Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!lll-winken!lll-tis!ames!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!bloom-beacon!gatech!mcnc!decvax!ucbvax!HUMBER.BITNET!BECKER
From: BECKER@HUMBER.BITNET (Bruce Becker)
Newsgroups: comp.windows.news
Subject: Re: Press Release-AT&T Look & Feel
Message-ID: <8804122102.AA23385@brillig.umd.edu>
Date: 12 Apr 88 21:48:33 GMT
Sender: usenet@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU
Organization: The Internet
Lines: 21

>Everybody, I think, realizes that there is a potentially large market for a
>*standard* interface mechanism, and Apple has done a rather good job at
>proving this point in the MAC series computers. It just seems to me, that if
>everybody is going to put out a different *standard*, rather then working
>with eachother (through ANSI or IEEE or X/Open possibly), to make a universal
>*standard*, the industry is going to end up getting nowhere real fast....
>
>OK - Now that I've blown off some steam, let the debate begin. Am I full of
>sh*t or do others see the same problems coming towards us?

I have the feeling that no *single* standard is forthcoming for quite a while.
The game is more like - how easy (or possible) to support multiple standards,
some of which are "moving targets" because they're so new?

X is more a toolkit, as to a fair extent is NeWS... Open Look appears to be
more ambitious a la Mac, in trying to specify User Interface & dialogue
standards - it seems that IBM's SAA also is their attempt to stumble about
in this minefield...

Cheers, BBecker       Humber College     Etobicoke, Ont.
z MAILER-D JADE.BER  4/12/88
' Mail Delivery Subsy BECKER@HUMBER.BITNE 88. 4.12 Returned mail: Host unknown