Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!mcvax!cernvax!pan!jw
From: jw@pan.UUCP (Jamie Watson)
Newsgroups: comp.windows.x
Subject: The Future of Widgets and UI packages on X
Message-ID: <472@pan.UUCP>
Date: 14 Sep 88 20:42:39 GMT
References: <403@mmlai.UUCP> <8809121841.AA00932@eros.pa.dec.com>
Reply-To: jw@pan.UUCP (Jamie Watson)
Organization: Adasoft AG, Solothurn, Switzerland
Lines: 49

In article <8809121841.AA00932@eros.pa.dec.com> price@WSL.DEC.COM writes:
>> ...It sure beats DEC, who won't let their
>> widget set out at all.  Consider THAT in your next purchase of 
>> hardware...
>
>WRONG. ABSOLUTELY AND COMPLETELY WRONG. Digital's DECwindows Widget Set
>is available by licensing the XUI package.

Well, this was bothering me as I was listening to the presentations and
panel discussion an Xhibition.  DEC has a widget set and UI package.  AT&T
and Sun have one.  HP has one and a half.  Several others were discussed
during the conference.  With every one, the story was essentially the same;
you can license it directly from the developer.  What bothers me about this
is that this implies first that people are going to have to spend a fair
amount of time tracking down who, at DEC for example, they are really to
license from; and second, all these licenses add up, both in direct cost
and in time invested to obtain them.  It sure would be a lot nicer if they
came on the X distribution tape.  It makes me wonder if the first of these
major developers who has the courage and foresight to put their stuff on
the X tape will win by default.

>media, same as MIT charges. With it you get a source license. But you
>get MUCH MUCH more than just a widget set. You get the UIL compiler
>and run-time system, an ICCCM compliant window manager, and a session
>manager.

This is really very admirable, and I don't mean to engage in unjustified
DEC-bashing here.  I think DEC has clearly proven their willingness to
cooperate in the X development effort with their contributions so far;
it's just too bad that they are taking a different approach this time.

>All components conform to the DECwindows Style Guide, a
>document which has been honed for over 2 years by industrial designers
>and Digital's system and product development teams.

This is the part where I think the fireworks are going to fly.  Every one
of these companies that were touting their UI packages at Xhibition were
very quick to say that the important thing for X now was to settle on a
standard UIMS.  They were also all very obviously convinced that this
standard would be their own package.  Suppose that DECWindows is chosen
as the standard by OSF (and by the X Consortium, if they are going to
choose one).  How quick will AT&T/Sun be to adopt DECWindows (and pay
DEC a healthy royalty for the privelidge)?  Again, I'm not trying to
pick on anybody here; reverse the roles if you like, or fill in the
names of other major competitors; the story fits the same way.  I just
don't see how we are going to get to the standardized UIMS utopia that
all the vendors were talking about anytime in the near future.

jw