[offtopic] Re: If Linux is to succeed

Ingo Molnar (mingo@pc5829.hil.siemens.at)
Sat, 25 Jan 1997 22:41:42 +0100 (MET)

On Sat, 25 Jan 1997, W. Reilly Cooley wrote:

> On Sat, 25 Jan 1997, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > most Microsoft APIs are >largely< redundant. Say i've counted 1500
> > different API calls in windows.h ... and that doesnt include new bloat
> > like ActiveX, 3D stuff and the networking nightmare called Netbeui and SMB
> > over TCP.
> >
> > Compare this with the 167 Linux system calls.
> You, however, are neglecting that the many Windows API calls are for
> graphical manipulation, e.g., InvalidateRect(), MsgBox(), and
> ShowWindow(). For this to be an accurate comparison you'd also have to
> include the Xlib and perhaps also X Toolkit calls.

pc5829:/usr/X11R6/man/man3$ grep -l 'XLIB FUNCTIONS' * | wc -l
pc5829:/usr/X11R6/man/man3$ grep -l 'XT FUNCTIONS' * | wc -l

181+95 calls.

But i kindof disagree to talk about X as an OS issue. And X isnt a moving
target. 5 years old X code runs just fine. Can you run 5 years old Windows
code on NT, without destabilizing the system? Not to talk about
performance and usability.

> I think perhaps you are missing the point about supporting the Windows
> APIs and such. [...]

i'm just saying that it costs too much, on the developer side. IMHO, lets
rather put energy into making better features, than putting energy into
upgrading to a newer API and a newer API and a newer API. The amount spent
on software doesnt change. But it's up to you where do you put the

-- mingo