Re: OFFTOPIC: GGI and alternative GUIs and windowing systems in Linux -LONG
Lance Dillon (riffraff@gte.net)
Sat, 31 Jan 1998 16:42:54 -0500
Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
>
> On Sat, 31 Jan 1998, Albert D. Cahalan wrote:
> > Alan Cox writes:
> > >> No. In many cases (menus, dialog boxes, ...) it is really
> > >> ineffective to transfer data by lines as X do it.
> > >
> > > X is meant to provide services not policy. Thats very important.
> >
> > People _want_ policy. (they complain "every window works different")
> >
> > >> MS-Windows do it this way. And I think that their way is
> > >> better than X. (Sad to say).
> > >
> > > MSWin isnt a networked windowing system
> >
> > That does not matter. You can ship the Windows API over the net,
> > as many 3rd party products do. You could ship MFC over the net.
>
> <ironic>
> Yeah, like WinCenter...
> </ironic>
>
> > On the net, bandwidth matters. It is rather odd that X is
> > less efficient than Windows.
>
> Now you make me laugh! Sometimes I use WinCenter (e.g. if someone sends me a
> very very very \ldots very important document in M$-WORD format that I can't
> simply drop in /dev/null), and I really don't have the impression that Windows
> is more efficient than plain X.
>
> Greetings,
>
> Geert
>
sorry to continue this thread, but...
we use wincenter at work, for all our ncd xterminals....its okay, i
guess, but doesnt handle everything properly (microsoft apps arent truly
multi-user, so you get problems)....it is much better than windd,
though, which sends entire bitmaps over the network for remote
displays....
--
Lance Dillon | "Not in the face,
UNIX/NT Sysadmin | not in the face!"
Booz-Allen & Hamilton, Inc. | -- Arthur
http://home1.gte.net/riffraff/ |