Date: Sat, 8 Dec 2001 08:20:46 +0100 From: "Anthony Atkielski" <anthony@freebie.atkielski.com> To: "James Howard" <howardjp@Glue.umd.edu>, "Brad Knowles" <brad.knowles@skynet.be> Cc: "Konstantinos Konstantinidis" <kkonstan@duth.gr>, <chat@FreeBSD.ORG> Subject: Re: A breath of fresh air.. Message-ID: <01c101c17fb8$db2cc960$0a00000a@atkielski.com> References: <Pine.GSO.4.21.0112071730170.8200-100000@y.glue.umd.edu> <006c01c17f70$8782de50$0a00000a@atkielski.com> <a05101005b837406671a6@[10.0.1.16]> <00de01c17fa1$06539e10$0a00000a@atkielski.com> <a0510100cb83754b63467@[10.0.1.16]> <015f01c17fae$74ebc4d0$0a00000a@atkielski.com> <a0510101bb837670c807d@[10.0.1.16]>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Brad writes: > No, not really. X is desirable for certain Unix > applications, yes. But not required. If you require a GUI, why wouldn't you use X? Doesn't that negate the utility and advantage provided by X in favor of UNIX? > Because, so far, Apple has decided not to > include one. I didn't ask why an X server was not included. I asked why Apple's GUI is not itself an X server. > What difference does it make if it's called > "WindowServer" or "xinit"? Or "Eudora 5.1" > or "mutt"? Or "Opera" or "Opera"? It's not in the name. > Frankly, I don't see a whole lot here that > I find unusual. It only takes one program. On MS-DOS, all you had to do was type "win." > You don't have to use most of the unusual > stuff if you don't want to. Are you sure? If I remove all the unusual stuff, for example, will the Apple GUI still operate? > Do you find the bootloader to be scary? It all depends on what it loads. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?01c101c17fb8$db2cc960$0a00000a>