Date: Thu, 11 Apr 1996 14:36:12 -0500 (CDT) From: Tony Kimball <alk@Think.COM> To: terry@lambert.org Cc: hackers@freefall.freebsd.org Subject: Re: Lesstif (motif compatible) package. Message-ID: <199604111936.OAA01259@compound.think.com> In-Reply-To: <199604111922.MAA04557@phaeton.artisoft.com> (message from Terry Lambert on Thu, 11 Apr 1996 12:22:23 -0700 (MST))
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
From: Terry Lambert <terry@lambert.org> Date: Thu, 11 Apr 1996 12:22:23 -0700 (MST) > I disagree profoundly. Tk is the closest thing to a standard. > Moreover, Tk is portable to the major non-unix platforms, > while Motif is not. Tk is interpreted. This is a *HUGE* drawback if what you are selling is a commercial product. No, Tk is not interpreted. Tcl is interpreted. And that not for long. You need not use Tcl in your Tk app. But when the next major tcl rev comes along you can ship compiled tcl objects, according to the announced development plan. Tk has Motif drag-and-drop interoperability? This I have got to see... Tk has Tk d-n-d interop. Not Motif interop. Nor does Motif have Tk interop. Mutatis mutandis. The small fraction running commercial UNIX and certified to comply with IBCS2 and the SVR4 EABI, so that you as a vendor nedd support only one binary distribution? The small fraction running Motif. It's too big to ship static executables. > And of course it is completely impractical to write freeware using Motif. Only because Motif is *currently* a proprietary standard. I'd like to see that fixed as well, but I'm less motivated because I think cross-platform is the summum bonum of GUI, and Motif is therefore not of interest. And as far as HI standards go, FVWM95 has already done more to standardize HI than CDE will ever do. I prefer CDE's content, but there you go. Motif:Tk::terminfo:termcap :-)
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199604111936.OAA01259>