home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: sparky!uunet!pmafire!mica.inel.gov!ux1!news.byu.edu!eff!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!emory!wupost!cs.utexas.edu!sun-barr!olivea!gossip.pyramid.com!pyramid!unify!openlook!openlook-request
- From: fgreco@cfdev1026.shearson.com (Frank Greco)
- Newsgroups: comp.windows.open-look
- Subject: Re: SunSoft Windows Toolkits Positioning
- Message-ID: <l2lco1v@openlook.Unify.Com>
- Date: 16 Nov 92 17:07:37 GMT
- Sender: news@Unify.Com
- Lines: 25
-
- > Perhaps more than just the "Xt is the de facto standard for GUI development"
- > sense, I took it to be a reference to the fact that the OLIT API is being
- > formally standardized (er, STANDARDIZED) by the IEEE. (Apart from P1295.2
- > work, IEEE P1201.1 has gone on record as saying that their window-system-
- > independent toolkit API only considers Xt-based toolkits of interest, so
- > they're working with OLIT, not Xview or TNT.)
-
- That's only because of good political lobbying on the part of AT&T and MIT.
-
- If your company is competing with such formidable organizations such as
- Microsoft, would you make GUI decisions based on IEEE standards? Is the
- IEEE going to help your product get shelf-space? Do you think the average
- end-user cares about IEEE compliancy when it looks at your product?
-
- A suggested standard is just that, a *suggestion*. Thanks, but no thanks.
-
- Besides, can anyone honestly say that an Xt-based toolkit can be "sold"
- to the PC programming community to use with MS Windows or MS NT?
- Anyone want to sell an Xt-based programer toolkit to the Macintosh
- community?
-
- Frank G.
-
- Let's get real here.
- =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
-