[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: Linux vs. Microsoft
On Wed, 16 Oct 1996 10:05:41 +0200 (GMT+0200), you wrote:
>______________________________
>Eddie harari - unix dep.
>Software Education LAbs - SELA
>______________________________
>Meseg sent at Wed Oct 16 10:05:41 GMT+0200 1996
>X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24]
>MIME-Version: 1.0
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>Content-Length: 1297
>
>()>This is where you are Wrong ...
>()>________________________________
>()>
>()>thae independent protocol is not just to use with terminals=20
>()>it is to share an app output between arch's .
>()
>()Sorry, I do not understand what you mean here.
>
>The X protocol , is not designed only so people can buy a diskless client such
>as X terminal and displey on it ...
>
> The main thing is that X runs on hetrogenus arch's and you can share the output between arch's - like Xoftware and X11 , you can play the Linux xtetris -
> thru your MS-WINDOWS machine.
> well that is power - and today we all know that many organizations have multi
> platform enviroment.
>
> can you do it on 95 ?
>
>
> another thing is that WITH all respect , gui building in MS is much harder then
> it is in X enviroment , there is no tool like UIMX in the MS enviroment ,
I can only say that I completely disagree here.
Any WIndows IDE or RAD tool, has with it a GUI builder that takes 5 minutes to
learn.
The worst thing about UIMX, in my opinion, is that once you leave its framework
and code directly, you cannot , in general, continue working on your project
through UIMX. UIMX cannot just take a Motif application, or even Motif
application's source files (except .UIL) and understand them.
The only way I found UIMX helpful, is for starting out an app. After I left
UIMX (because it stopped helping me), I could never go back.
Compare to Visual C++ (as an example). Its GUI editor (AppStudio) can read the
resources of an exe and you can edit them from there.
The important point though is that it is not that Visual C++ is so clever or
that UIMX is not. The reason for the difference is that the GUI for WIndows
applications is treated by the OS and has special status.
Motif and Xlib are independent libraries. The GUI (unless confined to .UIL
sources (for Motif only)), is a result of function calls in C or C++ source
files.
BTW, my initial reply to you was on the issue of performance due to X's
architecture.
I have never till now, heard an argument that X's strong point vs. Windows was
in the available development tools. The situation is the opposite. I think the
main reason for that is just Window's vast market.
> it is true that to build a GUI in X you should know much more about the motif and stuff related to X , but this is allways true when you are talking about
> good programing enviroment .
>
> you should know much more about the system when you program unix then you should when programming DOS.
>
Indeed, and it is not one of Unix's strong points.
--------
Moshe Cohen -- Software Development and Consultancy
17/10 Akiva St., Raanana 43260, Israel.
Tel: 972-9-989404. Fax: 972-9-420432.
Email: moshec@netvision.net.il URL: http://www.dezines.com/moshec/
References: