Slashdot Mirror
What GUIs Came Before X11?
Avi Bercovich asks: "We all know the base facts about X11. Built by Scheifler and Gettys et al at MIT and DEC, for look 'n feel impaired, networked bitmap displays. But what about the details? Now it would seem from what I've read that it has roots in X10 and something called W. But I've had a hard time finding out anything online about these ancestral systems. Where are there articles published on these systems? So who's got the lowdown, URL-pointers or juicy personal stories on our GUI/Windowing pre-history?" (There's more...)
"I'm sure that X11/10 and W weren't the only windowing systems around. I know there was something called NeWS - a sort of windowing postscript - that according to legend - duked it out with X11 and lost. Even earlier there where 'sketchpad' and the famous Engelbart 5 fingered mouse demo, but I think that those systems were developed even before we where blessed with Unix. And what _was_ XEROX up to when Jobs & Co. came to visit? Either way, there must've been a whole bunch of proprietary and/or research GUI windowing environments out there before X and its extentions swept the Unix board."
What follows is an excerpt from "Programming as if People Mattered: Friendly Programs, Software Engineering, and Other Noble Delusions", by Nathaniel S. Borenstein.
The Andrew Window Manager
An interesting constrast to the UNIX success story is the less well known but far more typical tale of how the institutionalized greed of the men in suits managed to kill another promising piece of software, the Andrew Window Manager. In contrast to the UNIX story, which occupies a key role in the history of computer software, the Andrew Window Manager is nothing more than a footnote in that history, a minor story that has been quietly repeated many times without anyone ever seeming to learn anything from it.
The Andrew Window Manager (WM) is a program that, as its name implies, manages windows on a computer's screen. It was one of the first network-oriented window managers to run under the UNIX operating system on a scientific workstation with a bitmap display. It was fast, easy to use, and reasonably reliable. Among those who used this class of machine, it generated intense interest, and a steady stream of visitors came to its birthplace, Carnegie Melon University (CMU), to see it.
However, WM was not owned by CMU. It was developed as part of the Andrew Project, a joint venture of IBM and CMU. Part of the agreement that defined the joint venture stated that IBM would own the software, but that "reasonable" licensing arrangements would be available.
Unfortunately, there are many definitions of "reasonable." To a university, a licensing arrangement like the standard UNIX license was "reasonable." To IBM, such low-cost licensing sounded insane. While IBM and CMU argued over licensing arrangements, the people waiting for licenses got impatient.
One such group, from MIT, eventually gave up on WM entirely, and built their own window system instead. That system, which they called X Windows, has the traditional evolutionary relationship with its predecessor: it did everything WM could do, and more. Moreover, the MIT group managed to align itself with a multivendor consortium that funded the continued development of X Windows as a nonproprietary, easily licensed standard window system. Within a few years, IBM found that nobody even wanted to license WM any more, and that IBM was in danger of being entirely left out of an emerging standard. With little choice, IBM embraced the X Windows standard, and CMU began converting all of the Andrew application software from WM to X.
What is most notable here is that WM was a very promising and useful piece of software. It was ahead of its time, and many groups would have liked to pick it up, use it, and improve it. By trying to from the beginning to squeeze every possible penny out of it, IBM squeezed the life out of it instead. Good software needs to evolve, and it cannot evolve in the face of greedy licensing arrangements.
--
"Convictions are more dangerous enemies of truth than lies."
i know nothing about NeWS, but have been very curious about it ever since i first heard of it.
I first heard of it in the X chapter of the UNIX haters handbook, which makes occational references to NeWS as a windowing system done right. It's also a very interesting read (not FUD at all, just reasonable if incendentary analysis..) and probably would tell you a little about NeWS..
The URL i just listed above, btw, which i just found now on Google, happens to contain a link to a series of NeWS resources, which i haven't read yet. draw your own conclusions.
I am very curious about NeWS, and if anyone out there has used it, please post and let us know anything about it you may have to say.. Or is there anyone who STILL uses it?
What are the differences between this, DPS, and Quartz? DPS and Quartz aren't capable of running over a network are they? (i fear this last sentance will ignite an irrelivant flamewar, but i'm curious, so i'll include it anyway..)
Irritable, left-wing and possibly humorous bumper stickers and t-shirts
Apple and others have done studies showing that on average, mouse users are no less efficient than pure keyboard users, despite the hand moving. The reason is that the user spends more time finding the correct command than actually executing the command. (Note that this is a generalization -- if you know the emacs or MS Word keyboard commands by heart, you are going to be faster than a mouse user. However, if you don't, you will probably be slower.) The general rule is that your brain is slower than your hands.
Anyway, I've been using a mouse for about 14 years, and have never had any carpel tunnel problems, from the mouse. A typical crapo PC keyboard will have my fingers knotted in 5 minutes, however. So, I normally run with an IBM Trackpoint II keyboard plus a MS optical mouse just because the trackpoint 'seems' quicker (not necessarily easier), and typing is definately quicker on the clickity-clack. I do wish there was a scroll wheel on this old IBM keyboard, though.
--
Business. Numbers. Money. People. Computer World.