Yes. If anything I would love to have QT for BeOS. However, I don't see anything wrong with existing GUI API - in fact, this kind of setup will provide consistency across all the apps on BeOs- something that Linux lacks.
X superbly designed... hmm, the forgot to include couple things that make programmers life very difficult ( like for example much better ways to query current WM,etc)
Zurk - it is clear that you don't know a thing about either C or C++...
There are many subjects here on/. that would probably fit you well, but do not comment on the stuff you completely don't understand - it makes you look stupid, you know...
It might be good standard for GNOME but I happened to run KDE on one box and IceWM on another. It doesn't do me much good that GNOME apps have some sort of internall standard , does it ?
Re:I agree. There's nothing quite as sad or pathet
on
The Future of KDE
·
· Score: 1
Slave ?? You are free to fuck up your Windows install as many times as you want. You can install GNU tools on it and make it look like a Unix box
The menus problem is only a part of bigger issue that causes so much pain for somebody trying to write GUI apps ( and I am currently trying to do exactly that.) The issue is >> lack of standards. The fact that Debian has a tool to do it automatically doesn't help me much cause RedHat for example doesn't offer that option and even if it did it would be completely different than what Debian does. The same goes for Suse, TurboLinux and whatever else is out there.
Nope. It should be a part of Xlib specifications. Every GUI toolkit links with Xlib. The makers of kwm,E,etc might provide way for doing this as long as you link with their libs which is what I wanna avoid.
What X is lacking is an API to interface with WM to do things like adding, replacing menu items etc... This API would give programmer a chance to implement many things automaticaly. There is really no reason why these things are left solely to the user. It is computer after all, it can easily handle issues like that.
Yeah. It can, I have heard that one. But you know what ? I would rather do it manually than be forced to used that definition of user unfreindlines they use for package managment...
You don't understand. It is not how many WM Microsoft provides, it is ability to uniformly access menu entries and things like that. There is no such option on Linux.
But that flexibility comes at the step price ! You change your WM on Linux - you are in for a couple hours of recreating your menu entries and stuff to accomodate all your apps... This is what sucks about X way of doing things.
But you still can get software for Windows that will radically change look and feel of your desktop. The crucial difference is that when you do it on linux you have to reconfigure all the menus, everything manually and on Windows it will automatically be there ( thanks to APIs that allow programmers to access this stuff)
I think you are right. Lack of standard GUI i hurting Linux position as a workstation terribly. But , try to mention that - you will get tons of post of people defending "freedom of choice","fexibility" and all that bullcrap.
What's the point of all this bragging about ActiveX-like capabilities when there are missing major parts like for example way to automatically add something to start menu. This is all hogwash, it only looks half-decent on the surface, underneath there is nothing to support that. Everything has to be done manually ( KDE is not perfect, but much better in this regard)
Slashdot Mirror
Could you explain what is so crappy about MS anti-aliased fonts ??
They seem to work very well and look very nice.
What ? Are you mad ?
... and it simply sucks as compared to say QT way of doing things.
...
C++ fits naturally into GUI model of programming.
I used C with Motif and EZWGL dev
I don't understand people fascination with C
Right tool for the right job.
Yes. If anything I would love to have QT for BeOS.
However, I don't see anything wrong with existing GUI API - in fact, this kind of setup will provide consistency across all the apps on BeOs- something that Linux lacks.
X superbly designed ... hmm, the forgot to include couple things that make programmers life very difficult ( like for example much better ways to query current WM ,etc)
If it will become one then great ! ...
Another issue resolved
_Sprocket_
... nothing more
Your children will suffer terribly so I suggest you stick to where you are now and don't even try to come out of your hole.
Just a good advice
Zurk - it is clear that you don't know a thing about either C or C++ ...
/. that would probably fit you well, but do not comment on the stuff you completely don't understand - it makes you look stupid, you know ...
There are many subjects here on
You posted a lot of stuff on GNOME debate. I recognize you :-)
It might be good standard for GNOME but I happened to run KDE on one box and IceWM on another.
It doesn't do me much good that GNOME apps have some sort of internall standard , does it ?
Slave ?? You are free to fuck up your Windows install as many times as you want. You can install GNU tools on it and make it look like a Unix box
Yes. You are right - it doesn't have to be located in Xlib as long as it is toolkit independant.
Windows was not written in C++. Win API is C based so check your facts before you post crap like this.
(MFC is basically wrapper around Win API)
Java sane choice for GUI ? ...
Definately not in 1999
Ever tried to use Swing ??? It so "blazingly fast" it even puts slowest Motif to shame.
The menus problem is only a part of bigger issue that causes so much pain for somebody trying to write GUI apps ( and I am currently trying to do exactly that.) The issue is >> lack of standards.
The fact that Debian has a tool to do it automatically doesn't help me much cause RedHat for example doesn't offer that option and even if it did it would be completely different than what Debian does. The same goes for Suse, TurboLinux and whatever else is out there.
Nope. It should be a part of Xlib specifications.
Every GUI toolkit links with Xlib. The makers of kwm,E,etc might provide way for doing this as long as you link with their libs which is what I wanna avoid.
What X is lacking is an API to interface with WM to do things like adding, replacing menu items etc...
This API would give programmer a chance to implement many things automaticaly. There is really no reason why these things are left solely to the user. It is computer after all, it can easily handle issues like that.
Yeah. It can, I have heard that one. But you know what ? I would rather do it manually than be forced to used that definition of user unfreindlines they use for package managment ...
You don't understand. It is not how many WM Microsoft provides, it is ability to uniformly access menu entries and things like that. There is no such option on Linux.
But that flexibility comes at the step price !
You change your WM on Linux - you are in for a couple hours of recreating your menu entries and stuff to accomodate all your apps...
This is what sucks about X way of doing things.
But you still can get software for Windows that will radically change look and feel of your desktop. The crucial difference is that when you do it on linux you have to reconfigure all the menus, everything manually and on Windows it will automatically be there ( thanks to APIs that allow programmers to access this stuff)
I agree. But what is missing is uniform GUI with uniform interface to accessing start menu ( or whatever it is there.)
No. Mac interface is hardly usable - if you wanna look at the state of the art look at Windows. Seriously.
I think you are right. Lack of standard GUI i hurting Linux position as a workstation terribly.
But , try to mention that - you will get tons of post of people defending "freedom of choice","fexibility" and all that bullcrap.
What's the point of all this bragging about ActiveX-like capabilities when there are missing major parts like for example way to automatically add something to start menu. This is all hogwash, it only looks half-decent on the surface, underneath there is nothing to support that. Everything has to be done manually ( KDE is not perfect, but much better in this regard)
You are right about Windows but I can't agree with Mac - it is ugly and hardly functional - at least for me.