At 10:52 PM 3/11/2002 -0500, you wrote:

>Tim,
>A real desktop and a standard Look and Feel are required for modern 
>computing platforms, it's both useful from an aesthetic view and from a 
>usability point... Browsers, gfx programs... why don't we have these 
>things on a QL? Ever tried to write something like that? I am currently 
>and it's a real pain as the OS doesn't help at all, ProWesS could be of 
>real help due to it's nice "connectivity" with its "API" but it's slow 
>therefore impractical...

A desktop and a "look and feel" are to separate things.  WMAN is a GUI 
without an ingrained desktop.  In writing X window programs, there is no 
reference to the desktop and is very similar to writing PE programs (at 
least with Perl/TK).  Suntools was a simple desktop that did not allow for 
documents to be icons (only executables) (and if I remember correctly).

I like the feature of the PE that does not require an actual desktop.  I 
have found desktops to be usefull with Linux/Gnome only when I did not know 
much about what apps to run and used the app launcher feature on the 
desktop (kind of like Window->Programs->).

But with SMS/QE, most of the main apps I've loaded myself so I know where 
they are and can easily add them to Qascade.

Everybody seems to be heading the was of the desktop metaphor, but I do not 
like it and do not see it as a necessity.  I can't think of a single 
requirement that would make a desktop a necessity.

Tim Swenson

Reply via email to