🚀 go-pugleaf

From article <788@jc3b21.UUCP>, by fgd3@jc3b21.UUCP (Fabbian G. Dufoe):
>      That's why we have the ability to include depth arrangement gadgets.
> It gives the programmer control over how the windows will behave.  It also
> lets the user know what has been decided.  Trying to achieve that
> flexibility without depth arrangement gadgets opens a real can of worms.

On a multitasking computer, making the assumption that you, as the
programmer of an application, know which window/screen I as the user
want to use next is WRONG!  The whole purpose of being able to run
multiple processes/tasks is to allow me to integrate several tasks.  I
don't think that utilities such as DMOUSE should need to exist.  The
fact that they do, in such wide spread usage, says something about the
users opinion of the current interface, and choice of a useable
interface.

***Hoisting myself to the top of the soapbox***

If there are patent problems with choosing to use something that looks
like an existing interface that works/feels good, the rights should be
purchased.  We seem to be spending a lot of time trying to get features
similar in capabilities to some that already exist, but the APPLE vs MS
war seems to have blinded us of the fact that a legal solution is
painless.

The UN*X band wagon provides some interesting insight in that UN*X
solves a lot of problems and provides access to many applications that
are good for software development and multiuser tasks.  If I were the
CEO of a computer company targeting any market, I would be very
interested in knowing how I could sell computers without have to spend
money writing software.  By providing a development environment that is
complimentary to the usage of the developed software, you can't help
but win.  Most companies are choosing to buy commercial resale rights
to UN*X or a derivative to eliminate the startup overhead of
designing a multiuser OS.

Commodores current direction with Amiga Dos worries me because they
are attempting to reproduce everything that already exists in UN*X.
It seems much more attractive financially to take UN*X my the reins,
and just port the graphics support to that platform.  I have heard
rummors of SYSVR4 appearing down the road for the Amiga.  I have
yet to see anything official (other than the boot screen on my
2500).

Everybody that I have talked computer purchasing with as of late
wants UN*X, or at least UN*X compatibility.  Most are buying 386
machines because they want it now.

Okay, I am stepping down now...

-- 
-----
gregg.g.wonderly@att.com   (AT&T bell laboratories)