🚀 go-pugleaf

lemson@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (David Lemson) writes:

>If you seriously think that OpenLook is a more productive
>environment, then I'd say you haven't had to use it for very long.
>(IMHO, as a biased opinion)

Hi!

     I use openwindows and openlook at work and Nextstep at home. I 
used Nextstep at school and was CC for Purdue. I've been living 
with openwindows for the last six months.

     For a UNIX jockey, openlook is not bad. If you are comfortable
with a UNIX editor and the command line, Openwindows is fine. It's
just like X for me. It does have an editor and Filemanager, but they
are worse than the command line equivalents. Make no mistake though,
if you use openlook/openwindows you are committing to UNIX at the 
command line level.

     Nextstep does a much better job of removing the UNIX command line
from normal system usage. It has a good source editor, the Filemanager
is much better than the command line. Nextstep blows openlook away as
far as usefulness goes. When I run Openlook I have about 5 terminals
hanging around. When I run Nextstep I have only one hidden terminal.

     On the other hand the Next hardware tends to be slower. Not
lots slower, but definitely slower.

     There are definitely tradeoffs with Next machines. However, even
given that Lexmark is pretty much a Sun / IBM shop, I'm still pushing
to get a Next into the budget for me. I find that the gains of a powerful 
interface outweigh the modest drop in speed. 

-Chris (Speaking for himself and not Lexmark)

PS: As a final comment, I don't find 3.0 on a 28Meg 040 Cube to be any
slower that Openlook/Openwin on an IPX. 3.0 definitely needs memory 
though. At 12 Meg 3.0 was a pig. At 28 Meg it is great! (With one
exception.....I'm about to post to c.s.n.p about the exception.)