> > I can think of some reasons why this is a good idea, but also why I
> > would personally not make this choice:
> > - as far as I can see there is not much support for Motif other than as
> > a widget set on top of X11
> Incorrect. Almost every PC X-windows package supports Motif, almost every
> UNIX platforms supports Motif, Even Mac-X supports Motif.. Remember,
> once the application is compiled and linked with Motif libraries,
> the Widget set is INDEPENDENT of the supplied X-windows system since
> everything folds down to Xlib. The server does not have to have
> Motif on it at all..
Hmm, are you implying that there are PC X-windows packages that allow
*clients* to run under DOS or Windows? All I know if in this area are
packages that are usable as an X server, allowing you to run X clients
remotely on a UNIX machine with their windows on your PC. But what
Rob is worried about is that he won't be able to write portable
*clients* -- if they use Motif they will have to run an a UNIX box.
Or have I missed something? (Quite possible, I don't follow all the
X-related market news any more...)
> Motif is more standard then STDWIN. People like the look and feel of
> Motif. The first time I ran a STDWIN program, I thought it looked
> like a toy. Put a nice Motif look to it and it can become a product.
One thing I'm thinking of is to create a STDWIN port that uses Motif
instead of bare Xlib underneath. It may even be possible to do this
entirely in Python, once my Motif/Xt port has sufficient Xlib
functionality (currently it has none). This would help Rob as well:
he can continue to use STDWIN for "toy" apps on his Mac or PC, but on
UNIX boxes his apps will follow the Motif style.
(To make one thing clear: I don't really plan to discontinue STDWIN,
but I don't want to make additions to it either, sice the audience is
really too small. Had there been a Windows port two years ago, the
situation might have been different... Sigh.)
--Guido van Rossum, CWI, Amsterdam <Guido.van.Rossum@cwi.nl>