[5156] in java-interest
Re: yet another awt incompatibility
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Jesse Hammons)
Tue Jan 30 12:10:13 1996
Date: Tue, 30 Jan 1996 10:17:48 -0500 (EST)
From: Jesse Hammons <jhammons@phoenix.Princeton.EDU>
To: Jonathan Locke <jonl@sealevelsoftware.com>
Cc: java <java-interest@java.sun.com>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.3.91.960129233657.10136B-100000@sealevel.sealevelsoftware.com>
On Tue, 30 Jan 1996, Jonathan Locke wrote:
>
> On Tue, 30 Jan 1996, Jesse M. Hammons wrote:
>
> > In article <Pine.LNX.3.91.960128182123.3216A-100000@16338-news.sealevel.sealevelsoftware.com> you write:
> > >
> > >On Sun, 28 Jan 1996, Jordan Hayes wrote:
> > >
> i didn't take your response as a flame. it sounds like you disagree with
> my _perceived_ argument for rational reasons. however, it also sounds like
> i had some serious trouble conveying my argument. please read on and i
> think you will at least come to understand what i meant (even if you
> still don't agree with my conclusions).
OK, things are a lot clearer for me after this message.
> > This is just plain wrong. There *is no other* UI for the x86
> > architecture. For instance, you can't buy MacOS for the x86 (it's been
> > written, but there were licensing issues. arrgg). Win95 does look
> > pretty good, but saying that it's the best because it was chosen from a
> > pool of competitors does make me really steamed. (BTW I used Linux/X on
> > my x86 box and I don't really consider that a competitor...)
>
> whoa! i never said it was chosen from a pool of competitors. as a matter
> of fact, i _completely_ agree with you: windows arose to such popularity
> almost entirely because there WAS NO competition on x86 boxes. i think
> our misunderstanding here is that ALL i'm trying to say is that Windows is
> by far the most *popular* interface. not the "best", not "better than the
> rest". simply the most prevalent. and for better or for worse, Windows
> OWNS the desktop market (80+% from what i've heard). i think it would be
> marketing suicide to ignore this fact when doing product planning because
> if you do, you are ignoring 80+% of your customers!
Here we simply have different definitions of popular. I'm hearing you
def. is "anything that gets used by a lot of people." Mine is more like,
"something that gets used way more than the alterntives." So the reason
I don't think Windows3.1/95 is popular is because there really isn't any
way it could *not* be "popular." whatever. I'm glad I was able to see a
new perspective on that.
> on the other hand, you are correct that it is not "clear" that Java *must*
> have a Windows look and feel to succeed. i'm only suggesting that it
> would be a prudent (ie., safe) route from a marketing standpoint. people
> have bought into the Windows look and feel in a big way. a *lot* of
> people have come to expect it. many millions use it and it *works*. if
> Java were to have a single look and feel (which i would suggest is a
> reasonable route (for technical reasons) over the long haul), what other
> UI would work better in terms of *selling* Java to the public than
> the Windows look and feel?
OK, I guess I just have personal hangups. *I* haven't bought into win95,
but you are right, most everyone else has. While I don't agree with many
things about Microsoft, the truth is they *do* have the best engineers
and managers, etc in the country. They are very competent, but there are
some issues in my mind:
Even an organization as big as MS is going to have some
stereotypes about what they think computer UI's should be. While I know
they put lots of research into the win95 UI, i don't thknk that makes it
automatically the best possible UI. Again your not saying that, so I
should leave that alone. Anyway, in my opinion, it can't hurt to hear a
bit about what people who don't work at MS think about UI's. Who knows,
maybe they are totally right and we will come up with something that
looks like win95....On the other hand, we might find that some widgets
were there for historical reasons, and that we could improve on them.
[wabi discussion deleted]
> > I'm not going to itemize the rest of the 3 paragraphs. Basically what
> > I'm hearing from you is that everyone should run windows, and if they
> > can't they should emulate windows using Java. Well heck, why don't I
> > just drop out of school and start porting WindowsNT to the Mac and a few
> > of the Unix's that don't have NT yet. Then we would have perfect "cross
> > platform" performances and all of M$'s great widgets, right?
>
> no no no! you completely missed my point. DON'T emulate windows!! just
> the LOOK AND FEEL of the UI (which is essentially _trivial_ in comparison
> with the OS itself -- especially when implemented in a decent OO language
> like Java). my reason for suggesting that something windows-like be used
> as a common java UI is a very simple 2 step argument:
{deleted good argument]
I agree there are 2 basic issues: do we have many diffent native toolkits
(widget sets) or one crossplatform one? We're probably going to end up
with both (I have no idea which one will become more "popular," in my
sense of the word or yours).
The situation is a little wierd, because as far as I can tell most Java
things of this nature are going to end up being done by 3rd parties (i.e.
not Sun). I won't be suprised if/when Microsoft comes out with their
Java stuff that they also release a win95 toolkit, which behaves as you
describe. But I bet that it won't come with Java source, like the AWT
does...
thanks,
- Jesse
http://www.cs.princeton.edu/~jhammons/java *Java Powered!*
-
This message was sent to the java-interest mailing list
Info: send 'help' to java-interest-request@java.sun.com
