From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on inbox.vuxu.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.0 required=5.0 tests=MAILING_LIST_MULTI autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 Received: (qmail 5168 invoked from network); 1 Mar 2023 16:54:58 -0000 Received: from minnie.tuhs.org (50.116.15.146) by inbox.vuxu.org with ESMTPUTF8; 1 Mar 2023 16:54:58 -0000 Received: from minnie.tuhs.org (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BAC4443338; Thu, 2 Mar 2023 02:54:53 +1000 (AEST) Received: from mcvoy.com (mcvoy.com [192.169.23.250]) by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1AE9443337 for ; Thu, 2 Mar 2023 02:54:47 +1000 (AEST) Received: by mcvoy.com (Postfix, from userid 3546) id 7B18D35E94C; Wed, 1 Mar 2023 08:54:46 -0800 (PST) Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2023 08:54:46 -0800 From: Larry McVoy To: Paul Ruizendaal Message-ID: <20230301165446.GB26409@mcvoy.com> References: <58626A0B-EF9C-4920-8E20-CE0C4210BA6A@planet.nl> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30) Message-ID-Hash: NRVVVMUBN2N6UFTQLPQBILXUIEVU4Q5I X-Message-ID-Hash: NRVVVMUBN2N6UFTQLPQBILXUIEVU4Q5I X-MailFrom: lm@mcvoy.com X-Mailman-Rule-Misses: dmarc-mitigation; no-senders; approved; emergency; loop; banned-address; member-moderation; nonmember-moderation; administrivia; implicit-dest; max-recipients; max-size; news-moderation; no-subject; digests; suspicious-header CC: "tuhs@tuhs.org" X-Mailman-Version: 3.3.6b1 Precedence: list Subject: [TUHS] Re: Early GUI on Linux List-Id: The Unix Heritage Society mailing list Archived-At: List-Archive: List-Help: List-Owner: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: It's worth pointing out that X had won before Linux. I was a contractor in 1987, worked on all sorts of different workstations with all sorts of vendor provided window systems, and the first thing I did was to bring up my trusty X10R3 tape. The vendor windowing systems were all oh-so-great (according to the vendors) but as a contractor, I could have cared less. I wanted my dev enviroment so I could get work done, learning the ins and outs of $VENDOR's $WINDOW_SYSTEM was just a waste of my time, I'd be done and on to the next job and all that specific knowledge was a waste of effort. All of that predated my exposure to Linux (which was early, way before Linux had networking or distributions, I brought it up from floppies). As a useful (to me) aside, I got very good at what I call "pruning the tree" when bringing up X10. There were a ton of #ifdefs and (even then) quite a few frame buffer drivers and there was no way I could have brought it up in any reasonable time if I tracked down the root cause of each reason it wouldn't compile. So I got good at looking at the source, going, huh, I don't need this and changing stuff like int whatever_function_that_I_did_not_need( Thank you for highlighting that! > > Several folks had already hinted at such, but your comments make clear that by 1991 the X ecosystem had come out on top in a winner-takes-all dynamic: people wanted X because that had the apps, and the apps were for X because that was the most prevalent. > > This also explains that MGR on Linux was so short-lived: although it provided the terminal multiplexing that was the key use case, it did not have the application ecosystem that was apparently already important enough to motivate people to make X run on Linux very early in its existence. I had always thought of those early X applications as little more than gimmicks, but apparently they were more appreciated than I thought. > > > > On 27 Feb 2023, at 21:30, Dan Cross wrote: > > > > On Mon, Feb 27, 2023 at 12:22 PM Paul Ruizendaal via TUHS wrote: > >> Thanks all for the insights. Let me attempt a summary. > >> > >> What it boils down to is that X arrived on Linux very early, because what the Linux hackers needed/wanted was a familiar terminal multiplexer. > > > > While that was literally true, I think it was a little more nuanced. > > I'd perhaps put it that people wanted their familiar environments. > > Many people were used to running a lot of xterms on their > > workstations, of course, but there were other X applications people > > used regularly. > > > > Some I remember where `gv` to look at PostScript documents, `xv` to > > view image files, `gnuplot` could generate plots in a window, `xdvi` > > to look at TeX/LaTeX output, and text editors like `emacs` had X > > front-ends that offered syntax highlighting and the like; some folks I > > knew liked `nedit`. `exmh` was my preferred email client for a while, > > and things like `xman` (was there a `tkman`, too?) was nice. Some > > system monitoring tools `xload` were considered essentials; `xbiff` > > could be useful (I could have sworn there was a `tkbiff`, too). A > > clock like `xclock` or `oclock` or something was also nice. Some folks > > liked graphical newsreaders, chat programs (I guess IRC was a thing > > back then, and I believe some `talk` client had an X front-end). There > > was a fractal viewer that I thought was fun, but I don't remember it > > much anymore (even the name...). Oh, and lots of games; I had a nice > > Solitaire version that I can no longer recall the name of. `xeyes` was > > cute, and running `xroach` was a popular (?) prank for an unsuspecting > > (but amenable) colleague. > > > > A lot of us spent a lot of time customizing our environments, and many > > eschewed the vendor-standard environment. For instance, a lot of > > people I knew used `twm` and derivatives (`ctwm` and `tvtwm` were > > popular), and spent a lot of time tweaking menus and stuff to set > > things up the way we liked. A lot of folks also wrote custom tools > > using `tk` or `expectk`. Giving all of that up to run on Linux was a > > bitter pill to swallow, so there was a real impetus to get X running > > quickly. Personally, I kept my `tvtwm`-based environment going until I > > switched to plan9 and then to the Mac as a daily driver. I'm not sure > > I miss it, but at the time it was head-and-shoulders above anything > > you could get on Windows or (classic) MacOS. > > > > So it wasn't just that people wanted a "familiar terminal multiplexor" > > as that people wanted the environments they had put a lot of time and > > energy into building up for themselves, and again, that often meant X. > > > >> It seems that the pattern persists till the present day (and yes, it matches with my own dev setup/needs). I wonder to what extent this is a generational thing though. Maybe today???s twenty-somethings spend their days in front of Xcode, VStudio, Eclipse, etc. more than using multiple terminals. > > > > I think it probably depends on what people are doing. I more or less > > switched to using VS Code for my editor, and I'm using a Mac Studio to > > write this, but my desktop is still littered with terminal windows, > > I've got a `drawterm` session open to my local Plan 9 network, and am > > logged into a bunch of old systems (Multics, TOPS-20, VMS, an IBM > > mainframe, CDC Cyber, RSTS/E, PR1ME), etc. > > > > But the way we write software has changed pretty dramatically in the > > last 3 or so decades. I used to start with an empty C file and write > > my stuff. Things like linked-lists? Mostly implemented by hand. These > > days, there are other languages and vast collections of libraries for > > almost anything imaginable; much of what "programming" is today is > > glueing together different libraries and making them interact in > > sophisticated, often quite complex ways. I don't know that it's > > better, nor that it's always worse, but it is qualitatively different. > > So almost necessarily the toolsets and environment have changed > > accordingly. > > > >> This ties in with another observation on early window systems. The earliest Unix window system that I could find (i.e. documented) was NUnix from 1981/82. Its desktop was designed around the idea of a dozen or so top level windows, each one being either a shell window or a graphics canvas, with no real concept of a widget set, dialogs, etc., or even of sub-windows. This paradigm seems to have been more or less the same in the Blit terminal, and carried through in MGR, Mux and even as late as 8 1/2. In the context where this serves the needs of core user group, such makes sense. > > > > It may be instructive to look at the early X window managers in this > > regard. One I remember was `uwm` (I think); I recall being struck > > that it reminded me of rio when I saw it. > > > >> It is in stark contrast with developments at the lower/consumer end of the market. The original Mac, GEM and Windows all placed much more emphasis on being a graphical user interface, with standard widgets and UI design elements. On Unix and X it remained a mess. It seems that this was both for technical reasons (X not imposing a standard) and for economic reasons (the Unix wars). Linux then inherited the mess and the core user/developer demographic had no need/wish/time to fix it. > > > > I remember the X mantra was, "mechanism, not policy." Which was fine, > > except that there wasn't much of even a default policy, which made X > > (IMHO) a bit of a bear to program and meant that interfaces were > > pretty wildly inconsistent across programs. By contrast, writing > > simple programs to draw lines on the Mac was easy. > > > > Interestingly, frustration with this caused an almost cambrian > > explosion of new windowing environments within a few years of Linux's > > arrival on the scene. From larger efforts like Gtk (and then GNOME), > > KDE, GNUStep (which I guess might predate Linux, but not by much...), > > etc, to less ambitious things components like fvwm and Enlightenment, > > we kind of went from "OpenWindows or Motif or roll your own stuff > > around twm or something" to a whole plethora of things. It's still a > > bit of a mess, though. > > > >> It makes me wonder when true graphical applications started to appear for X / Unix / Linux (other than stuff like terminal, clock, calculator, etc.). The graphical browser certainly is one (1993). StarOffice and Applix seem to have arrived around 1995. Anything broadly used before that? > > > > Lots! See above. > > > > - Dan C. -- --- Larry McVoy Retired to fishing http://www.mcvoy.com/lm/boat