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=-0.8 required=5.0 tests=DKIM_INVALID,DKIM_SIGNED, HTML_MESSAGE,MAILING_LIST_MULTI autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 Received: (qmail 10533 invoked from network); 27 Feb 2023 18:07:37 -0000 Received: from minnie.tuhs.org (50.116.15.146) by inbox.vuxu.org with ESMTPUTF8; 27 Feb 2023 18:07:37 -0000 Received: from minnie.tuhs.org (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 76A174326F; Tue, 28 Feb 2023 04:07:33 +1000 (AEST) Received: from mail-ed1-x532.google.com (mail-ed1-x532.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::532]) by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 00FB943265 for ; Tue, 28 Feb 2023 04:07:27 +1000 (AEST) Received: by mail-ed1-x532.google.com with SMTP id o12so29315343edb.9 for ; Mon, 27 Feb 2023 10:07:27 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=bsdimp-com.20210112.gappssmtp.com; s=20210112; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=GEbCd+elRlDShfznZKernJlxzAjhMPt7JHG+D75nzAQ=; b=UPkrlDzFTfFlWvEceVmSd8xoFiNctMh1ihQvQBR6mZI0N+5tiu8amk8iJlTuwZ/ddz qdkq3vSgsgI3VUrB/iqrimiuRVrSOkidnD7gY19eat8SHIwpQYGa5TOlmXsvnFllTIx8 kokeRgu0rQDo/qztsf5aXfCDC+I9+zOlEYJN/GxMP3wfCBj1Ihr3GVjJc+gsCCHsBB+m 1FeKmCiuqoffExRrxHEwMxi555a/X2s5cmG1Fe1/t1hzuEYMSwr95J90Qtm5zEiFnXOk 7aWp8S5fDs6LIQZuO2v+llMNCIkS9EkpZmt7BNQ+3XQ+eP+IymqL4oZx10Hhdg6UqBA3 lYtQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id :reply-to; bh=GEbCd+elRlDShfznZKernJlxzAjhMPt7JHG+D75nzAQ=; b=sWnrO9LWBAxwMFTy7TolEhn2C8N4mAyeKUJ5ZuST9Lv6EuzECbHZ2O2Uk6Q1TvuzPn qKiQgbxMLmuTaVi3+vzREnfbytnNu1/rNAGpbmm/OFWGJPUDJE3sOOyoZztYDiHe4MtA OrbO1qIkWqBk7SuaVI/29NuuKuOa/2B3L2wTjvZul0SNJtA5YAeohknv2vCFfcIEVowv Bo2yiI0QJ/JASZhXMIcZXuFwALs9dtCXhxbhzBhCMjyNIrYcnjY+oqaMiPegFx7L5/o7 n+HyLVCgkvoH1SFiAQhoI8CLoy2mMTel+KKNWrzcbogpxhr6nsbQHbYimkC3N1P1Y9rn BWiw== X-Gm-Message-State: AO0yUKU+6yms/9xdFGp7XvIMx3F02cNlUB55+olcJ190hpqemmISYMfN bMThv8pM1h4dMv2EQkjPyvWV2Jrnp5BBikvyEqC5pBhLyv4/7A== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AK7set83epSEPbxrEdso7eDAGEJdTJ8gcT+aqqP6ZqFcyy3Q7FLlxS6bArJX/JWrHM6ijd0kqUtilhZDTwuCmzeZ9dg= X-Received: by 2002:a17:906:d157:b0:8b1:3298:c587 with SMTP id br23-20020a170906d15700b008b13298c587mr16082314ejb.2.1677521246272; Mon, 27 Feb 2023 10:07:26 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <58626A0B-EF9C-4920-8E20-CE0C4210BA6A@planet.nl> In-Reply-To: From: Warner Losh Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2023 11:07:15 -0700 Message-ID: To: Paul Ruizendaal Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000fcced205f5b25923" Message-ID-Hash: 5W7LUF54GU4OYZXJ3U7XTNYXCE32T2EU X-Message-ID-Hash: 5W7LUF54GU4OYZXJ3U7XTNYXCE32T2EU X-MailFrom: wlosh@bsdimp.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: --000000000000fcced205f5b25923 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Mon, Feb 27, 2023 at 10:22=E2=80=AFAM 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. 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=E2=80=99s twenty-somethings spend = their days > in front of Xcode, VStudio, Eclipse, etc. more than using multiple > terminals. > > 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 t= op > 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 th= e > 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. > > =3D=3D=3D > > It is in stark contrast with developments at the lower/consumer end of th= e > market. The original Mac, GEM and Windows all placed much more emphasis o= n > 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 f= or > technical reasons (X not imposing a standard) and for economic reasons (t= he > Unix wars). Linux then inherited the mess and the core user/developer > demographic had no need/wish/time to fix it. > > 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? > ParcPlace produced the OI/uib linux port in 93 as well, even made standard floppies for it. Sadly, it didn't turn into sales, so we walked away form the Linux port, at least outside the building... OI/uib was an attempt to write your UI apps once, and use them with whatever look and feel the end user wanted... It was cool for the time, but things have evolved since then away from both OpenLook and Motif... and while the look and most of the feel was the same, X was, and continues to be, a mess because there's no standard cut and paste keys.... Warner --000000000000fcced205f5b25923 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


=
On Mon, Feb 27, 2023 at 10:22=E2=80= =AFAM Paul Ruizendaal via TUHS <tuhs@tu= hs.org> wrote:

Thanks all for the insights.=C2=A0 Let me attempt a summary.

What it boils down to is that X arrived on Linux very early, because what t= he Linux hackers needed/wanted was a familiar terminal multiplexer. It seem= s 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 thi= ng though. Maybe today=E2=80=99s twenty-somethings spend their days in fron= t of Xcode, VStudio, Eclipse, etc. more than using multiple terminals.

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 wi= ndows, each one being either a shell window or a graphics canvas, with no r= eal concept of a widget set, dialogs, etc., or even of sub-windows. This pa= radigm seems to have been more or less the same in the Blit terminal, and c= arried 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.

=3D=3D=3D

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 eleme= nts. On Unix and X it remained a mess. It seems that this was both for tech= nical reasons (X not imposing a standard) and for economic reasons (the Uni= x wars). Linux then inherited the mess and the core user/developer demograp= hic had no need/wish/time to fix it.

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 t= o have arrived around 1995. Anything broadly used before that?

ParcPlace produced the OI/uib linux port in 93 as w= ell, even made standard floppies for it. Sadly, it didn't turn into sal= es, so we walked away form the Linux port, at least outside the building...= OI/uib was an attempt to write your UI apps once, and use them with whatev= er look and feel the end user wanted... It was cool for the time, but thing= s have evolved since then away from both OpenLook and Motif... and while th= e look and most of the feel was the same, X was, and continues to be, a mes= s because there's no standard cut and paste keys....

Warner=C2=A0
--000000000000fcced205f5b25923--