Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments
Search

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

GNUstep Project Gets New Chief Maintainer

Posted by ScuttleMonkey on Tue Dec 26, 2006 06:29 AM
from the turning-over-a-new-leaf dept.
GNUStep GUI
stivi writes "Gregory Casamento has recently accepted the position of GNUstep Maintainer. Adam Fedor, former GNUstep leader writes: 'After over 15 years of being the Chief Maintainer for GNUstep, I've found I have too many other responsibilities to devote as much time to GNUstep as is necessary. I still plan on contributing to GNUstep in the future in a lower capacity.' Gregory has been a prolific developer for GNUstep for the past seven years and is currently the maintainer for Gorm (the graphical interface designer) and the GUI library. I think he will make a great choice to lead GNUstep in the future. New plans for change have been set up already. Thank you Adam for the past, congratulations Gregory to the future."
+ -
story
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.

GNUstep Project Gets New Chief Maintainer 50 Comments More /

 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.

  • Direction (Score:4, Insightful)

    by bsharitt (580506) <bsharitt&gmail,com> on Tuesday December 26 2006, @06:40AM (#17365440) Homepage Journal
    Hopefully we see GNUStep get some definitive direction to show the world that it's still alive. Most people think it's a legacy development tool kit which at one time was meant to replicate OpenStep, but is now dead, though that is not the case, but they need to let the world know they are alive. Also, they either need place nicer with the rest of the Linux/Unix desktops(Gnome or KDE) or either acknowledge that they are indeed their own little enviroment(the site still tries to pass it off as development libraries and tools)

    • Alive (Score:2, Insightful)

      by bartvh (60919)
      The previous news item in this category was exactly 4 years ago. He could start by sending out more 'press releases'.

    • Re:Direction (Score:4, Informative)

      by Somnus (46089) on Tuesday December 26 2006, @07:16AM (#17365630)
      There is at least one effort [etoile-project.org] in the direction of a desktop environment. Theming is provided by the Camaelon [etoile-project.org] bundle.

      On the toolkit/tools side of things, the major hurdles are:
      • app icon (perhaps could be integrated with/translated to the f.d.o. systray standard)
      • the work it takes to set up GNUstep just to launch an app (e.g., setting up paths -- thankfully handled transparently in my Gentoo setup)
      • incompatibility between GNUstep services and dbus, etc. etc.
      • non-standard build system (still easy enough to making into ebuilds/RPMs/etc.) and monolithic libraries
      Sidestep [gna.org] is an experiment in addressing these issues.
      • I've been casually flollowing the etoile development, and I've even gone so far as to (mostly successfully) build GNUStep and Etoile on my OS X-running Powerbook. It's clear that GNUStep has made some strides in recent times. Etoile seems to be proving that there are some with a vision of what a GNUStep *platform* could be. All in all, pretty exciting stuff.

        The catch is, that integrating this stuff is a bit more work than your average ./configure, make, make install... I'd like to see someone pick a ref

  • Ok I read TFA (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Psychotria (953670) on Tuesday December 26 2006, @06:52AM (#17365504)
    And... I think this dude is a complete moron. He types (on the page and in his blog) all this "business" speak gibberish which, in the end, means nothing. He says that he thinks KDE and Gnome are "amateurish" but doesn't bother to explain his reasoning behind the assertion. To me, this implies that he doesn't actually have a reason behind the assertion and that the whole silly blog is propaganda. I find his "business speak" patronising, transparent and meaningless. It may work for Microsoft, but propaganda does not work for the audience he is (supposed) to be targetting.

    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      by jcr (53032)
      He says that he thinks KDE and Gnome are "amateurish" but doesn't bother to explain his reasoning behind the assertion.

      If you had ever used NeXTSTEP, you would know what he means. It's one of those things that's hard to explain to someone who doesn't have the experience to tell the difference.

      -jcr

    • Re:Ok I read TFA (Score:4, Informative)

      by mungtor (306258) on Tuesday December 26 2006, @09:15AM (#17366170)
      "He says that he thinks KDE and Gnome are "amateurish" but doesn't bother to explain his reasoning behind the assertion."

      He does to some degree. He clearly states that neither look like they started with a clean vision of what the desktop environment should be and have simply "evolved" to what you see now. He also states that the code base which makes up most of Gnome is a nightmare. I can't speak about KDE too much since I don't use it (strikes me too much as Windows, which I don't particularly like).

      GNUStep looks something like the Sun OpenWindows desktop used to... Icons and apps minimize to the desktop, not the the taskbar area.

      Either way, I just hope that it will finally be easy to customize the behavior of windows... For example:

      I want my Xterm window to maximize to the vertical height of the screen without changing width when I double-click the title bar. How would you tell a non-programmer to accomplish that in Gnome or KDE? Will it be easier in GNUStep?

      (and I am sure the Gnome answer is to navigate some XML file to find the variable Window.click.title.bar.some.other.arbitrary.and.me aningless.string.that.you.will.not.know.unless.you .coded.it and change the default value from 1 to 3. Excellent usability there)

      • The funny thing is that the same criticisms can be made of GNUstep as of GNOME. Further, while the codebase issue may be true, GNOME is far from "amateurish" in 2006. It's a slick, professional, desktop, that, IMHO, is more usable and friendly than Microsoft's Windows, even if it isn't yet up to Mac OS X standards.

        Does GNUstep have direction? Does it hell. There is an official line (that it's supposed to look and feel like OpenStep 4), and an unofficial argument about where it's going. The look and feel

        • Oh, I definitely agree that Gnome looks very polished and professional. I was only pointing out that the new GNUstep maintainer does elaborate some reasons why he considers them to be sub-optimal.

          FWIW tho, I am still annoyed at how hard it is to find the right variables to change in Gnome to accomplish some tasks. Having Folders open in the same window in the file manager shouldn't be nearly as buried as it is. It doesn't bother me since I hardly ever use it, but it is very annoying and difficult to chan

        • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

          by claes (25551)
          This is not what you asked for but something handy to know: middle-clicking the "Maximize" button maximizes vertically. Left-clicking it maximizes horizontally. In KDE, at least.
      • NeXT was bought out for $400 million. How can I make my business a "failure" like that?

        -jcr

          • I was never a NeXT employee, I was a NeXT customer. As for your claim that I'm "rewriting history", please point out any factual error I have made.

            -jcr

          • it was taken over largely so Apple could get hold of its charasmatic leader.

            Actually, your statement above is rewriting history. Gil Amelio, following the recommendation of Ellen Hancock, made the call to take NeXT instead of Be, and he sure didn't do it to replace himself as CEO. Ed Woolard begged SJ to take the CEO position, after the board had decided to buy out Gil's contract and let him go.

            -jcr

          • No, Canon invested $100M initially, and another $30M later. Jobs put in about $10M of his own, and Perot was in for $20M. Apple bought them for $400M. That's not exactly a shabby ROI.

            -jcr

  • The *big* problem with GNUStep... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by muecksteiner (102093) on Tuesday December 26 2006, @07:03AM (#17365560)
    was (and is), that few people realised how great the original NeXTStep environment - which GNUStep attempts to clone - was.

    I was already around as a CS major at the time NeXTStep basically failed in the marketplace due to a) asinine marketing/pricing on the part of NeXT Inc. and b) the fact that everytime we showed the NeXTStep environment to fellow CS students and CS faculty, you would mostly get blank stares, and a few polite remarks. But no more.

    Few "got it" how easy this was to use - concepts like the seperation of the user interface specification from the core logic of a program simply did not register with people weaned on TurboVision ("one line per code for each UI element"), and Apple has (probably rightfully so) more or less given up on educating people on how great the current successor to NeXTStep (Cocoa) is.

    Nowadays, people code for OS X because OS X is seen as a hip system with a small but viable installed base, and the fact that the dev tools are extremely nice is just an added bonus.

    So if GNUStep is just an Open Source version of something that is obsolete, why care at all?

    Well, because the likes of KDE could have had it so much easier if they had used something like GNUStep (the structure of which is pretty revolutionary), instead of toolkits like QT, which were developed to be just a "better Win32" API.

    Make no mistake, QT/KDE et al. turned out to *be* a better Win32/Foundation class environment, but I guess that most folks who were ever proficient in developing for the NeXT environment will agree, that a widely used and enhanced GNUStep would have been even more productive than that.

    And still could be someday - after all, Linux desktops are such a melting pot of different toolkits and environments, that perhaps some "killer GNUStep apps" (graphics apps, like an Illustrator clone would be a good start) could get people to notice GNUStep again.

    One can always dream... :-)

    Just my $0.2E-32

    A.

    • Re:The *big* problem with GNUStep... (Score:4, Interesting)

      by jcr (53032) <jcr@mac.STRAWcom minus berry> on Tuesday December 26 2006, @07:21AM (#17365652) Journal
      So if GNUStep is just an Open Source version of something that is obsolete, why care at all?

      Well, if you care whether Linux is going to make a dent in Microsoft's market share, you should care very much about GNUStep. For my part, I'll just keep using the Mac, so GNUStep is mostly a matter of nostalgia.

      -jcr

      • GNUstep implements many parts of Cocoa. It's not *simply* an implementation of OPENSTEP. It's also an implementation most of the Cocoa additions to OPENSTEP as well. GNUstep is a cross platform API first and foremost.

        GJC
        • What I think would be nice for GNUstep is source-level compatibility for OSX apps, though that's probably a pipe dream. GNUstep on Darwin might be closer, but I don't know.

          -uso.
        • It's nostalgia as far as I'm concerned, because I've moved on from OpenStep to Mac OS X. For Linux though, GNUStep is still the best chance it has for a decent GUI and OO development framework, so it's import if Linux is going to move beyond the server room and embedded apps to any significant degree.

          -jcr

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by listen (20464)
      Did you ever actually use Qt? It is not to be sniffed at.
      Its main disadvantage is the same one as all C++ toolkits : the vast majority of people programming are absolute beyond belief raving idiots and will destroy their lives very quickly when they are given as many avenues of complexity as C++ gives them. Of course, this will probably make them feel that they are experts. I've recently realised after working on a few Python projects in groups that the same sadly applies to dynamic languages : most people

      • the vast majority of people programming are absolute beyond belief raving idiots and will destroy their lives very quickly when they are given as many avenues of complexity as C++ gives them.


        Which is just a stuck up way of saying that C++ doesn't meet the neds of most projects or programmers.

        And even smart people make mistakes.
        • No, I really mean what I said. Most people programming do not understand the basics of what they are doing. They have a huge problem grasping concepts if they can not envisage in their minds directly how the code they are writing will be evaluated, and they have a very limited understanding of possible computational evaluation models. So they work at a very very low level of abstraction.

          The code they are writing "works", but generally has huge performance, extensibilty and maintainability problems. The reas

          • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

            by hey! (33014)

            is that the Java market place (maybe not through conscious design) is the only one where the central concept driving changes is that almost all people programming are utter dunces.

            Which is a stuck up way of saying that Java meets the needs of more projects than C++.

            Of course the best solution here is to stop employing muppets as programmers. This is certainly never going to happen in our lifetimes.

            One implementations of your best solution would be to hire, exclusively, graduates of the Vulcan Science Academ

            • Erm... you have a truly unique talent for missing the point. My "best solution" was intended as a "this is NEVER going to happen" alternative. It is quite sad that you've wasted so much time attacking an opinion that no one professes to hold. To make it simple for you - I think it is very nearly impossible to hire a sufficient number of competent programmers for *any* project, mainly because the testing of competence in programming is incredibly expensive, and competent programmers are INCREDIBLY rare. So y
        • Er, yeah. My point was, when someone contrasts Qt and OpenStep, all the "big" advantages are mainly just not having to deal with people getting into a mess with C++ ( in which it is easy to express some very neat abstractions, and ridiculously hard to express others - but this is not the way to judge a language you are choosing for other people).

          If you really look at ObjC objectively, it is kind of disgusting. Don't get me wrong, it is usable, and will "normally" get muppets in to less trouble than C++, but
    • I think a "big" problem with GNUStep and Apple's Cocoa is its reliance on Objective-C, a language most people have never heard of. Apple put some work into building Java compatibility into its Cocoa environment, but they seem to have given up on that. (To the chagrin of projects like Adium, which used it extensively.) I would also argue that Java is a terrible choice for Mac programmers, who seem to favor more elegant and "artsy" results.

      If you could code in Cocoa using C++, C# or even a language like Pytho
    • was (and is), that few people realised how great the original NeXTStep environment - which GNUStep attempts to clone - was. [...] GNUStep (the structure of which is pretty revolutionary)

      Neither GNUStep nor NeXTStep were "revolutionary"; almost all of the fundamental concepts and designs in those systems came from Smalltalk. They may have been better than C and Motif at the time, but they were still a poor imitation of Smalltalk.

      Linux desktops are such a melting pot of different toolkits and environments,

      I'
    • > Few "got it" how easy this was to use

      If you have to "get" how easy something is ... it isn't.

      I like my menus horizontal, and my scrolling list of icons, well, not to scroll, but vertical if possible. The newfangled "mousewheel" thingie makes vertical things even more desireable. I also think grey 3-d relief checkmarks on grey checkboxes is not really a good UI decision. And speaking of 3d effects, tastes change, so let's ditch the grey "bumpy" look already, mmkay?
  • what is useful about GNUstep? I read throw the Wikipedia article on it, and I got the impression that it is yet another GUI toolkit. So I am curious as to what makes it more useful in which situations: ie. where does it shine?

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by m0llusk (789903)
      GNUstep is a GUI based on a toolkit and basic set of system services implemented using Objective-C. Because of the elegance of Objective-C, the design of the toolkit, and the architecture of the services, the experience of use is enhanced for ordinary usage and high level development and points in between. GNUstep emerged from the OPENSTEP standard.

      Much of Mac OS X Cocoa was derived from NeXTSTEP, so there is the possibility of some level of compatibility with Mac OS X. In some ways GNUstep might be cons

    • Where to begin? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Tony (765) * on Tuesday December 26 2006, @09:08AM (#17366126) Homepage Journal
      In 1985, Steve Jobs left Apple to found a new computer company. His company attracted many very talented individuals. They created the NeXT computer, a very advanced, very beautiful computer running a Unix-like operating system eventually called NeXTStep, which eventually became OSX.

      I use NeXTStep as proof that Microsoft has set the computer industry back 12 years. NeXTStep used display postscript on both the video display, and for printing. It was fully-preemptive, with a clean, POSIX-compliant system interface. The application framework was extremely advanced, and extremely easy to code for. Using Objective-C as the programming language of choice, NeXTStep had some very advanced programs for the time, such as Lotus Improv, the spreadsheet MS-Excel wishes to become when it grows up.

      As it is, MS-Windows still lags behind NeXTStep by a good amount, especially in terms of ease-of-development, ease-of-use, and aesthetics.

      Tim Berners-Lee created the World Wide Web on a NeXT.

      Anyway, when it became apparent that NeXT was not going to survive, they released a bunch of specifications that together made up the technical documentation for OpenStep, based on NeXTStep. The idea was that OS vendors could implement OpenStep APIs, and application vendors could target a single API for multiple OSs.

      GnuStep is an implementation of the OpenStep API, and other programs to recreate the NeXT environment on any Unix-like operating system. Applications written for GnuStep can be recompiled to target OS X with little-to-no work.

      Basically, when people say Linux needs an easy-to-use, easy-to-develop-for application environment and desktop, they are talking about GnuStep, whether they know it or not. It's not as flashy as GNOME or KDE, but it's much cleaner, easier to develop for, easier to use, and much more consistent. Where both GNOME and KDE try to be similar to MS-Windows, GnuStep tries to be like NeXTStep, the best application development and user desktop ever created.

      • Re:Where to begin? (Score:4, Informative)

        by WillAdams (45638) on Tuesday December 26 2006, @09:23AM (#17366226) Homepage
        Tony said:
        >Tim Berners-Lee created the World Wide Web on a NeXT.

        Other interesting programs which began on NeXTstep:

          - FreeHand v4 (essentially a port to Windows and the Mac of Altsys Virtuoso v2)
          - Doom
          - Lotus Improv
          - Stone Design's Create
          - sBook

        An interesting opensource app w/ NeXTstep roots:

          - http://www.cenon.info/ [cenon.info]

        William
      • "GnuStep is an implementation of the OpenStep API, and other programs to recreate the NeXT environment on any Unix-like operating system. Applications written for GnuStep can be recompiled to target OS X with little-to-no work."

        Does this mean that the converse is true? i.e. applications written for OS X can be recompiled to target GnuStep with little-to-no work?

      • Re:Where to begin? (Score:4, Interesting)

        by Frumious Wombat (845680) on Tuesday December 26 2006, @11:17AM (#17367328)
        Microsoft is certainly one offender, and certainly the largest, but let's not forget our dear friend, X11. Pre-Irix-4.0 SGI ran NeWS, which was also display postscript based. Nexts ran NextStep, VAXStations VWS, all relatively light, efficient, and functional, and everywhere I went the same whine arose, "we can't use this, it doesn't run X11!" So, Nexts weren't purchased, even though given the software and performance, they weren't out of line versus Sun 3/60, Apollo, etc, and SGI had to port everything to X in order to survive. We took a performance hit on every machine that had to run X versus the previous window-manager, had to add megs of expensive (early 1990s) memory just to not hear the disks whine, and generally gained very little in return for adopting this, ahem, standard. Then, if you wanted to see real death by toolkit, running Motif on a Vaxstation 3100/38 that had run smoothly under previous versions of X alone was a good example. We had a program that *somebody* insisted had to be Motif only, and the performance was so apalling we spent ~$15K on an Indy, just to be able to work. That VAX was perfectly fine (and would have still been useful if the programs the lab used had an X11-only, VWS, or even Tek-4107 interface), but it had to be retired due to a bloated toolkit.

        The Knight with the Chicken is going to be very busy in the computer industry one of these days.

  • Maybe they can fix .... (Score:3, Interesting)

    by phoxix (161744) on Tuesday December 26 2006, @08:45AM (#17365968)
    Their annoying usage of a top level conf dir ~/GNUStep (or whatever it is). No other app I've seen does such garbage, dot-dirs all ftw.
    • In theory (I haven't tried it), this is configurable: The GNUSTEP_USER_DIR, the default of which is set in {GNUSTEP_HOME}/Library/Makefiles/GNUstep.sh, has the name of the GNUstep directory relative to your home. ie, if you're prefer ".gs", place "export GNUSTEP_USER_DIR=.gs" in your .profile, or if that doesn't work, in Library/Makefiles/GNUstep.sh.

    • Re:gnustep (Score:5, Insightful)

      by bsharitt (580506) <bsharitt&gmail,com> on Tuesday December 26 2006, @06:45AM (#17365466) Homepage Journal
      If they get serious about more complete source compatibility with Cocoa, it could go a long way to attracting Mac developers to Linux if they can accomplish ports of many Cocoa apps with simple recompiles.

      • Re:gnustep (Score:4, Informative)

        by _|()|\| (159991) on Tuesday December 26 2006, @09:24AM (#17366238)
        Those interested in GNUstep as a poor man's Yellow Box may be interested in a younger, more focused project: Cocotron [cocotron.org]. It seeks to clone Foundation and Appkit, and to provide tools to cross compile for other platforms with Xcode. It's a little Windows centric, but support for Linux, Solaris, and others seems to be in the works.
      • it could go a long way to attracting Mac developers to Linux if they can accomplish ports of many Cocoa apps with simple recompiles.

        And this is useful... why? What Cocoa apps would actually be of interest to Linux users and wouldn't be so tied into the Macintosh desktop that it would still be a lot of work to port?

        A lot of the "big apps" are developed using various compatibility or wrapper libraries anyway (e.g., Skype, NeoOffice, Microsoft Office, AOL IM, Acrobat, Firefox, Thunderbird, Java, etc.)

        • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

          by Watson Ladd (955755)
          Think commercial apps. The Objective-C and Foundation platform would look a lot better then .NET if it works on all platforms. The speed of native code, the FFI abilities of C, and the flexibility of Smalltalk vs. the speed of Java, the FFI abilities of Java, and the flexibility of Java with even less cross platform support. Only additional thing Objective-C needs is Lisp for it to be perfect.

        • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

          by jcr (53032)
          Don't forget in-house custom app development. The easier it is to develop an app for a given platform, the better chance that platform has of being chosen. My company is a Mac shop, but if there was a 80+% Cocoa library available for Linux, we might very well choose Linux for certain vertical-market deployments. As it is, the GNUStep foundation makes Linux a possibility for our non-GUI apps (data acquisition, etc.)

          -jcr

    • Re:gnustep (Score:5, Interesting)

      by WillAdams (45638) on Tuesday December 26 2006, @08:36AM (#17365918) Homepage
      People who value a nice, open development environment and the integrated and synergistic environment which such creates. Consider a typical work-flow in NeXTstep:

        - write an article in TeXview.app
        - select a word, hit = and get a definition / thesaurus entry while writing it
        - create a drawing in Altsys Virtuoso which needs an equation in a label
        - copy the proper equation out of your .tex file from the TeXview.app window
        - paste in the equation into Altsys Virtuoso
        - invoke the Service TeX eq -> eps in Altsys Virtuoso and get a .eps of the typeset equation (you can send the source to a background layer for reference (what I usually do) or delete it.
        - select the address of the journal receiving the article
        - invoke Poste.app to bring up a window from you you can print an envelope to mail it for submission

      The environment affords similar integration w/ Mail.app as well if desired.

      The commercial developer Nova Mind, http://www.nova-mind.com/ [nova-mind.com] uses it to get a Windows version of their Mac OS X software.

      And for those who say just use Mac OS X (I do at work):

      (from: http://macslash.org/comments.pl?sid=4190&cid=63590 [macslash.org])

          - monolithic main menu bar w/ wasted blank space between the menus and the (optional) information / settings menus for Airport &c.

          - verbose Mac-style shortcut descriptions w/ arcane symbols instead of concise NeXT-style shortcuts (in NeXTstep, Save is indicated by ``s'' and Save as by ``S'', no Command symbol (it's assumed---Control only as a modifier is reserved for personal shortcuts / Unix-use), Shift by case)

          - Print, Hide, Services and Quit are no longer top-level menus where they made more sense and were quicker to get at.

          - scroll bars on wrong side (this can't be fixed by theming 'cause Carbon apps are responsible for deciding where scroll bars are placed :( having them on the left means a window is more useful when partially dragged off-screen and results in less-frequent need to resize a window

          - no Webster.app (this has since been addressed w/ 10.4), Digital Librarian / Shakespeare or Oxford's Book of Quotations --- in NeXTstep this meant one was guaranteed to have Command = _not_ used in an app so it'd be available for looking things up in Websters

          - Pantone colour library --- used to be this was licensed w/ the system, now each graphic app which needs it has to pay a license, and one _doesn't_ get them in one's office apps (major negative for adhering to corporate identity programs where such is specced)

          - vertical menu

          - pop-up main menu --- this is wonderfully fast / efficient / elegant. For me, ``Punch'' in Altsys Virtuoso is pretty much a gesture, right-click, down a bit, then straight over and release

          - repositionable sub-menus --- no need for inscrutable button bars, and one can make a given command easy to get to as needed (when doing lots of envelopes I tear off the poste.app Services menu, put it in the bottom left corner, then an envelope is merely a selection, mouse move to bottom left, click, shift right to the print menu (also aligned on the bottom edge for this) click away. (takes longer to say / type than to do)

      William
      (who really should save all that and put it on a web page or something instead of typing it up each time --- check my rants at http://groups.google.com/ [google.com] in comp.sys.next.advocacy to see if I forgot anything...)
        • I'm afraid those are all NeXTstep apps --- for GNUstep you'd need to see if you could port TeXshop, use Cenon instead, use Affiche instead of Poste (might need to add the envelope-printing service), there was a project called ``mylibrary'' to replace Digital Librarian/Shakespeare and you could use WordNet instead of Webster's. Not aware of an unencumbered book of quotations though --- Fortune w/ an index maybe?

          William
    • Well, to be more accurate, they cared about NeXT enough to base OSX off of it. GNUstep is the most API-compatible option that can run on alternative platforms. Of course, its not because of the API that it is so interesting as a desktop platform, and developers and users have come to appreciate it in OSX.

      The two main open desktop projects (GNOME and KDE) heavily mimick the user interface paradigm established by MS. GNUstep is a good complement with the NeXT (also OSX) user interface paradigm (separate men

      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by Colin Smith (2679)
        1: You can pretty much rip off a GUI as much as you like, nobody's won a court case to prevent competitors copying them.

        2: Take a lesson doesn't mean copy. If I wanted Aqua I'd just buy an Apple.

        However a great looking GUI along with a genuinely intuitive user interface, which is API compatible with an Apple Mac is a compelling proposition. In fact I reckon it has more potential than Gnome or KDE. The ability to write a GNUStep app and then just re-build on a Mac (and viceversa) vastly increases the market

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners. Comments are owned by the Poster. The Rest © 1997-2009 Geeknet, Inc.