windows and portability? (longish)

Mark Patrick markl at vecpyr.UUCP
Wed Dec 11 03:32:59 AEST 1985

An article was recently posted Net.lang.c comparing Sun Tools and the
Mac user interface toolbox.  Its main points can be summarized as follows:

	The Mac's software interface is incredibly machine dependent and 
		very cumbersome.

	The Mac's window system is "quick" and "dirty" compared to the

	Sun Tools provides a much higher level of interface than does
		the Mac.

While recognizing many weak points in the design of the Mac (very
limited memory, disk space and compute power compared to a
Sun/Apollo/Lisp Machine).  I consider its user interface to be a
strong point compared to these machines.

Having looked at both these products and typical user interfaces constructed 
from them I have the reverse opinion.  

The user interface components on Mac: the dialog manager, the menu manager, 
the control manager, the resource editor and MacApp seem far more capable 
of supporting a high quality user interface than does SunTools 
(moreover the documentation for Mac seems much clearer than that for the Sun).  

Since I last looked at the Sun documentation they have added a CGI and
are working on a new user interface and better documentation.  However, 
I am told by those who have to program to this interface that this is 
still dificult.

I would be very interested in hearing what features on the Sun (or
other workstation) appeal to end users/programmers which they
believe simpflify application development yet yield high quality user
interfaces and ideas for easing the porting of applications between
bit-mapped systems while not sacrificing quality of user

More information about the Comp.lang.c mailing list