Future Terminal Emulator?
in [Solaris]
|
Prev: sun ssh without a password again
Next: CDE: on xp, alt-tab pops up box of icons, easy choice. CDE did too, but stopped.
From: Doug McIntyre on 9 Mar 2010 12:32 Casper H.S. Dik <Casper.Dik(a)Sun.COM> writes: >"Richard B. Gilbert" <rgilbert88(a)comcast.net> writes: >>Tim Bradshaw wrote: >>> On 2010-03-09 11:02:55 +0000, David Combs said: >>> >>>> So what's the problem with sending a letter to McNealy with >>>> 100 signatures DEMANDING that they continue to support CDE >>>> WAY out into the future? >>> >>> The problem is that that is more CDE users than there are. >>> >>I don't know about the rest of you guys and gals but I've been using CDE >>for twenty years or so. I'm used to it, it does what I need, and I >>wouldn't change it if I could. >Perhaps 15 years, not much more than that. Can we count VUE to get up to that time line? :) (who used to have an HP/PA box running VUE way back when..)
From: Ian Collins on 9 Mar 2010 16:03 Andrew Gabriel wrote: > In article <o96dnX6gC9IGOufWnZ2dnUVZ_q-dnZ2d(a)giganews.com>, > "Richard B. Gilbert" <rgilbert88(a)comcast.net> writes: >> CDE stands for Common Desktop Environment. It means that you can switch >> from Solaris to IRIX, to AIX, to . . . and see the same, or highly > > and HP-UX > >> similar, icons which will do the same or, highly similar, things. >> >> I don't know if it was ever formally standardized but it's at least a de >> facto standard! > > Yes. I believe it was at one time a requirement for UNIX branding > that if you offered X, you also had to offer CDE (although you > didn't have to offer X at all). Pa! That abomination! It did me out of a promising career as an XView developer. If the source were free, I'd line my kids Guinea Pig pens with it. -- Ian Collins
From: Tim Bradshaw on 10 Mar 2010 05:04 On 2010-03-09 13:46:29 +0000, Richard B. Gilbert said: > I don't know about the rest of you guys and gals but I've been using > CDE for twenty years or so. I'm used to it, it does what I need, and I > wouldn't change it if I could. So that's one user. Seriously: given the size of the Unix workstation market (as opposed to the Linux workstation market, which I presume does not use CDE), I imagine the case for dropping it and using whatever GUI Linux desktops use is rather financially compelling. (I'm guessing that size(Linux desktop market) >> size(Linux workstation market) >> size(Unix workstation market)).
From: Chris Ridd on 10 Mar 2010 05:09 On 2010-03-10 10:04:46 +0000, Tim Bradshaw said: > On 2010-03-09 13:46:29 +0000, Richard B. Gilbert said: > >> I don't know about the rest of you guys and gals but I've been using > >> CDE for twenty years or so. I'm used to it, it does what I need, and I >> > wouldn't change it if I could. > > So that's one user. > > Seriously: given the size of the Unix workstation market (as opposed to > the Linux workstation market, which I presume does not use CDE), I > imagine the case for dropping it and using whatever GUI Linux desktops > use is rather financially compelling. (I'm guessing that size(Linux > desktop market) >> size(Linux workstation market) >> size(Unix > workstation market)). Are there accessibility-type (ie for the blind, partially sighted, etc) issues with CDE? -- Chris
From: David Combs on 17 Mar 2010 00:04
In article <hn7qrt$5n4$1(a)news.eternal-september.org>, Tim Bradshaw <tfb(a)tfeb.org> wrote: >On 2010-03-09 13:46:29 +0000, Richard B. Gilbert said: > >> I don't know about the rest of you guys and gals but I've been using >> CDE for twenty years or so. I'm used to it, it does what I need, and I >> wouldn't change it if I could. > >So that's one user. > >Seriously: given the size of the Unix workstation market (as opposed to >the Linux workstation market, which I presume does not use CDE), I >imagine the case for dropping it and using whatever GUI Linux desktops >use is rather financially compelling. (I'm guessing that size(Linux >desktop market) >> size(Linux workstation market) >> size(Unix >workstation market)). > Fine, have gnome. Just don't DELETE cde. David |