Re: Re: Are configuration & UI better in 4.2?
- To: mathgroup at smc.vnet.net
- Subject: [mg36900] Re: [mg36860] Re: Are configuration & UI better in 4.2?
- From: Gerald Roth <gerald.roth at aon.at>
- Date: Tue, 1 Oct 2002 04:45:40 -0400 (EDT)
- Organization: University of Graz, Austria
- References: <an3qi2$ohv$1@smc.vnet.net> <200209300702.DAA07124@smc.vnet.net>
- Sender: owner-wri-mathgroup at wolfram.com
hi, On Monday 30 September 2002 09:02, you wrote: > P.J. Hinton wrote: > I sholdn't have to. If I start messing with X resource settings for my > user environment, I am sure to break something else which is configured > based on the current settings. There should either be a GUI interface, or a > clearly documented, and easily accessible configuration file to modify such > properties as the size of the fonts in the GUI widgets. This is > functionality which is rightfully expected of a modern desktop UI. [snip] > And I'm sure there is some configuration file in which I could place that, > and hope that what you think will be read by my system *will* in fact be > read, and not subsequently overridden during xsession startup. Things > aren't the way they used to be back in the 1980s. The modern Unix desktop > has moved beyond the paradigm of openlook and motif. See for example > http://www.trolltech.com, http://www.gnome.org, and http://www.kde.org > moving the frontend over to QT would have some neat side effects: consistent look & feel with the modern linux gui, themeability, source code compatibility on Win, Linux and Mac AFAIK, the possibility to use antialiased truetype fonts as QT supports Xrender and Xft (looks great - see KDE3). i think all of those points are of value, but the most important might be source compatibility. ONE frontend for MOST (or ALL) platforms - sounds like a dream :-)) regards, gerald -- ************************************* Gerald Roth M@th Desktop Development Tel: +43 - 316 - 57 16 33 Email: Gerald.Roth at aon.at *************************************