Needs educating: Message from Linux (fwd)

[Georgina]

Hi

Exactly, it is what the GNU is all about "Freedom" for me to bake the cake and 
for you to have a copy of the recipe if you wish and even modify it as I'm not 
perfect.  But if time is pressing, you can still have a piece to eat on the 
hoof, if you wish.  Freedom.... Freedom.... Freedom.... Freedom...

Gena



>Hahahahaha! that was cute!
>
>I ain't domesticated anymore!  I prefer to buy my cake and eat it too!
>Now if I had sufficient time to make that cake, I'd probably grind my own
>spices and decorate it really nice!  but the point herein is obviously,
>the masses aren't going to want to tailor things and write scripts and so
>forth so there is where sharing these things will be necessary to promote
>Linux as being palateible to those who don't want to bake that cake!
>
>Amanda Lee
>
>
>
>On Tue, 22 Jan 2002, Georgina wrote:
>
>> Hi
>>
>> Here's how I see it, I might be entirely wrong but its how I understand thin
gs:
>>
>> You want to eat some cake?  Well you can buy a uniform one off the shelf.
>> The one you buy today will taste the same as the one you buy next week.  You
>> can't really change any aspect of it.
>>
>> However, you can make one yourself and you can choose which of the many
>> available parts to make up your whole.  You can gather a variety of
>> parts or can even go back as far as growing them yourself.  Thus you don't h
ave
>> to spread your cake with jam to make it palatable, you just make it to fit
>> your taste.  If X is the flour, eggs and butter.  Gnome and KDE are differen
t
>> combinations of fruit or other flavourings.
>>
>> Jam here in the UK means fruit preserve, I think that it is known as jelly i
n
>> other parts.
>>
>> Gena
>>
>>
>>
>> >         Thanks.  I understand what you are saying.  Does this mean that
>> >there would not be a fix for X-Windows like the MSAA in Windows?  Would we
>> >need some kind of major off-screen model?
>> >
>> >-- charlie Crawford.
>> >
>> >At 11:09 AM 1/22/02 -0700, you wrote:
>> >>Actually, being familiar with X myself, I'll answer this one.
>> >>
>> >>Xwindows, is a misnomer, in reality, it's just an X server, and clients. T
he
>> >>server draws to the screen, and sends user input to the clients. The clien
ts
>> >>are the applications, the clients are usually on the same machine as the
>> >>server, but they don't have to be.
>> >>
>> >>X itself is nothing more than a network protocol for sending graphic data 
to
>> >>an X workstation, the X protocol has no provisions for button, text box, o
r
>> >>any widgets for that matter, it has: line, circle, filled circle, rectangl
e,
>> >>filled rectangle, pixmap, etc...
>> >>
>> >>X also sends keyboard input and mouse click locations to the applications
>> >>that own the windows they occur in.  Beyond that, X's only other capabilit
y
>> >>is to send text glyphs (rendered in a given font) back to applications tha
t
>> >>request them.
>> >>
>> >>As for widgets, and controls, and a nice unified API for writing programs,
>> >>you need a "toolkit library". What's a toolkit library you ask? A better
>> >>question might be "what isn't a toolkit library?"
>> >>First of all, there are a lot of toolkit libraries out there, some are ver
y
>> >>simple (Athena) while some have a full-blown callback API and can be adjus
ted
>> >>with themes (GTK, GTK+) and some are object-oriented C++ based APIs (QT).
>> >>They all basically do the same thing, provide functions/objects/structures
 to
>> >>the application to draw typical GUI widgets, and send draw requests to the
 X
>> >>server. Here's the hairy part, each toolkit has its own look and feel, has
>> >>its own API, has its own conventions, and basically has its own everything
.
>> >>
>> >>There's also the seperate window manager, which is simply another X client
>> >>which registers a few special functions with the X server so it can get th
e
>> >>location and owner of each window and add decorations and task switching
>> >>behavior. Some (most) window managers do more than this, but they all do a
t
>> >>least this.
>> >>
>> >>Windows, on the other had, has the equivalent of the toolkit library and
>> >>window manager built into the kernel (sort of) and most applications eithe
r
>> >>use that, or a custom one that is very similar to it.
>> >>
>> >>I'm sure this is incomplete, but I've already been wracking my brain for a
n
>> >>hour over it, so I'll close here, feel free to ask questions or tell me ab
out
>> >>parts that are unclear.
>> >> >       Good to see you on this list.  I wonder if there are some folks
>> >> out there
>> >> > familiar with XWindows to share the kind of navigation that goes on wit
h
>> >> > it?  I have no idea.  Is it the same icons and rdio buttons and all of
>> >> > tht?  How is it different than windows and how much more easy would acc
ess
>> >> > be to develop in the XWindows environment?  These are important questio
ns
>> >> > to your point I imagine.
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >>_______________________________________________
>> >>Speakup mailing list
>> >>Speakup at braille.uwo.ca
>> >>http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>> >
>> >
>> >_______________________________________________
>> >Speakup mailing list
>> >Speakup at braille.uwo.ca
>> >http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Speakup mailing list
>> Speakup at braille.uwo.ca
>> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>>
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>Speakup mailing list
>Speakup at braille.uwo.ca
>http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup