Return to BSD News archive
#! rnews 7313 sserve.cc.adfa.oz.au
Xref: sserve comp.windows.x:80445 comp.unix.bsd.netbsd.misc:699
Path: sserve!newshost.anu.edu.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!simtel!swidir.switch.ch!newsfeed.ACO.net!Austria.EU.net!EU.net!Germany.EU.net!nntp.gmd.de!news.rwth-aachen.de!news.rhrz.uni-bonn.de!saph2.physik.uni-bonn.de!juengst
From: juengst@saph2.physik.uni-bonn.de (Henry G. Juengst)
Newsgroups: comp.windows.x,comp.unix.bsd.netbsd.misc
Subject: Re: MWM on XFree86 V3.1.1 / NetBSD V1.0A
Date: 28 Jul 1995 16:24:32 GMT
Organization: Physikalisches Institut der Universitaet Bonn
Lines: 142
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <3vb301$m83@news.rhrz.uni-bonn.de>
References: <1995Jul23.100140.10651@eisner> <3v0lji$s9d@inews.sc.intel.com> <3v2rvi$4th@news.rhrz.uni-bonn.de> <3v8hcc$pd5@inews.sc.intel.com>
Reply-To: juengst@saph1.physik.uni-bonn.de
NNTP-Posting-Host: saph1.physik.uni-bonn.de
I had a short discussion with Mark about FVWM vs. MWM via email. May be
it is interesting for others. I post my and (with his permission) his mail
here now.
Henry
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 1995 19:33:25 +0200
Message-Id: <95072719332522@saph1.physik.uni-bonn.de>
From: juengst@saph1.physik.uni-bonn.de (Henry G. Juengst, ISKP, Bonn)
To: mwilley@mipos2.intel.com
Subject: Re: MWM on XFree86 V3.1.1 / NetBSD V1.0A
X-VMS-To: SMTP%"mwilley@mipos2.intel.com"
> In article <3v2rvi$4th@news.rhrz.uni-bonn.de>, juengst@saph1.physik.uni-bonn.de (Henry G. Juengst) writes:
> |>
> |> In article <3v0lji$s9d@inews.sc.intel.com>, mwilley@xws181.sc.intel.com (Mark F Willey) writes:
> |> >In article <1995Jul23.100140.10651@eisner>, burns@eisner.decus.org (Scott Burns) writes:
> |> >|> I just installed XFree86 V3.1.1 on my NetBSD V1.0a (June 24) machine. It
> |> >|> comes with twm, can I get mwm for it somewhere, or is the source available ?
>
> |> >I would suggest getting fvwm. It's better, and can be configured to behave just
> |> >like MWM. If you have problems finding such, email me.
> |>
> |> "It's better" is just not true. Fvwm is a twm bastard.
>
> Henry, I'm curious. Why do you say that fvwm is not better than mwm? I honestly
> believe that it is for the following reasons:
>
> 1) it's free
> 2) GoodStuff Module is very handy
> 3) it has virtual windows
> 4) it can be configured to behave and look like MWM if you so desire.
>
> What does mwm have to offer that fvwm does not? Maybe I'll switch. ;-)
>
> Mark
The question should not be MWM vs. FVWM, it must be Motif vs. "what else?".
FVWM + e.g. TCL/TK is nice for toys, but you will use Motif as a serious
development platform.
Anyway, I spent nearly 3% of the total costs of my system at home for
Motif. It is really all the same to me if a package which I need costs
nothing or some 100 DM (or $$).
As you know even Motif 1.1 provides a root window menu. One can create
any menu and command action with a very simple, but clear syntax. These
menus can be simple buttons, cascade menus or pixel buttons as you want.
You can bind any key (e.g. F14) with additional menus.
BTW I use MWM and have binded some menu functions with some StarTrek
sound. Great! :-) But not serious .-)
In August Motif 2.0 will be 1 year old. Its MWM is a virtual window manager,
is 100% internationalized (Motif), supports XPM pixmaps, has a Workspace
Manager, TearOff menus and last but not least a Client Command Interface.
CCI means that clients can create their own new commands in a MWM menu
which is very useful e.g. for standard installation procedures. If this is
not enough you can add a session manager (CDE). MWM supports 100% ICCCM.
Now, let's talk about some FVWM internals. Robert Nation defined the error
codes of FVWM starting with "X_" which might produce conflicts with X11.
Obviously he had not enough experiences with larger software packages.
Motif definitions never begin with "X_" (they use the well known "Xm").
FVWM can be configured to look like MWM, but it is not MWM. It is a
TWM chield. The ICCCM implementation of TWM is mad and incomplete.
FVWM has just some fixes. Uninteresting for normal users? Well, one
nice effect was that e.g. pull down menus of Motif applications did not
work because the focus wasn't handled ICCCM compliant. But not only
Motif programs have/had problems with FVWM (e.g. xload). I am sure
that Robert Nation lost the fight against MWM before he started, because
he used TWM as starting point. Nobody can correct such a complex
program and protocol for no money as good as a team which earns money
with it.
You should not switch if you just use FVWM to start XDOOM. :->
But if you write applications which you like to sell (for money or
what ever) I would recommend to get an overview about Motif and then
to buy it.
Henry
PS: I don't want to compare TCL/TK with Motif 2.0. You can do it
yourself if you have worked with both (I did it and I prefer Motif).
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: SMTP%"mwilley@mipos2.intel.com" 27-JUL-1995 21:59:23.13
To: juengst@saph1.physik.uni-bonn.de (Henry G. Juengst, ISKP, Bonn)
CC:
Subj: Re: MWM on XFree86 V3.1.1 / NetBSD V1.0A
Henry G. Juengst, ISKP, Bonn writes:
>
> > In article <3v2rvi$4th@news.rhrz.uni-bonn.de>, juengst@saph1.physik.uni-bonn.de (Henry G. Juengst) writes:
> Anyway, I spent nearly 3% of the total costs of my system at home for
> Motif. It is really all the same to me if a package which I need costs
> nothing or some 100 DM (or $$).
<grin> Not me! That's a lot of paycheck for this boy! ;-)
> Now, let's talk about some FVWM internals. Robert Nation defined the error
> codes of FVWM starting with "X_" which might produce conflicts with X11.
> Obviously he had not enough experiences with larger software packages.
> Motif definitions never begin with "X_" (they use the well known "Xm").
Hm. I guess this is a bad design flaw. I see that there are some very
good reasons that Mwm is a better design. Not suprising, seeing as how it
is a commercial product. BTW, I have noticed that annoying menu focus
problem when I have autoraise on. And actually, XDOOM doesn't work so well
with FVWM because the default keybinding for screen-shift is the same as
some of the default DOOM movement keys. Gotta start up twm to run that...
Thanks for the info.
> You should not switch if you just use FVWM to start XDOOM. :->
> But if you write applications which you like to sell (for money or
> what ever) I would recommend to get an overview about Motif and then
> to buy it.
> PS: I don't want to compare TCL/TK with Motif 2.0. You can do it
> yourself if you have worked with both (I did it and I prefer Motif).
I'll certainly look into it if I am selling into an appropriate market.
I have worked with both, but not as a programmer. I will get Motif if/when
I need it to compile a program that I just "gotta have".
But actually, the computer people here use both Motif and TCL/TK. I
personally love exmh, a TCL/TK-based mail reader.
Mark
--
Mark Willey - Intel P6c DLA - (408) 765-3913 - mwilley@mipos2.intel.com
--
juengst@saph1.physik.uni-bonn.de [131.220.161.1] (internet)
juengst@boss1.physik.uni-bonn.de [131.220.161.41]
saph1::juengst [13.259] (decnet)
Any opinions in this mail are my own.