Re: Re: gtk2?

On Sat, Jan 12, 2002 at 03:04:48PM +0100, Nils Faerber wrote:
> > still not convinced that gtk is the right tool for an embedded device.
> > my current point of view is that it's "good enough", available and it
> > works, but from the HCI side, it definitely isn't the right choice.
> What is "HCI" supposed to mean? (sorry ;)

Human Computer Interface

> Please keep in mind that pixil, nice as it is, uses FLTK. You could also
> use FLTK on X11 but we have decided some time ago not to do it. Using FLTK
> you can program and design GUIs in another way than GTK+ does. FLTK is
> more like specifying everything, colors for every widget, fonts for every
> widget, and even the position! It has not real means for themes (FLTK2
> will have). It is not that far abstracted as GTK+ is. And thus it lacks
> many features we would like to have. It makes it for example very
> difficult to offer a consistant look and feel.

all that is true, of course. nevertheless, the fact remains that if you
give a non-geek a screenshot of pixil and of mingle and toad, he'll
definitely go and download pixil, not familiar.

> No, for me FLTK is still no choice.
> And microwindows/nano-X neither. See how it performs, try it. It is nice
> for very lightweight GUIs but IMHO not for our general purpose PDAs.

the point was less technical, more visual. if we can get something
similiar on gtk, I'm all for it. for all I know, however, gtk does put
quite a few restrictions on us.

-- 
http://web.lemuria.org/pubkey.html
pub  1024D/D88D35A6 2001-11-14 Tom Vogt <tom_at_lemuria.org>
     Key fingerprint = 276B B7BB E4D8 FCCE DB8F  F965 310B 811A D88D 35A6