Hi Unfortunately, what you describe with MAC OS isn't quite the way X works. If it did, there wouldn't be so many apps inaccessible with gnopernicus even in this early stage. X has many toolkits (be they GTK+, QT, or others). Applications written with these toolkits share characteristics (one gtk+ app has similar aspects to another gtk+ app) but each toolkit is different, with its own appearance and interface. Thus, if you run a QT-based app in a GTK+ GNOME environment, it will look quite different and, more important to us, won't be accessible. Currently only GTK+ version 2 is accessible with gnopernicus and, given the fact of just how early gnopernicus is in its development, even that access must be considered marginal at best. I wish X was the way you've described, we'd've had access a long time ago if that were the case. On Sun, 28 Mar 2004, Krister Ekstrom wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: RIPEMD160 > > Hi Jacob, > > Thank you, thank you, thank you! Very, very well said and it > coresponds exactly with my thoughts. Let me just add another thing: > There are more ways than the windows way of handling the gui. I'm > thinking about the Mac way, that at least up to system 7.5X was pretty > standard and few applications left that standard which meant that > Outspoken, (no matter how primitive that app was), could read and > access most progs. I thought that X-windows worked along similar > lines, but i could be wrong.
