Re: GNU OpenStep

Andrew Sullivan (
Wed, 2 Dec 1998 18:54:55 -0500 (EST)

On Tue, 1 Dec 1998, John Lewis wrote:

> I want Linux to topple Gates from his self built pedestal, I had hoped
> IBM would do it with OS/2 but they have no interest in taking the evil
> empire on. And to make Linux a real alternative to windross there
> needs to be a viable GUI that Joe Public can use as easily as what he
> is given today.

I've argued elsewhere (see, e.g., Slashdot) that this is a foolish pipe
dream.  Simply put, Win (and, for that matter, MacOS) get their absolute,
rock-solid simplicity by giving up flexibility or (the logicians',
inclusive or) stability.  It will _never_ be that easy, in spite of what
the GNOME people say.  (KDE is an example of how it can be that easy: lock
lotsa stuff down hard, so that anything but heavily-managed changes, from
few options, is basically impossible.)

> Does AS depend upon fvwm being installed is it now completely stand
> alone. Can I remove all traces of fwvm?

Yes, you can.  It's "based upon" in the sense that they share a common
code base.  Neither is reliant upon the other for binaries.

Anyway, I'm pleased that this did not turn into a name-calling flame war.
The rational debate -- even, or, in fact, especially over areas of
disagreement! -- is sooooo heartening to someone like me.  (I usually
teach critical thinking, and the _ad hominem_ tone of so much of Usenet
and the various *Net debates makes me depressed.)


Andrew Sullivan | (better)| (worse)
                                   *  *  *
                Go to, or issue
'finger -l' to find the AfterStep FAQ file.