7 comments

  • red_admiral 21 minutes ago
    A portable GUI interface is a hard problem, unless you mean "a browser window without an URL bar" and your controls are HTML/CSS components.

    Windows has keyboard shortcuts on buttons, but you can set per-user whether they appear underlined always or only when you hold Alt. Mac always has exactly one, immovable menu bar; and Enter doesn't close a dialog box. GNOME can rollup or pin windows from the title bar if you add the buttons for it. Whether the native dialog layout has the ok button to the left of the cancel button depends on the OS and the writing direction (p206 of [1]). Not every platform has a native calendar widget. And so on ...

    Worse still, you're building an abstraction layer on top of several genuinely different systems, that users of different platforms will expect to work differently in the first place. Go down this rabbit hole and you end up with "show a help button on modal dialogs only on platforms where this is usual, and where you can open the help window without closing the modal first". "Portable native-GUI" is almost an oxymoron; wxWidgets is perhaps the closest we can get where at least you can ask for a wxFindReplaceDialog abstraction (p229 of [1]) and get the cancel button in the platform-default place, even if "Find-Replace Dialog" is not a feature included in the OS' component library itself.

    [1] https://wxwidgets.org/docs/book/Cross-Platform%20GUI%20Progr...

  • decasia 4 hours ago
    It's a neat project. Write cross platform desktop apps in C. Presumably it would not have been very usable in practice in the late 1980s, because of all the OTHER system interfaces that still weren't portable, even if the windowing system was available in a portable way.

    I can remember the subsequent period in which Java desktop apps were relatively common. They had cross platform UI by default. But the problem was:

    1) cross platform GUIs are ugly by default, compared to fully native desktop apps, because they don't entirely replicate the affordances or the style of the platform;

    2) in the Java case, it seemed heavyweight to install and sluggish compared to native apps;

    Point 2 would not have applied to stdwin, as it would have produced small compiled binaries I suppose, but Point 1 would have.

    So in the end, obviously web apps (and partly, Flash) took over the niche that "cross platform desktop apps" had once tried to fill, and then it was something of a dead zone until Electron, as far as I remember.

    • JohnDeHope 3 hours ago
      > cross platform GUIs are ugly by default, compared to fully native desktop apps, because they don't entirely replicate the affordances or the style of the platform;

      I think this is an implementation detail. It's up to the software stack whether it leaves off before drawing the UI elements on screen, or goes ahead and takes on that responsibility too. The wxWidgets toolkit uses the runtime platform's UI, so it does not draw the widgets themselves. Java Swing took on the task of drawing the UI elements on the screen in its own style.

      • StilesCrisis 2 hours ago
        When OS X was new, Apple was still under the assumption that Java on the desktop was important, and they built an in-house Java with full Aqua support. It was still _terrible_! All the Aqua-specific affordances like animation or shadows were janky or absent. Sizing and positioning always felt weird because the application was written assuming Windows-shaped controls.

        Basically, cross-platform GUI only looks good on the platform that it was originally designed for. Unless the other platforms make zero interesting choices, they will always look worse.

    • pjmlp 1 hour ago
      Point 2 nowadays feels like high performance when compared to Electron crap.
    • c-smile 42 minutes ago
      > cross platform GUIs are ugly by default,

      ... was said reading it in a browser on who knows what OS/DWM.

      I mean that 90% (if not more) of all UI interactions happen now in a browser or in multi-platform applications (e.g. messengers, SublimeText, VSCode, etc).

    • flohofwoe 4 hours ago
      The other popular option for cross-platform UI apps was Tcl/Tk:

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tk_(software)

      ...which even leaked into other language ecosystems like Python:

      https://docs.python.org/3/library/tkinter.html

      • graemep 3 hours ago
        Which had the ugliness problem then, although it is a lot better now.
        • flohofwoe 1 hour ago
          AFAIK Tk simply wrapped native widgets though? E.g. when the result was ugly, then that was because the platform's native UI framework was ugly.
    • AlienRobot 2 hours ago
      Honestly, "native UI" gets so much worse with every passing year that I don't even want native UI. I want old windows UI.

      I saw a screenshot of GTK 1 and the first thing I thought is that I'd rather make something using GTK 1 than GTK 3. Unfortunately I asked an AI chatbot about it and they advised against it because of "security" :(

      • tosti 27 minutes ago
        That's the false assumption that unmaintained is insecure. Any old DOS game in Dosbox would be insecure by that logic.

        So if I run Dune2 in dosbox, is that a security issue? Of course not, but if you were to load a bitmap from the network and feed it to GTK1 for displaying, there could well be an overlooked issue lurking around. But you need to look at the greater picture, not just "old==insecure"

  • DaOne256 5 hours ago
    This should be linked as the original post: https://ir.cwi.nl/pub/5998

    It says 1988 there.

  • spacedcowboy 1 hour ago
    I remember running this on an Atari ST with MiNT as the multi-tasking kernel. It took a lot less resources from my 4MB STe than running X11 did. It was actually quite usable to compile with gcc in one window and edit (with vi, of course) in the other.
  • pantulis 3 hours ago
    I find it amusing that the paper doesn't include any screenshots. Those were the days!
    • akreal 52 minutes ago
      I also expected screenshots there, especially given the word "interface". Turns out, it's not about user interface (UI), it's about programming interface (kinda API). It allows calling window-related functions on Macintosh, X Window System, and Atari. So the resulting windows were looking like a native UI, I assume.
  • shevy-java 5 hours ago
    How old is this? 1989 or something like that? Guido was probably quite young when he wrote it. Looks like LaTeX?

    Edit: Someone else wrote 1988 which I suppose makes sense, as the latest reference at the end is from 1988 too. So then Guido was 32 years old.

    • ramon156 4 hours ago
      > quite young

      > 32 years old

      As a ~20 year old this feels so weird to read. I'm still considered young in ~10 years?

      • ChrisMarshallNY 4 hours ago
        I’m nearly 64.

        Back when I was a teenager, people in their 20s were “old farts.”

        Nowadays, I look at people in their 40s, as “kids.”

        Here’s my first ever engineering project (1987): https://littlegreenviper.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/07/TF30...

        I was 25, at the time, and a fairly newly-minted EE.

        • FpUser 3 hours ago
          Brother in arms ;)

          I just turned 65. Own 1 person custom software development company and am very much active professionally. Started programming in the 80s while working as a research scientist.

      • sgbeal 2 hours ago
        > As a ~20 year old this feels so weird to read. I'm still considered young in ~10 years?

        An anecdote for you...

        In Summer 1997 i was 24 at a family reunion, listening to my grandmother and several other seniors talk about some recent interaction my grandmother had had with a delivery person. One of her friends asked her, "how old was he?"

        i'll never forget either her response or my jaw-dropping which followed:

        "Oh, he was a _young_ man. About 50, I guess."

        (Yes, she actually stressed the word _young_.)

      • sgbeal 1 hour ago
        > As a ~20 year old this feels so weird to read. I'm still considered young in ~10 years?

        One of these days, maybe as early as your mid-/late-40s, you will be consulting with your a medical doctor and realize that you are the oldest person in the room.

      • romankolpak 4 hours ago
        It's all relative. When I was 20, I'd consider myself old at 36. Now when I am 36, my definition of old has shifted and it's now somewhere past 50. I guess "old" for a person is just that person 10+ years older :)
      • swiftcoder 3 hours ago
        > As a ~20 year old this feels so weird to read. I'm still considered young in ~10 years?

        You'll still feel young too! It's really weird when you get to your mid 30's and realise that all the 20-somethings view you as old

        • Scarblac 2 hours ago
          And later too! I'm 51 but mentally I still feel like 50.
      • Scarblac 2 hours ago
        Consider that careers run from 20 to 70 or so.
        • dejv 2 hours ago
          Careers could be very very long. My relative was kicked out of academia after finishing his postdoc and has to work manual jobs till the end of comunism in my country. His career actually started after 60 and he died just a few weeks before his announced retirement at the age of 96, teaching 5 to 6 classes a year in CS department.
      • AlienRobot 2 hours ago
        You'll always be young according to yourself.
      • magpi3 3 hours ago
        Yes
      • rowanG077 4 hours ago
        Young is relative. To an 80 year old someone who is 40 is young. To an 8 year old someone who is 20 is old.
    • f1shy 4 hours ago
      I would say roff, not LaTeX
      • ksherlock 6 minutes ago
        100% correct. The GitHub repo linked elsewhere include this documentation in (dit)roff (-ms) form.
  • ale42 5 hours ago
    (1988)