Re: SDL Interface Development

[Lincoln Peters <sampln@sbcglobal.net>]

On Sat, 2004-10-30 at 23:13, Elijah Meeks wrote:
> 1.  We'll lose all the work done in SDL, right?  It
> seems that ParaGUI is less work than writing
> everything from scratch, so maybe this isn't too big a
> deal.

I suspect that we'll lose some of the existing work in SDL, but not all
of it.  However, what existing work we replace will probably be so
greatly improved by ParaGUI that everyone would agree that it's a good
trade-off.

> 
> 2.  Forcing the average user to load a bunch of
> external programs.  It took me awhile to get
> comfortable with open-source software, coming from a
> Win32 background.  Loading TCL/TK, in the case of
> XConq, or GTK in the case of Gimp, while pretty
> standard fare for a Linux user, is very intimidating
> for someone used to loading a single piece of software
> to run on Windows.  So if it can all be packaged as a
> single install and be relatively seemless, this isn't
> a big deal, but otherwise, it'll be an added hurdle
> for an audience that is notable hurdle-adverse.

The more I think about this, the more I think that what Windows needs is
a port of apt-get...

---
Lincoln Peters
<sampln@sbcglobal.net>

"Little prigs and three-quarter madmen may have the conceit that the laws of 
nature are constantly broken for their sakes."
-- Friedrich Nietzsche