From: David Ross <drossruby@...>
Date: 2004-08-01T10:27:06+09:00
Subject: Re: Free(real Free) GUI toolkits

> I hate myself for asking this question:
> But what is so wrong with the LGPL in an object
> oriented GUI toolkit
> where you can create commercial X widgets without
> any problems for any
> purpose. I'm speaking about GTK/FOX/FLTK/TK here.

LGPL has strings, if you don't believe me, reread the
license. Look at the clauses about distributing
non-source binary applications. Then take a really
good look at the clauses in wx and FOX (LGPL and the
wx license) about binary objects(*note: binary objects
are *NOT* binary executables). Thank you for your
input.
 
> I believe that the world really don't need another
> toolkit, with a lot
> of common widgets still missing. Widget creation is
> also not very
> difficult in any toolkit (TK may be an exception).

This toolkit is more flexible than FOX or
wxWidgets(wxWindows) will ever be. WS was designed for
embedded systems, I am glad that the design works on
nix and windows.

I am glad to use WS now, it has proved more worthy
than  FOX,GTK, and Wx. Big deal it lacks the more
common widgets you would find in GTK, or even Qt.
Hopefully, people will support this better toolkit.
You might not find it interesting because most people
do not read about embedded devices and read about
software like T-Engine. Please research this on your
own. the research for WS has been extensive. Its not
just *another* toolkit. Hmm okay, you must not be into
widget design that much, or do not create complex
widgets. I don't know about you, but WS is a very good
IDE. --David Ross


		
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - Send 10MB messages!
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail