[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: [DotGNU]Re: Collaboration on alternatives to the US-patent-endangere
From: |
Thong (Tum) Nguyen |
Subject: |
RE: [DotGNU]Re: Collaboration on alternatives to the US-patent-endangered APIs? |
Date: |
Sun, 12 Oct 2003 05:57:08 +1300 |
>
> Maybe you are not familiar with it, but take my word, it is
> radically different. Both at the rendering level (Drawing) and at the
> toolkit level (Windows.Forms).
>
I don't agree. The drawing primitives are the same and all they've done is
replaced handles with classes. The API is actually identical to the 8 year
old WFC classes from J++. It's the same non-MVC, ancient, outdated way of
writing UIs. Appropriate for quick drag and drop UIs while making it
difficult and inefficient to write anything more advanced.
All the best,
^Tum
- [DotGNU]Collaboration on alternatives to the US-patent-endangered APIs?, Norbert Bollow, 2003/10/10
- [DotGNU]Re: Collaboration on alternatives to the US-patent-endangered APIs?, Miguel de Icaza, 2003/10/10
- [DotGNU]Re: Collaboration on alternatives to the US-patent-endangered APIs?, Norbert Bollow, 2003/10/10
- Re: [DotGNU]Re: Collaboration on alternatives to the US-patent-endangered APIs?, Rhys Weatherley, 2003/10/11
- Re: [DotGNU]Re: Collaboration on alternatives to the US-patent-endangered APIs?, Miguel de Icaza, 2003/10/11
- Re: [DotGNU]Re: Collaboration on alternatives to the US-patent-endangered APIs?, Rhys Weatherley, 2003/10/11
- Re: [DotGNU]Re: Collaboration on alternatives to the US-patent-endangered APIs?, Miguel de Icaza, 2003/10/11
- Re: [DotGNU]Re: Collaboration on alternatives to the US-patent-endangered APIs?, Rhys Weatherley, 2003/10/11
- Re: [Mono-list] Re: [DotGNU]Re: Collaboration on alternatives to the US-patent-endangered APIs?, Ian MacLean, 2003/10/12
- Re: [DotGNU]Re: Collaboration on alternatives to theUS-patent-endangered APIs?, Seth Johnson, 2003/10/11