From: rgooch@rp.CSIRO.AU (Richard Gooch)
Subject: Re: Motif vs. [Athena, etc.]
Organization: CSIRO Division of Radiophysics/Australia Telescope National Facility
Lines: 38

In article <C5K6ny.AzJ@kirk.bu.oz.au>, bambi@kirk.bu.oz.au (David J. Hughes) writes:
> 
> >I am also concerned by this prevalence of Motif, particularly from the
> >point of view of writing and obtaining free software.  As the Linux and
> >386BSD communities grow, however, I think that Motif will lose some of
> >its grip, at least in the non-commercial marketplace.  
> 
> Ports of Motif to both 386BSD and Linux are available for a fee of about
> $100.  This is cost recovery for the person who bought the rights to
> redistribute.  The activity in both the BSD and Linux news groups
> pertaining to Motif has been high.
> 
> >I just wonder if this will also cause a divergence between commercial
> >and non-commercial software (ie. you will only get free software using
> >Athena or OpenLook widget sets, and only get commercial software using
> >the Motif widget sets).  
> 
> I can't see why.  If just about every workstation will come with Motif
> by default and you can buy it for under $100 for the "free" UNIX
> platforms, I can't see this causing major problems.
> 

  I think you will find that the active Linux and 386BSD communities are
  populated by enthusiasts who would object to paying *any* money for software.
  Otherwise, they would probably have gone for a commercial Unix.
  An important factor in the Linux community is that source code is always
  available (this is probably similar in the 386BSD community, however, I'm not
  really involved there). Many people using Linux like to stay at the cutting
  (bleeding) edge: ie. when kernel patches, C library or compiler patches come
  out, people like to rebuild their entire systems. The prime requirement for
  all Linux software is that it is available under a GNU style public license.
  Hence, Linux software uses either the Athena widgets or XView.
  Individuals may write software requiring Motif, but I doubt it is widely
  adopted.

				Regards,

					Richard Gooch....
