Return to the archive index

Paradigms, was Re: ARM pc/104 wearable?

From: Legacy Xunker <>
Date: Fri, 01 Oct 1999 00:45:24 -0600

Noware uv Noware wrote:

> In order that I may throw one big ol' monkey wrench
> into the mix, I'd like to state that Parratt has a
> point here.  I grew up on Windows 3.0 and 3.1.  I
> personally didn't like Win95 when I upgraded, but I
> eventually found that it had its good points.  I now
> use Win98, and (here's where the holy war takes a wild
> turn) I also use PhatLinux, the first Linux
> distribution to be able to run off of windows.  Let
> the fighting begin!

I would second that, for all it's short commings, I still like the
Windows UI.  The underlying code sucks heartily, but i like the way it
works.

The thing here, is that Windows is the Wrong Way to do a warbles, be it
9x, NT or CE.  The user interface and system design would not work -- at
least in this early of an age in wearables.

I guess that's where the open OSs come in.  Wearables have very, very
selective needs, and need to do things you can't write into a driver.
The OS doesn't have to be a *nix, but it helps, simply due to the user
base.  Sure, and EPOC32 based wearable would be mondo cool, but it would
be hard to do and harder to support.

On a similar note, instead of a 'wearable OS', how about just a Wearable
UI, like a Window Manager designed for the intricacies of the use?

--
Subcription/unsubscription/info requests: send e-mail with subject of
"subscribe", "unsubscribe", or "info" to 
Wear-Hard Mailing List Archive (searchable): http://wearables.blu.org

+Previous Message in Thread | Next Message in Thread

From Wear-Hard Mailing list Archive (WH)
Maintained by R. Paul McCarty

Archive created with babymail