[TUHS] X, Suntools, and the like

Lyndon Nerenberg lyndon at orthanc.ca
Sat Mar 18 08:50:52 AEST 2017

> On Mar 17, 2017, at 2:08 PM, Dan Cross <crossd at gmail.com> wrote:
> While they tend not to use the bitmapped graphical icons of other systems, I argue that limiting the definition of desktops to being characterized by icons representing objects such as files and applications while being present on the screen seems like an implementation detail and unnecessarily limiting.

But I didn't say a desktop requires iconic representations of objects.  I don't think the early Oberon implementations had them (but there are >20 years of memory loss between then and now).
Was Oberon a desktop?  Not to my mind.  It was a bitmapped interface vs a text-cell-based interface to a cooperating group of programs.  Conceptually I don't see any difference between Oberon and screen(1) in that regard.  Would you consider screen a 'desktop'?  And likewise, Oberon?  I'm not asking this rhetorically.  These concepts have fuzzy definitions for a lot of people, and I'm curious to see how they map out.


More information about the TUHS mailing list