mailing-list for TeXmacs Users

[Jan Peters <address@hidden>]

The whole discussion of User interfaces brings up the
topic of Mac OS X. A port which mixes the cacao interfaces
with the X11 main windows would be marvelous.
As Mac Users are usually NOT Latex people AND
still fed up with MS Word & equations, a more native
port could broaden texmacs user base significantly...

If it gets a good port,
I would donate as much as I paid for
Scientific Workplace a long time ago...

Best,
-Jan

On Saturday, February 8, 2003, at 10:04  AM, michael graffam wrote:

> --- Daniele Pighin <address@hidden> wrote:
>
> > You didn't get my point, instead.
>
> Actually, I do get your point. This is the same debate
> that happens with any reasonably powerful piece of
> software on any *NIX platform.
>
> I understand the benefits of a consistent UI, and I
> understand that most programmers don't want to learn
> the TM GUI.
>
> My point is this: the GUI works, today. It may not be
> perfect, but it works, looks nice and serves its
> function.
>
> However, there are many TeXmacs features that we need
> that simply don't exist.
>
> Your stated goal is to increase the TM user base --
> there are other ways to do that. Namely, to create a
> really seemless interface to Maxima and Octave
> complete with online help, plotting inside TeXmacs,
> etc.
>
> As Joris mentioned, more and better connections to
> external systems are important and yet we CAN'T do a
> lot of the stuff we need to in order to really make it
> work right.
>
> If Joris worked for 6 months adding only the TeXmacs
> features that are useful to extern systems, and Andrey
> and I tracked that work and developed the Octave
> interface in parallel .. in 6 months probably every
> Octave user would be a TeXmacs user.
>
> Already Octave users that I show TeXmacs/Octave to are
> impressed and can hardly believe it. But there are
> gaping holes in the interface that prevent them from
> using it.
>
> A feature freeze kills this line of work and that of
> attracting new users.
>
> Work for six months to slap on a gtk GUI and TeXmacs
> is still useless to the Octave crowd.
>
> And how many mathematicians/scientist types who are
> going to use TeXmacs in the first place are really
> scared off (or attacted) because of the widget set?
>
> Probably close to zero.
>
> > My thought is: a more standard interface ==> more
> > users ==> more programmers,
>
> Dubious. I'm not convinced that a 'standard' interface
> is such an attraction. LyX/LaTeX has more users not
> because of the interface but because of the momentum
> of LaTeX.
>
> Further. More power/features/flexibility --> more
> power users --> more programmers.
>
> > If you want a decently crowded base of developers
> > you can't just count on
> > those who "love" a software and are faithful to it,
> > you should rather try to
> > attract also those who are curious about it and want
> > to land a hand.
>
> I can't disagree with that. We both want the same
> thing; I just doubt the effectiveness of your method,
> is all.
>
> > > I personally don't see the point in rushing it. It
> > > will happen in time.
> >
> > If it has to happen, why not let it happen?
>
> I'm all for it! I just don't want a feature freeze to
> limit other avenues of attracting users.
>
> If you know some gtk/guile programmers willing to
> start hacking on the development version, let me know.
> I'm teaching myself the gtk widget set for Scheme now
> for exactly this reason.
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now.
> http://mailplus.yahoo.com