Linked by Christian Paratschek on Thu 23rd Sep 2004 05:59 UTC
Editorial After reading Adam Scheinberg's original article "The Paradox of Choice" and Kevin Russo's response, I want to add my personal comments to this discussion. I will quote Adam and Russo several times and pick up their arguments.
Permalink for comment
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: Bad Toolkit!
by Roman Pretenderle on Thu 23rd Sep 2004 09:33 UTC

No, I am generally speaking.
You can either have several toolkits, with all the benefits and let-downs of this. Or you can have one toolkit, with all the benefits and let-downs of that.
My point is: a single toolkit is no silver bullet. It may look unified, but the problems might very well breed under the hood, worse than if the toolkit had competition.

>That's not a problem and even if such thing existed just
>replace it with another, it would be simpler to replace only
>one messed toolkit than 5 messed toolkits.
If you only have one toolkit and want to replace it with another (which you have to code first, I doubt it is easy and fast), then you have two. Whoops, the same problem applies. Legacy applications will not be ported over, will you be able to make sure that it runs ok on low-power computers, handhelds, if desired? (I think GTK can this, but I remember several others that can, Fox Toolkit can do that too, IIRC.) Of course, you can bend over for backwards compatibility, but one time you WILL have to make a cut or it will end up like Windows XP, which still has the entire 16 bit subsystem, with all the problems that come from it.