[GEM Development] DayDream (was NextGem..)

[Rev Peter R Green]

G'day!

Well, I would have to say that I have ratehr mixed feelings about what 
is going on in the group at present. I can fully understand what you and 
several others are saying, Chris; and your suggestion would be one 
option. The point is well made that our GEM folders are filling with 
what may prove to be very off-topic postings. On the other hand...

As I have read Shane's comments, it seems to me that
(1) he is making a serious effort to address some of the issues which 
have bugged this group for quite a while, particularly the question of 
whether GEM can or should be redirected so as roughly to match the 
capabilities of contemporary "junk" computers -- the fast 486s and 
classic Pentiums which are now appearing in the industrial discards 
outlets, or whether it should survive as long as possible as a true 
bottom end GUI for the XT, 286 and 386 computers that the industrial 
discards places put in the scrap bins.
(2) his Linux-GEM idea has a point, but it would probably succeed only 
at the expense of both Linux and GEM as we know them... but I am more 
than willing to be corrected on this perception!
(3) a useful level of conflict is developing, and it could be 
counter-productive to stifle it right now. Frankly, I have been 
considering doing a Peter Sieg for a little while, because GEM seems to 
have seriously stagnated. In saying this, I do not intend to denigrate 
what Shane has been doing with 16-bit GEM. What I mean is that (as Shane 
seems to see) the FreeGEM 3 or whatever really takes GEM about as far as 
it can go. Erin C "began" the idea of a complete distribution; Shane has 
made that idea work in a more sophisticated manner. But there isn't much 
hope of a FreeGEM 4 as things stand.
Conflict (and I personally hate conflict, Dr Freud...!) is one of the 
most important catalysts of change and progress, and will stimulate a 
lot of thought which we would otherwise be too sleepy to institute.
(4) Managed, the conflict could lead to creative new paths for GEM; 
stifled, it will probably kill the group; left to run without any 
guidance, it will probably frighten the timid among us into ignoring GEM 
until everything seems safe again.

My suggestion is that we should not end Shane's NextGEM "thinking 
aloud", but should critique it, compare and contrast it with other ideas 
such as combining it with one of the 32 bit DOSes beginning to appear; 
and do some clear thinking about what the future of GEM -- if there is 
one -- should be. Use it, don't kill it.

But I will return to you for a moment, Shane, and comment that I suspect 
that you are thinking aloud a trifle prematurely. You seem to be one or 
two Linux steps ahead of me, but that still leaves a lot of 
unfamiliarity. I know you have been listening to Liam's input on Linux 
and why it does some of what it does. I'm unsure how your need to get 
some clearer ideas can be addressed. Maybe you need to get some of your 
ideas down in a very structured form so that you can ask more focused 
questions, get the answers you need on the more basic stuff, and then 
bring it back to this forum.

And, yes, ultimately our GEM may have to be split. A few more facets 
rarely spoils a diamond, though... But is this the right time?

Peter
Dostal, Chris E. wrote:

>This is perhaps a duel response/questioning to both Ben and Shane.
>
><snip>
>  
>
>>Yes, I am planning on skinning KDE for a specific purpose.  As I was
>>    
>>
>saying
>  
>
>>to Liam a while back, I want to be able to use Unix in an easy way.
>>    
>>
>
>As far as I can see, that has nothing to do with GEM and as such really
>isn't appropriate for this mailing list.  As I said, I don't mind the odd
>off-topic discussion, but it sounds to me like this is the main thrust of
>your new project -- in that case, it's likely to become more than the odd
>discussion.  It's obviously a laudable aim, but I'm sure there are better
>places to discuss it.
></snip>
>
>Hate to take sides, but I see your point Ben.
>On this list, we've had little off-topic/side-topic "spark threads" that have thrusted our mailboxes over-quota.
>All we need now is a re-vamp of the Emma Bunton messages? :P~
>
>How about setting up a small e-mail list/mail list Shane?
>This way us gemmers (like myself) will subscribe/participate, and those that don't want to.. won't be bothered :)
>To stop confusion perhaps put a GEM/II header in the subject line?
>
><Snip>
>Everyone's heard of Windows, after all!  On the other hand,
>those who want to run GEM on Unix may well not want to install a new Unix
>distribution to take advantage of that ability.
></snip>
>
>Very true.
>Hence my original comment re: some sort of GEM-WINE? But not sure if this is do-able.
>
><snip>
>  
>
>>Yes, some of what I am doing is far removed from GEM, some of it is
>>not.  On the whole however I am trying to do something that will allow GEM
>>development to progress in a new direction.
>>    
>>
></snip>
>
>Thought I'd reply to this comment too Shane..
>See someone like me reads the above thread and immediately thinks "ah man.. someone trying something new again".
>
>I have to admit when I read your post on what NextGEM entailed I personally found it a little blasphamist, thinking someone was leveraging the name/enthusiasm of GEM and GEM users to develop a new product.
>
>When I sat and thought about it I thought, hey in a way this guys promoting it.. and inturn, might spark some users to get an old box up and running, develop some real mode "*.app" and port it to there old box running dos and freegem. - Which is kinda what spurred me onto posting "daydream".
>
>Either way, I wanted to let you know personally Shane that I do feel asthough your intentions are quite good, and genuine.. but I have to say, keep it to a seperate list, for civil sake :)
>
>Regs,
> 
>
>Chris Dostal
>
> 
>
>Service Level Co-Ordinator
>
>UNISYS Imagine It. Done.
>Unisys Australia Ltd
>18 Harker Street
>Burwood, Vic, 3125
>Australia.
>
> 
>
> 
>
> 
>
>_______________________________________________
>gem-dev mailing list
>gem-dev at simpits.org
>http://www.simpits.org/mailman/listinfo/gem-dev
>
>  
>