[GEM Development] GEM not going forward... Comments?

[David Ormand]

 > I've seen this list has 91 members. I don't know how much interest is left
 > on the project for all of us, but I would like to know. Maybe there are some
 > people like me willing to help a bit with things that the rest currently has
 > no time to spent in, in order to relaunch the GEM project.

I like DOS.  It's simple, it's quick, you turn on the computer and DOS is _there_,
you don't have to wait for anything much to load (unlike Linux).  When you're done,
you turn it off; you don't have to shutdown.  Now that FreeDOS is mature, we're on
more or less the same footing with Free software as Linux.  The fact that the FreeDOS
community is as active as it is indicates that DOS is _not_ dead.  It is not just a
hobby or nostalgia trip.

But DOS doesn't have a GUI.  I messed with SEAL, but SEAL is dead.  GEOS/NewDeal was
pretty cool, but it's closed-source.  I looked at a few others, like MGUI or ozone or
wxWindows on MGL/Snap, and of course Allegro, but most are mere graphical environments
instead of actual GUIs, and the few GUIs are immature or stalled.  GEM is the best
there is; that's why it's the "official" GUI of the FreeDOS project.

I like GEM; I loved programming in GEM on the Atari.  I'd like to port/build a
Bible program based on the Sword library (www.crosswire.org) on DOS.  My problem with
GEM is, of course, it's natively 16-bit, and has limited graphics capability (although
1024x768 is probably adequate for most anything).

I like DJGPP/DPMI; it allows the use of libraries developed for Linux under DOS (like
the Sword library, which I've built for DOS).  It looks like there are GEM bindings
for DJGPP, so I should be set.  Now all I need is the time to play :)

Too bad GEM can't be built as a 32-bit system with DJGPP.  I suppose if it _could_,
then it could also be built with GCC under Linux, and then GEM could be a lite
alternative to X.  Might get a bit more attention in the Linux community.