Paul Vigay wrote:
In a dim and distant universe <4865EB6E.20505@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Phillip Marsden <phillip.marsden@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> enlightened us thusly:Thus neatly side-stepping the issue of appearance, which is what you passed comment about. What did I tell you Steve (Fryatt)? He found a way to side-step your question.I wasn't commenting about appearance, other than the fact the Java engine generally runs in a self-contained window which offers little integration with the host GUI. My main criticism of Java (in my experience) is the speed.
Ah, but, but..."With Java you end up with everything within a walled garden and the user interface is horrible."
That indicates to me (at least) that you are saying that the appearance of Java user interfaces is not very good (horrible). Is there something in THIS sentence (not in a sentence you wrote several years ago and has no relevance to this discussion) that I have misunderstood? Does the phrase "the user interface is horrible" not mean that the graphical appearance is not good?
I am sorry to keep banging on about this Paul, but I am trying to make the point that you try to deny that you have said things, because someone has successfully rebutted one of your wild claims. You may not see it this way, as this behaviour seems ingrained in you. You should realise that while you want to be an ambassador for RISC OS, you make yourself appear to be an unreliable source of information. This is the reason why posters on the RISC OS forums have said that you are not the best person to be an ambassador for RISC OS. Perhaps you should take time to reflect on this, rather than just banging out anything that happens to come into your head because you feel impelled to leap to the defence of RISC OS.
-- Regards, Phillip MarsdenFor quality bespoke acoustic guitars phillip.marsden@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe or subscribe goto: //www.freelists.org/list/davidpilling
