[ale] Object Model on Linux...and GUI

[R I Feigenblatt]

Omar Loggiodice wrote me:

>following (from Netscape 3.0 review page, updated Oct 17 1996):
>(at http://home.netscape.com/comprod/products/navigator/
>           version_3.0/review.html#gen6)
>  Even if OLE/ActiveX is some day ported to Windows 3.1, Mac, and Unix, code
>  will still need to be separately compiled and maintained for every
>  platform.

 This statement is dated. As I wrote, there is an ActiveX SDK for Mac
 now; it is not vaporware. As far as I know, Microsoft has always been
 the biggest independent software developer for the Mac. And, um, since
 when do Netscape plug-ins escape compilation for each supported platform?

>  Navigator. Navigator customers far prefer plug-in support and a leaner,

 Yeah, customers "prefer" plug-in support so much, Netscape has announced
 it will replicate the ability for plug-in self-installation pioneered by
 ActiveX controls in Microsoft's Internet Explorer. And why the change if
 Netscape really believes Java will soon sweep away plug-ins?
 
> OLE/ActiveX code is complicated to
>  program. For example, to add an OLE/ActiveX control to a Web page, you
>  must add the following line to HTML:
>  CLASSID="CLSID:8BD21D40-EC42-11CE-9E0D-00AA006002F3">

 Simple free tools like the ActiveX ControlPad isolate the coder from
 having to hand-copy GUIDs such as that cited above. Just because source
 code lands up as machine code, doesn't mean one has to know the binary
 op codes of a microprocessor to program it. I never learned Postscript,
 either. Now, OLE components HAVE been complicated to CREATE, if not use;
 but even this changes: Visual Basic 5 allows even the programming masses to
 create ActiveX controls, just as Visual Basic 1 opened up Windows coding.

>4.ActiveX/OLE is proprietary, and Microsoft is wavering on recent promises
>  to make it less so. Information Week reported on August 5, 1996:
> (To view the article live, go to:
>http://techweb.cmp.com/iw/current/hotnew.htm#st1_85)

 This dead link wastes one's time; the site has been reorganized.
 Speaking of cooperation, why was Netscape so hard-assed about
 delivering Javascript (the disingenous new name of "Live Script")
 specs to Microsoft if it is so committed to being open?

But let's talk about Linux, shall we? Can someone comment on
the availability of free RAD (rapid application development)
tools for Linux? 

For example, XF for Tcl was interesting, but languished. 
Has anyone played with the new:
        Visual Tcl
        http://www.neuron.com/stewart/vtcl/
 "Visual Tcl is a freely-available, high-quality application
 development environment for UNIX, Windows and Macintosh platforms.
 Written entirely in Tcl and generating pure Tcl makes porting
 either unnecessary or trivial... Visual Tcl is covered by the
 GNU General Public License. Visual Tcl has no relation to
 SCO Visual Tcl or the FREE Visual Tcl/Tk project."

And while talking about Tcl, can someone speak to the question
of any Tcl compiler projects?

Ron Feigenblatt