Re: Why is GNUstep less successful than GTK and Qt??

[Christopher Browne]

Centuries ago, Nostradamus foresaw when jmckitrick@yahoo.com (jonathon) would 
write:
> Is it because they are C/C++ based?

That's probably part of it.

The need for the DPS substrate is probably scary to some, and easily
regarded as a way applications could become glacially slow.  (Of
course, the average Palm Pilot has more CPU "oomph" these days than
the machines NeXTStep was deployed on, so there's a fallacy there big
enough to drive a Mack truck through...)

There hasn't been a commercial enterprise hawking software running
atop GNUstep.  

There's no web browser.  No spreadsheet.  No word processor.  No
attempt at a port of GNU Emacs to GNUstep (as is the case for GTK).
What system can be "real" if it isn't supporting deployment of those
applications?

The latter is actually the vital part; in the absence of tricky sorts
of applications like web browsers, it is difficult to establish that
GNUstep is robust enough to support building big, hairy applications.
-- 
If this was helpful, <http://svcs.affero.net/rm.php?r=cbbrowne> rate me
http://www3.sympatico.ca/cbbrowne/internet.html
"(Windows NT) version 5.0 will build on a proven system architecture
and incorporate tens of thousands of bug fixes from version 4.0."
-- <http://www.microsoft.com/y2k.asp?A=7&B=5>