How was it clearly a typo when he repeated it with exactly the same spelling and capitalization, two times in a row?
And neither of those things are even toolkits like GTK: "GIMP Tolkit" is an image editor, and "GNOME Tolkit" is a desktop environment.
And even if you ignore the two typos and the two mis-namings, his whole point is factually incorrect, and jdub was correct
and not a revisionist when he said "That is ahistorical, and the misnaming doesn't help make your point".
I'm simply giving him the benefit of the doubt, and asking him to explain what he means, or why not only his main point was wrong, but also why he got both of the names wrong two times in a row, and thinks an image editor and a desktop environment are incorrectly spelled toolkits.
And he still hasn't explained, or admitted he made two typos and misnamed two projects in a row while trying to make an incorrect point, while claiming to be an expert tech writer, and accusing someone who was correct of being a revisionist, so the jury is still out. But your theory it's clearly a typo just doesn't wash. Maybe they're the names of his own forks, or maybe he's just a charlatan, who knows? ;) Why don't you ask him yourself.
Because he was incorrectly nitpicking himself, and was wrong to call somebody else a revisionist without citing any proof, while he was factually incorrect himself, and offering an appeal to authority of himself as a writer and "random Gtkmm contributor" instead. I too have lots of strong opinions about GTK, GNOME, and GIMP, so I am happy for the opportunity to write them up, summarize them, and share them.
You'll have to read the rest of the comment and follow the links to know what it says, because I already wrote and summarized it, and don't want to write it again just for you, because I don't believe you'd read it a second time if you didn't read it the first time. Just use ChatGPT, dude.
Then you will see that it has a lot to do with GTK and GNOME and GIMP, even including exclusive photos of Miguel de Icaza and his mom with a garden gnome flipping the bird.
>X gave Unix vendors something they had professed to want for years: a standard that allowed programs built for different computers to interoperate. But it didn’t give them enough. X gave programmers a way to display windows and pixels, but it didn’t speak to buttons, menus, scroll bars, or any of the other necessary elements of a graphical user interface. Programmers invented their own. Soon the Unix community had six or so different interface standards. A bunch of people who hadn’t written 10 lines of code in as many years set up shop in a brick building in Cambridge, Massachusetts, that was the former home of a failed computer company and came up with a “solution:” the Open Software Foundation’s Motif.
>What Motif does is make Unix slow. Real slow. A stated design goal of Motif was to give the X Window System the window management capabilities of HP’s circa-1988 window manager and the visual elegance of Microsoft Windows. We kid you not.
>Recipe for disaster: start with the Microsoft Windows metaphor, which was designed and hand coded in assembler. Build something on top of three or four layers of X to look like Windows. Call it “Motif.” Now put two 486 boxes side by side, one running Windows and one running Unix/Motif. Watch one crawl. Watch it wither. Watch it drop faster than the putsch in Russia. Motif can’t compete with the Macintosh OS or with DOS/Windows as a delivery platform.
Motif today isn't that bad compared to the bloat of GTK4. Today's '486' in the era of Pentium 3's would be an Atom netbook. EMWM (enhanced MWM) + XFile flies. I quickly hacked NNTP auth support through some quick code and an Xresources value for NCSA Mosaic. Yes, that one.
Also, you get XFT and UTF-8 support thru fontconfig and XFT on every Motif based software. Far from the propietary Motif of 1996...
And neither of those things are even toolkits like GTK: "GIMP Tolkit" is an image editor, and "GNOME Tolkit" is a desktop environment.
And even if you ignore the two typos and the two mis-namings, his whole point is factually incorrect, and jdub was correct and not a revisionist when he said "That is ahistorical, and the misnaming doesn't help make your point".
I'm simply giving him the benefit of the doubt, and asking him to explain what he means, or why not only his main point was wrong, but also why he got both of the names wrong two times in a row, and thinks an image editor and a desktop environment are incorrectly spelled toolkits.
And he still hasn't explained, or admitted he made two typos and misnamed two projects in a row while trying to make an incorrect point, while claiming to be an expert tech writer, and accusing someone who was correct of being a revisionist, so the jury is still out. But your theory it's clearly a typo just doesn't wash. Maybe they're the names of his own forks, or maybe he's just a charlatan, who knows? ;) Why don't you ask him yourself.