yct wrote:
>> 
> no offence to FOX. but wxWindows look much more native.(therefore much
> more attractive, at least in windows).

No offense taken ;) There are reasonable arguments for both sides of the 
"native look-and-feel" versus "consistent look-and-feel" debate.

But it should be no surprise that wxWindows looks "much more native", 
since it's just a wrapper over some other widget toolkit. For example, 
if you're using wxGTK, you're using wxWindows, layered on top of GTK, 
layered on top of X. Similar story for wxMotif and whatever they do for 
the other ports of wxWindows.

FOX *intentionally* takes the approach of relying only on low-level 
system facilities and *not* wrapping the native GUI toolkits. It's an 
approach similar to that taken by Swing, Qt and other modern GUI 
toolkits. For more words on the "Goals & Approach" of FOX, see:

	http://www.fox-toolkit.org/goals.html

It is interesting to note that the next generation of wxWindows (the 
wxUniversal project) has also adopted this approach.

Hope this helps,

Lyle