> It is *not* difficult to install if you read the docs and follow some
> simple instructions. It took me less than 1/2 hour to install it on a new
> Linux system just the other day. Maybe it is hard for someone with no
> Linux experience,

Please don't assume that I don't have any Linux experience.  I've been
using Linux and Unix as my sole OS for 5 years.  I love tinkering with the
system and I generally install from source.  I assure you that I'm
familiar with the ./configure; make; make install.  My complaint is that
it doesn't work on the systems I've tried.


> I've no experience using GTK, nor the newer Qt bindings available for Ruby
> so I can't compare them, but I'd bet they'd lose on the speed,
> 'look-and-feel' front too.

You shouldn't make that statement if you don't have that experience.  My
experience with Ruby/Gtk was better on both accounts.  I wasn't (and I'm
not) trying to push any given toolkit.  I was asking a question.

> I'll tell you why *I* use FOX/Ruby: They are a *joy* to code in!
> ... and the License is right. Qt, you have to pay a ton for a Windows
> license, Tk, looks Ok, but it's API is horrid... and WxWindows, well,
> again, the API isn't so cool as FOX and the cross-platform widget
> problems are there and aren't they going the way of FOX anyhow?

Thank you for the input.  This explanation is more along the lines of what
I was looking for.


Daniel Carrera
Graduate Teaching Assistant.  Math Dept.
University of Maryland.  (301) 405-5137

> Hope this helps,
> D
>
>
> >
> > I'm sure that there is a very good reason for choosing Fox.  I just want
> > to know what it is.
> >
> > Thanks a lot.
> >
> > Daniel Carrera
> > Graduate Teaching Assistant.  Math Dept.
> > University of Maryland.  (301) 405-5137
> >
>
>
> --
> "Daniel P. Zepeda" <daniel@z,e,p,e,d,a,-,z,o,n,e.net>
> (Remove commas for address)
>
>