https://sourceforge.net/projects/motif/files/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motif_%28software%29
(in some alternate universe, motif was under the x11 license and you would have motif v13 instead of GTK.)
eventually HPE got tired of dealing with VMS customer requests and sold the rights to VMS Software Inc, who ported it from Itanium to x86 as soon as humanly possible
now VMS Software Inc, is stating that they wish to support ye olde DECWindows and Motif on the modern, x86-enabled VMS
from 1989 to 2005 everyone used more or less the same version (from 1989) because vendors and standards are painful
it wasn't like, meaningfully standardized. just no one ever updated anything. or set a meaningful version string. you just guessed which bugs were un-fixed based on `uname`
Now we live in a time where we allocate GBs of RAM to eye candy that functionally accomplishes nothing. Then we make the case to rewrite the eye candy in increasingly "safe" languages, requiring even more RAM.
Which contrary to UNIX did not had the C mistake.
Rather Structured BASIC, Extended Pascal, COBOL, Modula-2, Fortran and Bliss.
It is really sloppy programming nowadays, regardless of the languages.
Being able to define command line interfaces using cld files on VMS was really wonderful and you got things like abbreviations of options (and commands) to their shortest unique initial string was quite nice (so, for example, the directory command could be named as such but everybody just typed dir).
Just like MS-DOS had plenty of C compilers to chose from, while it was actually written in Assembly, and most folks were programming in Turbo and Quick Pascal, Turbo and Quick BASIC, Clipper,...
Hardly the same kind of C for everything like on UNIX.
The API sucks real bad, and even at the height of Motif popularity, the package itself was riddled with bugs because proprietary UNIX vendors never updated that shit
Motif was super-obviously designed by C++ programmers who could not ship a C++ library for technical reasons. So they tried to do a C++ API in C. And it hurts like a pineapple thrust into the wrong orifice, leafy-part-first.
Well, of course it takes more ram when we run 4x the pixels for the same size screen. And we double the refresh rate, but then hold everything back a frame to composite it. :P
Enhanced Motif Window Manager https://fastestcode.org/emwm.html
and the full-fledged CDE desktop that uses Motif also:
https://sourceforge.net/projects/cdesktopenv/ (note that you want to firewall this somehow as the default settings on the background process ttdb can be a security hole)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_NT_3.1
[edit]
So, I guess the history of 'windows NT' is lost on many. 'NT' started with version 3.1 as the MS/IBM breakup from the joint OS/2 venture happened. It was their first real push into 32 bit protected mode operating systems and supported really crazy cool things like 'multiple processors' and totally different architectures than x86, like DEC. Give the link a look.
Cutler lived in an extremely overcomplicated world of VMS kernel primitives, and given the chance to let his freak flag fly, he really overcomplicated his past work for Windows NT
In case you ever wonder why your 1 gb/s ssd has ~100 mb/s throughput on windows. there are often quite literally hundreds of layers of filters on even the simplest i/o
but it is super flexible! just slower than iced treacle. aren't you glad you had an object oriented I/O subsystem supporting microkernel services and aspect-oriented programming? i bet you use those features way more often than you read or write files from disk
They were entirely different OSs.
Edit: the previous poster has since completely rewritten this comment to talk about windows NT. they originally talked about Windows (without the NT) then linked to an NT wiki. Hence my reply.
@OP Poor show on your ninja edit.
So NT 3.1 != Windows 3.1
As you said “history here is important”.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_Equipment_Corporation
Anyway, I think we’re both plenty experienced on both platforms so I don’t see any need for us to argue over NT or not to NT.
But NT 3.1 is a completely different OS to Windows 3.1.
They might look the same, but one has OS/2 heritage while the other has DOS heritage (to overly simplify their origins, but I’m in a rush this morning so can share more accurate details later if you wish).
Edit: the GP changed their comment. The original copy didn’t reference NT, it just said “Windows 3.1”. Hence my reply.
not windows 3.1 -- windows 3.1 was popular! Windows before 3.1 was distinctly unpopular. It had basically no installed base. The only Windows 2.x applications I know of actually shipped an embedded Windows copy on the floppy disk.
HP was carefully tracking all the much less popular stuff Microsoft was doing in the late 80s because they thought this "WIMP" paradigm had staying powers, even if Microsoft was not exactly selling a lot of units
the worst example of "second system effect" i have ever heard of
I can't see myself ever using VMS professionally though, and it has a somewhat vague description of the actual content. It's not super expensive but I'd have to fork out for the travel and accommodation.
I'd love to hear about it if anyone does a write-up after the fact.
lslpp -l|grep -i motif
X11.adt.motif 7.1.5.31 COMMITTED AIXwindows Application
Development Toolkit Motif
X11.compat.lib.X11R6_motif
7.1.5.31 COMMITTED AIXwindows X11R6 Motif 1.2 &
X11.motif.lib 7.1.5.31 COMMITTED AIXwindows Motif Libraries
X11.motif.mwm 7.1.1.0 COMMITTED AIXwindows Motif Window
X11.msg.en_US.motif.lib 7.1.3.0 COMMITTED AIXwindows Motif Lib. Msgs -
X11.msg.en_US.motif.mwm 7.1.3.0 COMMITTED AIX Motif Window Mgr Msgs -
oslevel -r
7100-03which would be unremarkable except none of the UNIX vendors has produced a new build in like 30 years
so if they are still shipping CDE it is probably 32 bit binaries from AIX 4 or AIX 5L
it can take literally decades for a deprecated package to actually get removed, because customers get mad