[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20110323083126.GB6365@openwall.com>
Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2011 11:31:26 +0300
From: Solar Designer <solar@...nwall.com>
To: john-users@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: Interface for John
Brad,
On Tue, Mar 22, 2011 at 08:51:01AM -0400, brad@...ystems.com wrote:
> FLTK is a nice GUI library that I've used in the past, it allows for all
> of your requirements for a JTR GUI except the native look/feel you
> mentioned. One benefit to a smaller GUI library (such as FLTK) is that it
> can easily be statically compiled/linked so distribution is simple.
> wxWidgets is nice too (I've used that as well), but it is larger and may
> be trickier when it comes to distribution.
Thank you for sharing your experience. This sounds about right.
> If the GUI is done well and "just works", people won't mind that it does
> not blend in with the OS look/feel. Just thought I'd throw that out.
I'm afraid that some people would be discouraged from trying out and
learning JtR (vs. some other tool) by the weird look of the GUI. It's
sort of the same kind of people who are now discouraged from using JtR
by it lacking a GUI. Sure, those who are using the command-line JtR now
yet would prefer a GUI would likely be happy with any GUI that is done
well in terms of functionality, ease of use, and reliability, but one of
the reasons for making a GUI is to attract new users to JtR.
Thus, I think that OS native look & feel is fairly important.
Alexander
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
