
I used to think this way, and not just about X. For example, incorrect
English constructs such as "its raining" or "it's window id" annoy me.
However, there comes a time when popular usage starts to dictate the way
things really are in the world. Indeed, the fact that X won out over NeWS
was really down to popular opinion (I know, we all think it's(!) technically
superior as well!).

On a related topic, who is to say that "color" is more or less correct
than "colour" - being Irish, and hence using English English as opposed
to American English, I always use the latter except, of course, for API
terms such as "XAllocColor" and "colormap".

In a world that uses the term "Windows" to refer to Microsoft Windows,
perhaps the time has come to accept "X Windows" as a valid term for X.
I think that this is a more concise and uncluttered term than, say,
"the X Window System" and, let's face it, almost everyone uses it.
Ultimately, we all need product sales to more than just X-literate
people. In this respect, product recognition is important and a short,
snappy, descriptive title ("X" is positively obscure) will help
when dealing with the average punter (it's sad - I thought I was a
software engineer!). Indeed it is unfortunate that X did not become
popularly known as Windows and let MS worry about whether it should
be called "Microsoft Windows" or "the Microsoft Window System" or
how about just plain "Microsoft"!

To summarise (or should that be "summarize") the point of this message:
I think there are far more pressing issues facing the X community than
worrying about subtle distinctions in the naming of the window system
(or should that be "windowing system"). Whatever gets recognised is
fine by me. I agree that one should be careful in interpreting what
trade papers say. However, I would be reluctant to come to this
conclusion purely on the basis of how they name the X Window System.
