Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The X API Is About 15 Times Bigger Than Wayland

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    Originally posted by nnine View Post
    For new programs, network transparency will be lost.
    Interesting. I wonder how you come by this information, since the Wayland developers themselves have said that it will work just fine. I guess you know better than they do, right?

    Comment


    • #32
      Originally posted by nnine View Post
      The only advantage of Wayland seems to be to get rid of some old APIs in X which are not used in modern programs.
      Well you START OUT with a TOTALLY HYPERBOLIC lie and then it just GOES ON.

      This is making things more complicated instead of simpler.
      EGAD the point is to SIMPLIFY THE RENDERING PROCESS. Separate OUT the legacy X code and put it in an environment WHERE IT CAN STILL RUN AT FULL EFFICIENCY.

      Imagine moving a window of a running movie player from a mobile device to the TV when coming home... or all kinds of interactions which could be designed when people could move the windows of their computers to a common display
      LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, THE TRAIN HAS LEFT THE RAILS

      YES INDEED HE PROPOSES USING REMOTE X DISPLAY AS A WAY TO DISPLAY REMOTE VIDEO.

      THROW AWAY 40 YEARS OF VIDEO COMPRESSION RESEARCH, SPEW RAW BITMAPS OVER THE INTERNET. WHEEE!

      ----

      X Windows DOES NOT NEED an ADVOCATE. EVERYONE hates it, starting with THE PEOPLE WHO WROTE IT.

      IT NEVER WORKED RIGHT. Network display in a desktop environment is a CROCK. WHOSE D-BUS are you talking to? WHY? Does it make ANY SENSE? Shooting the clipboard contents over the network for NO REASON! 3-D doesn't work, it has NEVER worked, it NEVER WILL WORK. Transparency SUCKS! HOW MUCH CRAP do you have to shove back and forth over the network to make your fantasy work? NOT ENOUGH, because it STILL doesn't work right.
      Last edited by frantaylor; 10-22-2012, 10:22 AM.

      Comment


      • #33
        OpenGL and Remote X: a match made in HELL

        X Windows is a DISASTER for 3-D.

        X Windows API is chock full of asynchronous APIs: "Do this when you get around to it, I have other stuff to do in the meantime"

        OpenGL is chock full of synchronous APIs: "Do this RIGHT NOW and I will wait until you are done"

        WELCOME to HELL. This is WHY X Windows is DOOMED on the desktop. Its asynchronous, queued, remote-event-driven API is NONSENSE when you have SUPER-DUPER fast graphics hardware locally. There is NO POINT to queuing graphics primitives that take longer to enqueue than it does to JUST DRAW THEM IMMEDIATELY.

        Oh but NO, we have to put up with CRAPPY delayed GRAPHICS because there are WHINERS out there who think that "remote X" is the greatest thing since sliced bread, but when you ask them, "do you actually USE remote X" they say "well, it's okay, but the interactive response is so miserable, I just set up VNC instead and now I can get my work done better".

        Comment


        • #34
          Kill x windows kill it now

          Years and years and years of user interface research tells us that the way to a better user experience is to make it more immediate. Respond quickly and interactively. Interpretation and response to user gestures requires rapid and immediate processing.

          But here we are in 2012, and the linux desktop community treats its display devices as if they were on the other end of a network connection.

          NO WONDER linux has lost the destop war. They didn't even show up, they just "phoned it in".

          Comment


          • #35
            Originally posted by frantaylor View Post
            LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, THE TRAIN HAS LEFT THE RAILS

            YES INDEED HE PROPOSES USING REMOTE X DISPLAY AS A WAY TO DISPLAY REMOTE VIDEO.

            THROW AWAY 40 YEARS OF VIDEO COMPRESSION RESEARCH, SPEW RAW BITMAPS OVER THE INTERNET. WHEEE!
            I don't care if you write like a teenage valley girl, that was the best laugh I've had in a while, LOL

            Comment


            • #36
              Originally posted by Ex-Cyber View Post
              Network transparency will be lost at the display server. There's no reason it can't be built into higher-level toolkits/frameworks.
              Network transparency is being lost at the PROTOCOL, where apps do not connect to a display server over the network, and can actually be then provided by the display server.

              Instead you get your local Weston, and the Weston on the remote machine. The Weston on the remote machine fowards the windows individualy to your local Weston, acting like a proxy.

              Kristan demonstated this, At about the 1:12:00 mark.
              http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature...qKysfI#t=4322s

              IMHO this is better, as with X, if you lose your connection to a remote server, all your apps running remotly die.
              As the apps on the remote machine will be running under the remote machines local Wayland server, the apps won't lose connection to the server

              Comment


              • #37
                nearly two years later, this is still holding true:
                https://twitter.com/nwnk/status/2068270475649025

                'let me summarize every wayland discussion on the internet: I'VE SEEN A WINDOW SYSTEM SO I KNOW HOW THEY SHOULD WORK PAY ATTENTION TO MEEEEEE'

                Comment

                Working...
                X