Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Fedora 18 Will Get 256 Color Terminals

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

  • Fedora 18 Will Get 256 Color Terminals

    Phoronix: Fedora 18 Will Get 256 Color Terminals

    At today's FESCo meeting it was approved that Fedora 18 will aim for 256-color terminal support by default...

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=MTEzNjQ

  • #2
    Boring.

    Terminals are so 80's. Sure, they do and always will have their uses, but user interfaces are simply the superior way of doing things. Linux isn't intended to be confined to geeks, it actually has a future.

    Overall, I'm not very enthused about F18. F17 had a ton of features that were immediately beneficial to a user, but most of the stuff in 18 seems to be plumbing stuff, or something like this for the terminal.

    OTOH, I'm sure that many of these F18 features will make F19 fantastic.

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by halfmanhalfamazing View Post
      Terminals are so 80's.
      Or, as Ron Minnich put it, "Type 'stty' at an xterm and tell me why a window has a baud rate. [...] Wow, how advanced. 1,000,000 times the performance and there's still an ASR-33 in the middle". Of course, he was questioning the usefulness of pretending that you're talking to a terminal, not the usefulness of textual interfaces generally.

      Comment


      • #4
        Big deal?

        This seems rather irrelevant when we don't even have AMD/NVIDIA graphics drivers that can perform even close to Windows. Forget about the terminal colors and focus on the #1 lacking area for Linux : proper graphics acceleration.

        Comment


        • #5
          Gentoo has had this for years.

          Originally posted by enfocomp View Post
          This seems rather irrelevant when we don't even have AMD/NVIDIA graphics drivers that can perform even close to Windows. Forget about the terminal colors and focus on the #1 lacking area for Linux : proper graphics acceleration.
          What are you doing to give us proper graphics acceleration?

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by halfmanhalfamazing View Post
            Terminals are so 80's. Sure, they do and always will have their uses, but user interfaces are simply the superior way of doing things.
            Terminals ARE user interfaces. And if you mean "graphical user interfaces", no, pointing at graphical representations of things is caveman technology and generally a far inferior method of communication compared to language.

            Comment


            • #7
              I say this every time the topic comes up: for tasks that are not inherently visual, a graphical user interface is likely to be far more arcane and difficult to use than a well-designed text interface. There is, after all a reason we have a language based on logical semantic (symbolic) structure and not pictography or imitative sounds.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by halfmanhalfamazing View Post
                Overall, I'm not very enthused about F18. F17 had a ton of features that were immediately beneficial to a user, but most of the stuff in 18 seems to be plumbing stuff, or something like this for the terminal.
                While I am quite pleased with how Fedora 17 turned out I am actually skipping it in favour of Fedora 18. Mostly looking forward to Xfce 4.10 and Mesa 8.1, plus any other graphical enhancements that are in the pipeline.

                Originally posted by enfocomp View Post
                This seems rather irrelevant when we don't even have AMD/NVIDIA graphics drivers that can perform even close to Windows. Forget about the terminal colors and focus on the #1 lacking area for Linux : proper graphics acceleration.
                Once again a simple answer to an all together all to prevalent misconception: this is not an either or thing, and one does not take away effort from the other. One developer can not take on all problems. Some can work on graphics and others can work on other things. It is amazing how hard this can be for some people to grasp.

                Originally posted by TechMage89 View Post
                I say this every time the topic comes up: for tasks that are not inherently visual, a graphical user interface is likely to be far more arcane and difficult to use than a well-designed text interface. There is, after all a reason we have a language based on logical semantic (symbolic) structure and not pictography or imitative sounds.
                Well said.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by halfmanhalfamazing View Post
                  Terminals are so 80's. Sure, they do and always will have their uses, but user interfaces are simply the superior way of doing things.
                  http://www.catb.org/~esr//writings/u...rogrammer.html

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    I doubt it will ship Perl 5.6 but 5.16.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Great!
                      Where is Ubuntu? I hope they're following.

                      Originally posted by enfocomp View Post
                      This seems rather irrelevant when we don't even have AMD/NVIDIA graphics drivers that can perform even close to Windows. Forget about the terminal colors and focus on the #1 lacking area for Linux : proper graphics acceleration.
                      From 8 to 256 colors, that's 32 times more colors!
                      It is a great leap.

                      Maybe you care about graphics acceleration and don't care about the terminal, but there are people who use the terminal everyday who don't care about graphics acceleration.
                      People have different needs, uses and goals.
                      People gauge success in different ways than you.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by TechMage89 View Post
                        I say this every time the topic comes up: for tasks that are not inherently visual, a graphical user interface is likely to be far more arcane and difficult to use than a well-designed text interface. There is, after all a reason we have a language based on logical semantic (symbolic) structure and not pictography or imitative sounds.
                        But this is what sudents are tought today? No clicky = no good?
                        http://see.stanford.edu/see/lecturel...a-866adcae1111
                        In episode 25 or so, he moves away from their internal IDE and explains what a 'real' main(String[] args) method is. Then he goes on 'in the past' programs were started with arguments from a 'command line' etc.

                        I do that all the time, at home, at work... so we are from the past like caveman

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by BO$$ View Post
                          Wrong! Wrong! WRONG!!!

                          We have limited resources. Meaning there is not an infinite pool of programmers with infinite time to do everything. Thus we invent the concept of focus. Right now Ubuntu number one bug is windows has majority of desktop. So we must focus on fixing that. Windows 8 will most probably be a clusterfuck. Let's take advantage of that. For now we must focus on the glaring problems of linux and right now graphics support is a major issue. So programmers should focus on that. Instead of having one idiot creating the 30000th quake 3 engine, another adding 256 colors to terminal and one writing graphics drivers maybe we should have 3 writing graphics drivers, get it? The time is limited. Windows 8 will be an opportunity for people to jump to linux. People should learn FOCUS! Once the graphics is solved they can FOCUS on another problem in order of priority. If you come to linux you see what the problems are, learn the apis and everything necessary to contribute and then contribute. Don't write the bilionth cat command in lisp or whatever you like at this moment!
                          You are making the mistake of assuming that all "programmers" have the same skill set. I, personally, might have the skills to modify a terminal program to support 32 colors, but I sure as hell don't have the skills to write a GPU driver. I'm sure there are a lot of Fedora contributors who are are in the same boat. If a contributor who has the skills and knowledge to work on a terminal spends his time working there, and he doesn't have the skills to work on your pet project, is anything really being lost?

                          Besides, as is brought up every time this argument is made, most of the contributors are volunteers and because of that your choices are: let them work on what they are interested in, or lose them as a volunteer.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by BO$$ View Post
                            Wrong! Wrong! WRONG!!!

                            We have limited resources. (...) For now we must focus on the glaring problems of linux and right now graphics support is a major issue. So programmers should focus on that.
                            So you are the leader of a team of programmers that intend to do that? Or are you just telling people what you think they should do? If that's the case I think you are absolutely right and so you must focus on working to improve graphics drivers! It's a glaring problem that you aren't working on graphics drivers this very instant!! You should really focus on that or else we're all doomed!! Seriously, go!! Develop!! Why are you wasting time reading this instead of developing graphics drivers??

                            PS: The binary driver's performance is very close on Linux and Windows.
                            PPS: I got tired of the politically correct answer to these types of posts :P

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by BO$$ View Post
                              I am not telling anyone what he/she should do, but if the stated goal is to get rid of windows on the desktop (and from what I read this seems to be the long term goal), shouldn't we do things that move linux in that direction? I think too much time is wasted on things that do not contribute to that goal. Now we have an opportunity with windows 8 and instead of taking advantage of it we have ubuntu 12.04 which is a buggy mess for example. Is this the alternative that will make people jump ship from microsoft? Shouldn't developers like fix things in ubuntu instead of adding new UIs and other buggy stuff? (I know this is about Fedora but the points still hold. Fedora will not take over anything in the current state)
                              Beauty IS a reason for someone to jump ships. Or even a reason to "ignore" certain drawbacks. How do you think apple got where its at. I bet everyone would choose scarlet johannson even if she burped or farted loudly in public.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X