Results 1 to 9 of 9

Thread: GTK+ 3.2 Is Gold With Wayland, HTML5, Etc

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    14,628

    Default GTK+ 3.2 Is Gold With Wayland, HTML5, Etc

    Phoronix: GTK+ 3.2 Is Gold With Wayland, HTML5, Etc

    With the official release of GNOME 3.2 coming later in the week, Red Hat's Matthias Clasen has christened the official version of the GTK+ 3.2 tool-kit. GTK+ 3.2 brings several interesting features since the inaugural GTK+3 release earlier in the year...

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=OTk0Mg

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    23

    Default

    Any screenshots of new file chooser?

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Ontario
    Posts
    144

    Default

    Re HTML5/Broadway backend, there must be a lot of overlap between the gnome-shell and a webkit browser? What's stopping the desktop from being replaced by a webkit instance? Performance?

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    San Bernardino, CA
    Posts
    232

    Default

    The HTML5/Broadway backend looks very interesting and might be a game changer. Imagine being able to run your apps via a web-browser (ie. OpenOffice instead of Google Docs, etc).

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    1,024

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by gururise View Post
    The HTML5/Broadway backend looks very interesting and might be a game changer. Imagine being able to run your apps via a web-browser (ie. OpenOffice instead of Google Docs, etc).
    This kind of stuff has been possible for a long time via browser-based virtual desktops. The reason nobody does it much is because the resources required to run an instance of any traditional desktop app (something coded with the intent of running a full persistent process dedicated to a single user on a single machine) are many, many, MANY times higher than the resources required to implement an app targeted directly at the Web (something coded knowing that its running over a stateless protocol on a multi-user machine with a workload distributed to the client-side application wherever possible).

    Basically, Broadway is just a really weak display server that keeps a huge app instance running all logic on the server, while a proper Web app (like Google Docs) runs a large majority of the code on the browser and keeps a very minimal amount of state, data, and logic on the server. Google Docs is significantly more scalable, and will perform significantly better as there's far less network traffic necessary do to most of the logic being local and only needing the network to sync changes (and multi-user editing).

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    718

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by leif81 View Post
    Re HTML5/Broadway backend, there must be a lot of overlap between the gnome-shell and a webkit browser?
    Not really. Shell may be written in Javascript, but otherwise has little in common with a web browser.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    1,359

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by elanthis View Post
    This kind of stuff has been possible for a long time via browser-based virtual desktops. The reason nobody does it much is because the resources required to run an instance of any traditional desktop app (something coded with the intent of running a full persistent process dedicated to a single user on a single machine) are many, many, MANY times higher than the resources required to implement an app targeted directly at the Web (something coded knowing that its running over a stateless protocol on a multi-user machine with a workload distributed to the client-side application wherever possible).

    Basically, Broadway is just a really weak display server that keeps a huge app instance running all logic on the server, while a proper Web app (like Google Docs) runs a large majority of the code on the browser and keeps a very minimal amount of state, data, and logic on the server. Google Docs is significantly more scalable, and will perform significantly better as there's far less network traffic necessary do to most of the logic being local and only needing the network to sync changes (and multi-user editing).
    I think you might be too interested in dismissing this. Apparently Qt is doing something similar in Lighthouse.
    Anyway, I dont think the point is to make it "scalable" but provide a quick way to run a single instance to a thin client (cell phone/tablet). You wouldn't need any client software other than a websocket browser.
    Of course this is nowhere near ready but using the exact same code for both desktop and network instances is pretty cool.
    Things left to do (at a minimum) if he's interested are, 1.security, 2.compression and 3. local store (this is probably the easiest to do but may require app changes which kinda defeats the purpose).
    Someone else proposed mapping the cairo instructions to html5 canvas but as Mozilla found out, they don't map well. Perhaps this can be fixed, though.

  8. #8

    Default to the chase

    The question everybody wants to ask: does it still suck?

    [and yes, I'm a gnome user!]

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Portugal
    Posts
    945

    Default

    And still no proper documentation on PyGI...

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •