08-05-2013, 09:00 AM
Just to say that it's the other way around. A synchronous protocol requires responses or acknowledgment to come back before sending new requests, while an asynchronous one doesn't. As such, asynchronous protocols are the ones that lag less, because if you send an intensive request and then a less intensive one, you can still receive the second answer rapidly.
Originally Posted by nomadewolf
That being said, Wayland is actually asynchronous while X11 isn't much, so this is indeed an improvement brought by Wayland's design.
08-05-2013, 12:21 PM
Actually, X11 is asynchronous. Xlib is synchronous, but XCB exposes it as an asynchronous protocol.
Originally Posted by erendorn
What keeps being synchronous (because only Khronos Group can change the standard) is GLX, since it's based on Xlib.
08-05-2013, 12:28 PM
Android does most of the stuff on their on, Canocial relias mostly on the community or other companys for example: libhybris: Jolla.
Originally Posted by johnc
08-05-2013, 12:59 PM
Worth to point out: Android was never a part of the community. It was always *just* a product. Canonical had a speech about free software and the community and bla bla bla. That's what makes hypocrites hypocrites, faking your intentions. Android doesn't mean "from humans to humans" or anything like that.
Originally Posted by Thaodan
Finally, Android has near zero relevance on defining what the future of desktop Linux, or Linux in general, will be. It only powers some kinds of devices, which none of them are desktops, using the kernel and maybe a few other low level tools; everything else, is Android specific. I'd totally prefer Ubuntu to Android on phones, if you want to know. I'd totally prefer someone who actually works with the community or at least cares enough to not make a mess of it, though.
Last edited by mrugiero; 08-05-2013 at 01:02 PM.