Page 12 of 23 FirstFirst ... 2101112131422 ... LastLast
Results 111 to 120 of 230

Thread: Canonical Posts 15 Mesa Patches To Support Mir

  1. #111
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    1,287

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Honton View Post
    You probaly would prefer LGPL to GPL on library software. At least that is what KDE and Gnome does. Qt is a bit better here because the also license to LPGL+exemptions. The exemptions are designed to retain some restrictions so people will be able to deviate too much from Qt. Yet another sad story of legalese taking over what should be about transparency, freedom, symmetry, and equality.

    If Shuttleworth was a bit smarter he would make an agreement between Canonical and the Ubuntu spins. Keep it as vague and weak as KDEs agreement with Qt. Canonical would lose nothing but gain an asymmetric partnership. Who don't like loyal minions?
    True, I'd probably prefer LGPL, didn't thought too much actually.
    As for the agreement, yes, probably, but if he were smarter he would have promised a stable API (as a future feature, of course) from day zero, so the spins would be far more likely to want to switch to Mir. I believe they will have it at some point, because otherwise Unity devs will fight with Mir ones everytime one breaks the API, but they said before they planned on having an unstable one, so now one would have no clue on which statement deserves more trust.

  2. #112
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    65

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by alexThunder View Post
    How many vendors are actually selling machines with various distros pre-installed (that means, not only Ubuntu)? There is ZaReason - and well, that's all I heard of. System76 is (afaik) only selling Ubuntu. And both of them are pretty small. On the other hand, e.g. HP, Dell or Asus (at least with Note/Netbooks) are selling some machines with Ubuntu pre-installed - only Ubuntu (in terms of Linux support).
    I think this has pretty much been addressed, but it depends on the market. HP and Dell have more (and longer standing) Linux partnerships than just with Canonical.

    http://h71016.www7.hp.com/html/Linux...ucts/index.asp
    http://h71028.www7.hp.com/enterprise...0-0-0-121.html
    http://h71028.www7.hp.com/enterprise...0-0-0-121.html

    http://linux.dell.com/wiki/index.php/Main_Page
    http://www.dell.com/learn/us/en/19/l...tions-partners

    I know that ASUS has also supported RHEL and SLES distributions in the past for commercial servers and workstations, though I don't have any current information on that. I do know that as recently as last year they tested some of their hardware offerings against multiple Linux distributions (beyond just RHEL, SLES, and Ubuntu), though obviously that is different than officially endorsing those other distributions. Other major companies do something similar (e.g. http://support.lenovo.com/en_US/deta...cID=MIGR-59116).

    The reason that Red Hat and SUSE don't focus on the home desktop market is likely the same reason that Canonical is shifting focus towards the non-desktop-replacement mobile device market (← though they will be at some point in the future, these devices aren't yet 100% desktop substitutes). And, IMO, any company whose bread and butter isn't the home desktop market isn't likely to pull Linux on the desktop into the mainstream. Perhaps Mandrakelinux/Mandriva could have done more on this front years ago (though I seriously doubt it) had it not been so woefully mismanaged. Regardless, eventually it, too, shifted its focus to other markets. I don't think Steam Boxes will influence the home desktop market either (though I tentatively welcome them with open arms). And perhaps the home desktop market no longer matters in terms of growth potential for operating systems anyway.

    Though some companies and communities throughout the history of Linux have tried to address this, Linux (of the GNU/Linux variety) just doesn't do stupid well. I don't necessarily consider that a bad thing, though admittedly it does impact market share.


    Quote Originally Posted by alexThunder View Post
    I know, that Ubuntu is not a very big part of Dells business, but it still is: http://blog.canonical.com/2011/10/27...ores-in-china/
    I'm not discounting China as a very important consumer market, but there are different factors at play (scope of the black market, influence of the CPC in the business realm, etc) that make foreign business footholds in China a little less stellar than their marketing makes them out to be, at least to me.



    Quote Originally Posted by mrugiero View Post
    most Canonical defenders sound really childish (well, maybe only BO$$, but he's so persistent he's the one who comes to mind), and stating a hope doesn't sound childish to me.
    Quote Originally Posted by LinuxGamer View Post
    Stop it BO$$
    Quote Originally Posted by LinuxGamer View Post
    damn BO$$
    Quote Originally Posted by LinuxGamer View Post
    you happy BO$$
    Quote Originally Posted by LinuxGamer View Post
    his real name is BO$$
    Quote Originally Posted by ninez View Post
    Isn't BO$$ a Windows Guy??? ...which i am *NOT* at all.

    My comment that you quoted was a reflection of reality, all previous attempts (including Canonical's) have been failures. That isn't to say, Linux won't be successful eventually on the Desktop (obviously, i want it to be), but it's my personal belief that we aren't there yet. ~ which i think is fair to note/say... and that doesn't make me BO$$ for pointing that out
    Quote Originally Posted by LinuxGamer View Post
    i was calling alexThunder BO$$ them 2 are twin's
    [Come on, alexThunder and BO$$ could hardly pass for twins, even if you've been drinking.]

    Quote Originally Posted by alexThunder View Post
    Since everybody hates Ubuntu except for BO$$, everyone not hating it must be the same person. Deducing from this, you must be BO$$ as well - just as I am. It makes sense, since no one else would question
    that - except for BO$$

    You shouldn't investigate any further. People like him are so deeply sunken in their own personal conspiracy, that arguing with common sense won't get you any further. At the very end, he'll instead ask you to prove that you're not BO$$, which is pretty much impossible for you to do - thus, you must be lying, if you're claiming you're not BO$$ (same is true for disproof, but that doesn't matter :P).
    Quote Originally Posted by mrugiero View Post
    I don't want to sound like BO$$, but you should really get out of the basement (?)
    (Now, seriously, I think it passed a lot less time than it really passed at times, too, but I needed to make that joke)

    Also, BO$$ is mostly an annoying being you can't reason with. The other user seems fairly rational.

    Can I be BO$$, too? Can I? I promise I'll be annoying as hell! Pretty please?
    Quote Originally Posted by alexThunder View Post
    Heh, we're slowly building an army of BO$$es :>
    Quote Originally Posted by intellivision View Post
    You also didn't put up any evidence that proves mrugiero and BO$$ are the same person, so I assume you're going to shut up about that instead?
    [How can anyone be certain that LinuxGamer isn't BO$$ playing both sides of the fence? ]


    I hope this isn't like Beetlejuice, where saying BO$$'s name three times will summon him from the Neitherworld. Now this thread has probably been jinxed.
    Last edited by eidolon; 07-21-2013 at 12:57 AM.

  3. #113
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    1,024

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Britoid View Post
    Whatever happened to Linux being about choice?
    Nothing. It was _never_ about choice. It was about having a Free kernel.

    Short version of a long explanation: your "choice" is 100% to modify and share the code; it is not to force (give no choice to) other people to accept it.

  4. #114
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    1,287

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by eidolon View Post
    [How can anyone be certain that LinuxGamer isn't BO$$ playing both sides of the fence? ]
    I'm not sure, but I tend to think that BO$$ isn't actually trolling (in the sense of saying nonsense just to irritate people), but that he believes what he says. If that's how it is, he doesn't play both sides, because he can only really believe in one of those ideas.

  5. #115
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    110

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bwat47 View Post
    Rejecting the patches would just make things even worse.
    What things? Wayland is the future, canonical can suck u know what.

  6. #116
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    110

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by alexThunder View Post
    (in fact, Ubuntu is somewhat popular among Linux distros).
    The funny thing is that Ubuntu got popular not because they made something right, it's because they sent hundreds of thousands or millions of free ubuntu cd's all over the world.
    BTW read Gabe Nevells thoughts on windows 8, and guess what steam box and linux has in common. But i bet you can't comprehend anything u read, you just keep praising Canonical all over this thread. Brainless people are brainless people. Linux just evolved into the state it is now and Canonical did nothing to help linux to get there.
    Last edited by phoen1x; 07-21-2013 at 04:19 AM.

  7. #117
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    163

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by phoen1x View Post
    The funny thing is that Ubuntu got popular not because they made something right, it's because they sent hundreds of thousands or millions of free ubuntu cd's all over the world.

    Linux just evolved into the state it is now and Canonical did nothing to help linux to get there.
    If you can't see what Ubuntu did for Linux then you are a prime example of a nerd who completely lost connection to the normal users.

    But if it helps to keep up your view of the world, you can continue to tell yourself that Ubuntu only got popular because they sent CDs all over the world.

  8. #118
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    160

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sergey Shambir View Post
    Correct client-side decorations implementation development time is 10-100 times bigger rather than just binding binding toolkit to yet another window and OpenGL context creation mechanism. I've spent about 1 hour to port cocos2d-x game engine to SDL library (which just creates and handles window and OpenGL context, and input). Someone should spent months to implement correct client-side decorations.

    Enjoy.


    All phones have integrated GPU, so operating memory always can be also videocard memory. This fact used on Android to make built-in browser, Chrome and Firefox work smoother; there are ANDROID_NATIVE_BUFFER extension in EGL that makes it possible. Also on phones client-side buffer allocation causes bigger memory consumption than server-side; Wayland developers said that wayland doesn't prohibit server-side buffer allocation, however, wayland doesn't prohibit and doesn't implement nothing, it is not display server. Weston is display server, and I see no mechanism to allocate buffer on server side with Weston.
    Other people had tried to justify their choice because some (presumed) wrong wayland design and they had failed miserably because they were too ignorant to understand how wayland works.
    Do you want so much add yourself to the list?

  9. #119
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    65

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mrugiero View Post
    I'm not sure, but I tend to think that BO$$ isn't actually trolling (in the sense of saying nonsense just to irritate people), but that he believes what he says. If that's how it is, he doesn't play both sides, because he can only really believe in one of those ideas.
    I assure you it was meant facetiously, in response to the comparisons to BO$$ that had been made. I tend to think the better of people that they haven't created multiple logins.

  10. #120

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by valeriodean View Post
    Other people had tried to justify their choice because some (presumed) wrong wayland design and they had failed miserably because they were too ignorant to understand how wayland works.
    Do you want so much add yourself to the list?
    It's straw man argument. Client side decorations are not related to wayland (because wayland is not display server, it's RPC mechanism like Google protobuf). But Weston enforces client-side decorations, and even if KDE will not use them, any toolkit that needs to be ported to Weston still should implement cross-DE client-side decorations. At this moment there are no toolkit where cross-DE client-side decorations are done, so you can estimate amout of work on supporting each theme. It's not design, it's Weston implementation details - but looks like nobody want to give up client-side decorations at all.

    Also it looks like client-side decorations will increase memory consumtion, especially for heavy themes - each application should keep own copy of all graphics required to draw CSD.

    Also MacOSX, iOS, Windows and Android have no any stable protocol - they have very stable API like GDI, WGL or skia (on android), and that's enough. But one of Mir "disadvantages" is that it have no stable protocol, while Weston has.

Posting Permissions

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