Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

GTK4's Vulkan Support Continues Maturing

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

  • GTK4's Vulkan Support Continues Maturing

    Phoronix: GTK4's Vulkan Support Continues Maturing

    One of the questions that came up following our GNOME 3.26 feature overview was how GTK4's Vulkan renderer is coming along...

    http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pag...ulkan-Maturing

  • #2
    The whole gnome 3 is just a proof of concept

    Comment


    • #3
      Yeah a proof of concept for the Standard Desktop.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by GhostOfFunkS View Post
        Yeah a proof of concept for the Standard Desktop.
        Which is KDE Plasma, of course ; though I'd say "shitty imitation" rather than "proof of concept"

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by doom_Oo7 View Post

          Which is KDE Plasma, of course ; though I'd say "shitty imitation" rather than "proof of concept"
          Plasma is sadly a huge bugparty with some tech demo elements which is apparently created by developers for developers without a design strategy for a efficient user interface. I'm not even talking about a modern one but an efficient and consistent one.

          At the beginning I thought it was stupid from Valve to not choose Plasma but later on I realized everything would simply be worse. Performance, Usability and the aged UI.

          That's all a real pitty since Qt should be the leading and only GUI framework in the *nix desktop world (ignoring the moc mess for a moment ).
          Last edited by Kemosabe; 09-11-2017, 02:29 PM.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Kemosabe View Post

            Plasma is sadly a huge bugparty with some tech demo elements which is apparently created by developers for developers without a design strategy for a efficient user interface. I'm not even talking about a modern one but an efficient and consistent one.
            ...
            That's all a real pitty since Qt should be the leading and only GUI framework in the *nix desktop world (ignoring the moc mess for a moment ).
            All large scale Qt deployments have failed on the free desktop. kde, Nokia, Unity8, Jolla. It is about time to let go of "Qt save Us All" narrative. Who would think that handing over complete API control to a commercial entity would be smart in the first place?!?

            GTK is tailored to the Standard Desktop. They design and decide the API which is an absolute necessity if you want something like a Wayland desktop.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by GhostOfFunkS View Post

              All large scale Qt deployments have failed on the free desktop. kde, Nokia, Unity8, Jolla. It is about time to let go of "Qt save Us All" narrative. Who would think that handing over complete API control to a commercial entity would be smart in the first place?!?

              GTK is tailored to the Standard Desktop. They design and decide the API which is an absolute necessity if you want something like a Wayland desktop.
              Well, I have to say I do like Redhat's financial model of supporting itself. Because in supporting itself it supports a broad portion of the open source projects it uses. It's a good thing that even GTK falls under to some degree. But that still doesn't excuse the GTK devs from breaking shit constantly. And then bragging about it. It's definitely the worst widget set to choose if you want a stable interface between versions. GTK -will- break between versions. It's already happened again and again and again.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by GhostOfFunkS View Post

                All large scale Qt deployments have failed on the free desktop. kde, Nokia, Unity8, Jolla. It is about time to let go of "Qt save Us All" narrative. Who would think that handing over complete API control to a commercial entity would be smart in the first place?!?

                GTK is tailored to the Standard Desktop. They design and decide the API which is an absolute necessity if you want something like a Wayland desktop.
                C'mon it's really not Qt's fault. And from a technological point of view: Gtk always has been and is inferior. Who actually wants to develop with Gtk? For me, it is a nightmare because I know the other side. Besides that the platform independence is kinda iffy <- And yes, this is a crucial feature these days.

                You mean "tailored to the standard desktop" because it's being developed hand in hand with the one and only DE you can show the world without being completely embarrassed?
                Last edited by Kemosabe; 09-11-2017, 03:31 PM.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by duby229 View Post

                  Well, I have to say I do like Redhat's financial model of supporting itself. Because in supporting itself it supports a broad portion of the open source projects it uses. It's a good thing that even GTK falls under to some degree. But that still doesn't excuse the GTK devs from breaking shit constantly. And then bragging about it. It's definitely the worst widget set to choose if you want a stable interface between versions. GTK -will- break between versions. It's already happened again and again and again.
                  That was not the case for GTK2 when it served as Stable. That is not the case now for GTK3 as it serves as Stable. GTK4 will also get API modification until it can get a stability promise. That will take time.

                  So that's the thing about APIs, they are not perfect when fleshed out. The important lesson is to understand WHY stuff breaks. GTK changes because they want to EVOLVE a desktop. That is how you do CSS theming, vulkan renderer, Wayland etc.

                  QT changes because busine$$ comes before Free. Look how the changed the internal of QT that put kde's Wayland effort one release back. That is some thing to cry about.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Kemosabe View Post
                    You mean "tailored to the standard desktop" because it's being developed hand in hand with the one and only DE you can show the world without being completely embarrassed?
                    Ding, ding, ding. We got a winner. As stated earlier API design is harder than surgery on a beating heart. If your API is there to support one platform you might succeed. If your API is there serve all platforms you got compromises to make. QT decided stuff like QNX is more important than kde. That's why we get endless QT regressions and bad release management to read about on Phoronix.

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X