Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The X API Is About 15 Times Bigger Than Wayland

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

  • Rigaldo
    replied
    Originally posted by frantaylor View Post
    What will compiz fusion do for the raspberry pi? It doesn't have enough CPU horsepower to run a compiz fusion desktop. THAT is where the bloat is, ON THE DESKTOP, NOT the X server.

    I'm NOT arguing against wayland, I think it's great! But BLOAT is not the reason to switch.

    If BLOAT was a legitimate reason to dump software then Windows would have been toast decades ago.

    New CPUs arrive with regularity, and yesterdays bloated mess is today's normal workload.

    Shit we used to joke that emacs was a terrible memory hog, but the modern Notepad uses more system resources, and now emacs (bigger than ever!) is slim and trim in comparison.
    Ok, I meant that things X does can be done much more efficiently. And lags in some operations are visible. Except if even openbox is bloated ..
    I asked about compiz out of curiosity mostly. Bloat also has to do with code, as I mentioned.

    Leave a comment:


  • frantaylor
    replied
    Originally posted by Rigaldo View Post
    If I recall and understand correctly, X needs to do about 15 communications between applications for each resize event. (Possibly more, I think some where removed for simplicity from the example .. )
    In the same case Wayland can do with ~3.
    That's just part of what can be called bloat in X.
    Like much code not used by pretty much anything today, but needing to be maintained(and possibly loaded?).
    Btw, how well does your Raspberry Pi run compiz effects btw?
    What will compiz fusion do for the raspberry pi? It doesn't have enough CPU horsepower to run a compiz fusion desktop. THAT is where the bloat is, ON THE DESKTOP, NOT the X server.

    I'm NOT arguing against wayland, I think it's great! But BLOAT is not the reason to switch.

    If BLOAT was a legitimate reason to dump software then Windows would have been toast decades ago.

    New CPUs arrive with regularity, and yesterdays bloated mess is today's normal workload.

    Shit we used to joke that emacs was a terrible memory hog, but the modern Notepad uses more system resources, and now emacs (bigger than ever!) is slim and trim in comparison.
    Last edited by frantaylor; 17 October 2012, 05:23 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Rigaldo
    replied
    Originally posted by frantaylor View Post
    Weight is not a factor when a $35 Raspberry Pi runs X windows like a champion.

    If $5 worth of video card can run X windows better than any Sun or SGI workstation then its "bloat" is MOST CERTAINLY NOT an issue.
    If I recall and understand correctly, X needs to do about 15 communications between applications for each resize event. (Possibly more, I think some where removed for simplicity from the example .. )
    In the same case Wayland can do with ~3.
    That's just part of what can be called bloat in X.
    Like much code not used by pretty much anything today, but needing to be maintained(and possibly loaded?).
    Btw, how well does your Raspberry Pi run compiz effects btw?

    Leave a comment:


  • frantaylor
    replied
    Originally posted by uid313 View Post
    In time Wayland will get a bit bigger, and perhaps X.org will cut some weight.
    Weight is not a factor when a $35 Raspberry Pi runs X windows like a champion.

    If $5 worth of video card can run X windows better than any Sun or SGI workstation then its "bloat" is MOST CERTAINLY NOT an issue.

    WOW! The X Server uses a WHOLE 16 MEGABYTES of RAM on my Raspberry Pi! WHAT A HEAVY WEIGHT PROGRAM! Oh My Goodness, it makes sed and grep look like firefox!
    Last edited by frantaylor; 17 October 2012, 05:03 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • frantaylor
    replied
    Originally posted by johnc View Post
    Of course.

    It supports less functionality.
    Wayland will run MULTIPLE X servers, SIMULTANEOUSLY with NO PERFORMANCE PENALTY.

    If by "less functionality" you mean "more functionality" then I would agree with you.

    Or perhaps you think that tearing video and poor support for transparency are "more functionality"
    Last edited by frantaylor; 17 October 2012, 04:44 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • archibald
    replied
    I think that one of the problems with X is that in order to truthfully advertise its ability to speaking the X11 protocol, lots of old cruft is required that isn't used any more, so there is a limit to what can be removed whilst still legitimately calling it an X11 server.

    Leave a comment:


  • uid313
    replied
    Well

    In time Wayland will get a bit bigger, and perhaps X.org will cut some weight.

    Leave a comment:


  • Rigaldo
    replied
    Originally posted by boast View Post
    Hopefully Wayland will have over 2,000 by 2.0, and beat xorg!!!
    Yeah, and by 3.0 it will be .. OVER NINE THOUSAAANNDDD!!!!

    There's some pretty "small" articles today it seems, including this one.

    Leave a comment:


  • boast
    replied
    Hopefully Wayland will have over 2,000 by 2.0, and beat xorg!!!

    Leave a comment:


  • jrch2k8
    replied
    Originally posted by johnc View Post
    Of course.

    It supports less functionality.
    wrong, wayland protocol support most of the actually used features of Xorg already and it has some that are not possible with X11 protocol without a barbaric amount of hacks[like fps accurate animations].

    about missing features in 1.0 protocol will be network rendering but i agree this support should move client side, after all Kde/Qt --Gnome/GTK[etc] know better than anyone how they specific render code works
    for example:
    * Kde can reuse the local icons theme if present[or ask the user to install it] so it doesn't have to send images just pix identifiers to instruct the target wayland/kde to use those in your HDD
    * another example could be Qt/gtk introducing a meta renderer plugin that just instruct the remote Qt/wayland draw a Qcombobox with this properties at this position using X font, etc. so the actual local QT/gtk in the remote host do the rendering making the bandwith use extremely fast/easy to compress and encrypt, in fact this can allow you to use remote apps as any of your local apps, without worry about resolution or any other setting in your origin desktop/server,etc (many possibilities left to think about )

    about both project size, wayland will always be smaller than X11 since wayland is not a renderer, wayland is just a police that route commands to KMS/DRM/DRI/EGL/OPENGL/MESA/EVDEV/V4L/Overlays[<-- those one do the actual rendering] in a standard way so everyone can be on the same page.

    weston is just an example toy of how to do composite using wayland protocol instead of X11 that will make life easier for desktops devs to make the transition and well is a test client that wayland devs use to put some pressure in their code and iron bugs/errors

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X