Xfce, LXDE, & GNOME Are Running On Ubuntu XMir

[liam]

That has yet to be seen.

While it has yet to be released as a default, most of the X devs seem to think it will be a huge step forwards.
It certainly seems to more closely model how we want display managers to work than X.

[johnc]

While it has yet to be released as a default, most of the X devs seem to think it will be a huge step forwards.
It certainly seems to more closely model how we want display managers to work than X.

Yes, the people selling it say that it's the best thing since sliced bread.

[Desiderantes]

I admit that may be a possibility, yes.

you w0t m8?

[Auzy]

I admit that may be a possibility, yes.

I mean, against Wayland.. Sorry, 7AM post ...

[liam]

Yes, the people selling it say that it's the best thing since sliced bread.

I wasn't aware there were people of similar knowledge levels about the graphics stack that had different opinions.

[eudoxos]

xmir: X11 on Android devices

That means that now I can run LXDE/XFCE/KDE/Gnome/... session on Google Nexus 10, or any other device supported by ubuntu-touch Ubuntu touch without X compatibility layer was pointless for non-100% developers.

[timothyja]

Yes, the people selling it say that it's the best thing since sliced bread.

This guy is just a windows fan boy with to much time on his hands trying to stir up trouble.

[oleid]

That means that now I can run LXDE/XFCE/KDE/Gnome/... session on Google Nexus 10, or any other device supported by ubuntu-touch [...]

You can do that already, as there are native X-Servers for Android.

[dee.]

We shouldn't dismiss it immediately simply because its Canonical..

Whilst I'll be the first to say Canonical makes some crap products (unity only became a production-quality product in the last release), and they tend to rush unfinished programs into production, it is possible Mir as a final product may be able to compete with Mir. That being said, them constantly making their own products instead of joining existing projects with similar goals wont encourage the community to join development, and may naturally lead to a worse product.

Either way, we all win because both Wayland and Mir are a huge step forward for Linux over X11

No, we shouldn't dismiss it because it's made by Canonical. Who it was made by has no bearing on this. If any other company were in the same position as Canonical is now and were doing the same things, it'd be just as stupid and horrible.

Mir may be able to compete with Wayland, not because of any technical merit, but because of Canonical's existing user base and loyal fans (and the fact that a large part of Mir is copied straight from Wayland...) but that's exactly what makes it bad. Competition is fine for higher levels of the stack, like the desktop environments: we can have a 100 different desktop environments and all can still run the same applications, because they all use X and conform to certain standards... but in such an essential part of the system as the display server, competition is a bad thing and only causes division.

Think about it, does any other operating system have two different, competing display server standards? Does Windows ever release a windows OS in two versions, both having different display servers (or whatever passes for one on windows), and both being incompatible with each other? Does Mac OS do that? No, that'd be stupid, because they know that would cause compatibility problems for the users. So why do you suddenly think it's good for Linux to have this kind of division in the graphics stack?

[seb24]

No, we shouldn't dismiss it because it's made by Canonical. Who it was made by has no bearing on this. If any other company were in the same position as Canonical is now and were doing the same things, it'd be just as stupid and horrible.

Mir may be able to compete with Wayland, not because of any technical merit, but because of Canonical's existing user base and loyal fans (and the fact that a large part of Mir is copied straight from Wayland...) but that's exactly what makes it bad. Competition is fine for higher levels of the stack, like the desktop environments: we can have a 100 different desktop environments and all can still run the same applications, because they all use X and conform to certain standards... but in such an essential part of the system as the display server, competition is a bad thing and only causes division.

Think about it, does any other operating system have two different, competing display server standards? Does Windows ever release a windows OS in two versions, both having different display servers (or whatever passes for one on windows), and both being incompatible with each other? Does Mac OS do that? No, that'd be stupid, because they know that would cause compatibility problems for the users. So why do you suddenly think it's good for Linux to have this kind of division in the graphics stack?

We have 3 or more different Kernel, We have 3 or more sound server, we have X different file system, We have X different package manager....
OSx or Windows have more than 1 DE ? bad comparison. Or you suggest we need to do the same with Linux ? 1 Kernel, 1 File system, 1 DE, 1XServer, 1 Company ?

I love when people from open source community trying to discredit Canonical explaining that the better way to do is the way of proprietary solutions... Big Facepalm.

When you suggest that a company/people can't do it's own project you fail totaly. Open Source encourage fork, new projects, creativity and all people to do new stuffs... If you rant against this point for some idiot reason you are against the basis of the Open Source rules.