Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The New X.Org Server Driver API Is Coming

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

  • phoronix
    started a topic The New X.Org Server Driver API Is Coming

    The New X.Org Server Driver API Is Coming

    Phoronix: The New X.Org Server Driver API Is Coming

    The new driver API for the X.Org Server that would finally allow for the X.Org stack to better compete with modern desktop drivers on Windows and Mac OS X, may actually see the light of day, prior to the Wayland push...

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=MTEwMzE

  • V!NCENT
    replied
    The fact that Plan9 was never used for production use/end use, is because it's a research operating system. It was a moving target and never even advised to be developped for, because it was continuesly changing.

    But that doesn't mean that their research was not valuable. In fact, it was meant to be copied by other operating systems. Apple's backup timemachine hdd was actually an implementation of Plan9's networked harddisk with delta changes. Microsoft copied some of their research for the distributed NT kernel in business network settups (making Windows plus Office the number one solution for businesses).

    Don't underestimate the advances Plan9 made at Bell Labs!

    Leave a comment:


  • pq__
    replied
    Originally posted by renox View Post
    Funny you should say this because in theory you could move Windows in X without paying a RTT, but with Wayland 'normal' design, you cannot avoid this: the decoration is handled by the client.
    Hi, just ensuring that little detail about wayland:

    If you move a window in Wayland by clicking and dragging a window element (like the title bar), the round-trip happens once on button-down. After that, it's all compositor play while the button is held down and you wiggle the mouse.

    If you move a window by a compositor hot-key, say, Super+left-mouse-button-drag, the client will never know.

    If the window enters or leaves an output's area, the client gets notified, but that's beside the point.

    Leave a comment:


  • daniels
    replied
    Originally posted by V!NCENT View Post
    This whole X11 architecture is dead. Instead of defending it, why not evolve it? Plan9 did something similar; network the hell out of everything.
    plan9 has also only ever been used by like ten people.

    Leave a comment:


  • smitty3268
    replied
    Originally posted by V!NCENT View Post
    But still; stuff like Fuse and streaming entire HD movies isn't a problem over the internet, so what are we even talking about?
    Something most people overlook when bringing up this argument:

    sure, movies stream fine over the internet for the most part, but check out what happens when you throw in user interaction and seek to the middle - it pauses and buffers before starting up again.

    Such pauses may be acceptable in a video streaming scenario, but you obviously don't want to happen all the time in an interactive desktop.

    Leave a comment:


  • V!NCENT
    replied
    Rendering a webpage doesn't require more bandwith, even when you max the browser window, either. It's drawn by a driver that has nothing to do with the network. Why? Because it's all semi-code and content loading. After that...

    Well that's kindof how Plan9 handles things; with common sence.

    Leave a comment:


  • renox
    replied
    > Ah yes, my bad. It was specifically (entire Plan9 OS) designed for distributed networks.

    Yes, I know but my question was: which network: local or WAN? Both are quite different (especially the RTT).

    > But still; stuff like Fuse and streaming entire HD movies isn't a problem over the internet, so what are we even talking about?

    As said above, mostly about round trip.

    > Rio works mostly with commands and discriptions, which is window management transparent, which means resizing a window isn't even consuming bandwith.

    Uh? Given that if you increase the size of a window a program may display more text/data than it had with its previous size, I don't know how this can be possible, you're sure that you aren't thinking about moving windows?

    > I'm guessing this is a pain in X.org?

    Funny you should say this because in theory you could move Windows in X without paying a RTT, but with Wayland 'normal' design, you cannot avoid this: the decoration is handled by the client.

    Leave a comment:


  • V!NCENT
    replied
    Ah yes, my bad. It was specifically (entire Plan9 OS) designed for distributed networks. But still; stuff like Fuse and streaming entire HD movies isn't a problem over the internet, so what are we even talking about?

    Rio works mostly with commands and discriptions, which is window management transparent, which means resizing a window isn't even consuming bandwith. I'm guessing this is a pain in X.org?

    Should be just fine.

    Leave a comment:


  • renox
    replied
    Originally posted by V!NCENT View Post
    Cosmetics have nothing to do with the inner workings. Running on wireless of wired is completely irrelevant due to TCP/IP as opposed to UDP.
    Are you even aware of what we're discussing here? (no offence )
    You should be more cautious when you're responding, especially since your answer is making me think that *you* have no clue.
    WAN == Wide Area Network i.e. I was asking if rio worked well in a (wired) network which has high latency and small bandwidth: having a remote display working well in a LAN is easy, having a remote display working well in a WAN is hard..

    And yes, the look may be important: as "cosmetic effects" can use a lot of bandwidth (which isn't so good in a WAN).

    Leave a comment:


  • V!NCENT
    replied
    Cosmetics have nothing to do with the inner workings. Running on wireless of wired is completely irrelevant due to TCP/IP as opposed to UDP.

    Are you even aware of what we're discussing here? (no offence )

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X