> I have to say I'm with Kurt on this: I too have seen requests for "not > having X because it is such a hog". > > I don't have hard numbers to support this either way, but the last time > we looked at this it became apparent that the end user wanted all manner > of fonts, graphics, GL support etc., but for some reason (irrational, > probably ill informed) was opposed to X. > > So... I conceive that there is a pool of users who see all the cool > stuff their shiny new smart phones can do, and want to do all that too > on their OMAP or similar ARM embedded boards, but think that this tiny > little board can't possibly run X, since X is "such a huge resource > hog". > > So you set about writing dedicated code to re-invent all the stuff that > X already does, and it ends up just as big, or bigger... > > Now, I've been around since X was new, and back then it *was* a bit of a > hog. But it did run. > We had dedicated X terminals for it... Then we got it running on Windows > PCs too and that was a huge step forwards - we could access the "real" > computers from our 50MHz x86 PC's with 4MB of RAM and very simple > graphics cards... > > Now, my little OMAP test board has a 350MHz clock (I think, can't > remember, doesn't even matter any more) and about 1GB of RAM. > Can it run X11 - why yes, yes it can. Just fine. > > Does running X get in the way of the "real" work the board has to do? > No... It does not. > > >> I did however implement a very simple HAL for FLTK2 at some >> point to get a few user interface elements into a screen >> buffer attached to a regular PC that was otherwise not >> supported by the OS. Limiting myself to a single font face >> and a single font size, it was very fast and quite tiny. > > Indeed so. > But the problem is not in the niche cases, it is the requests we are > seeing from folk that want to do all the things X can support, but for > some reason want to re-write it all from scratch. > > CPU power has advanced so far that X just is not an issue any more.
Ian, you have said absolute right thoughts but - A few times I was listening similar arguments when developers compared other libraries - Qt and FLTK. Do you understand me? :-) _______________________________________________ fltk-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.easysw.com/mailman/listinfo/fltk-dev
