On Saturday 30 August 2003 23:50, Tzafrir Cohen wrote: > > and that means nice looking, _responsive_, > > stable GUIs. > > _stable_ :-)
Well, that was my underline, you can go and underline your own sentences ;-) seriously, I think X is stable enough - IIRC last time X crashed on me for no obvious reason (that is - not me tinkering with development drivers in non-obivous ways) was a couple of years back. >> X is... damn slow. its a CPU and Memory hog, and its > > design is so bad it makes it very hard to extend its feature set to > > compete with other graphical environments. > > Please support with evidence. I'll later try that on my P133/32MB. Can > you get XP to even consider running on it? No, but that is a marketing decission. I don't want to run X on this kind of computer because its not usable. I have a P166MMx/192MB and I run Win98 on it because its the latest GUI that is actually half usable on that machine. > Antialiasing is yet another example of extentions to the X protocol. Two > years ago none of my programs supported it. Now almost all do. Two years to get an extension to work half reasonably is too slow. and still many people can't get it to work correctly or at all. XRANDR which many will consider a simpler issue stands to face the same length acceptance cycle and acceptance problems (maybe shorter, as it is simpler - lets give it a year). This is because extending X is too complicated. > When will OSX aquire the ability to display windows from a different > computer? (not a whole desktop)? X-Windows has had that for almost 20 > years. Don't we live in a networked environment? What about XP? I don't know - apparently its not that a requested feature - most people are happy with an entire desktop, and for others you have application servers. Everytime I say something bad about X somebody pulls out the old remote X argument. well, I know - remote X is neat and I use it every day. I'd love to get other windowing system to do that, but that's not to say that X cannot be improved upon because it has features A and B that the competing windowing system doesn't - its lacking features C to G that others have and so it needs to be improved or dumped for another solution. If the guys who're doing the XFree rewrite can come up with a better, faster, lighter and easier to extend X server, then I'd love to switch to that. otherwise I'll switch to another architecture the second it will be usable enough for me. -- Oded ================================================================= To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
