On Mon, Dec 17, 2001 at 11:20:54AM -0800, Tim Roberts wrote: >On Mon, 17 Dec 2001 13:08:13 -0600, Jonathan Rockway wrote: >> >>Remote X is very important, and very widely used. > >Not if you agree with the 1% figure. There is no conceivable way in which one >can interpret 1% as "very widely used". > >>> Should X continue with a model that makes improvements to >>> the common case very slow/difficult so that the rare case >>> preforms okay? >> >>Yes. > >This is boneheaded. Please note that no one has suggested BREAKING the remote >case. The suggestion, rather, is to improve the 99% case at the expense of >slightly reduced performance for the 1%. That is an absolutely sensible and >supportable tactic. > >In Spock's words, "the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few."
Today's many might not be tomorrow's many, and I think it would be short-sighted to ignore bandwidth issues that may impact the usability of remote X. I'm not saying that this should stand in the way of improvements in the local case, but it shouldn't be ignored either. David -- David Dawes Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tungsten Graphics, Inc http://www.tungstengraphics.com Founder/President, Release Engineer Phone: +1 570 764 0288 The XFree86 Project, Inc http://www.xfree86.org/~dawes _______________________________________________ Render mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/render
