Re: 30+ reasons why X-Win32 is Better than Cygwin/X
I didn't read much of this email when I first responded to it since I suspected that I'd feel compelled to respond and it would interfere with my real job. But, now it's Saturday, so... On Thu, Mar 10, 2005 at 12:57:53PM -0800, Matthew Johnson wrote: Cygwin/X installs with the cygwin setup and this is fast too. Not always. Setup.exe presents a list of mirrors with no commentary and not even a _hint_ of which is closest to the user in the Web. I tried 5 or 6 different mirrors in that list before I could find one that was fast too. That is pretty poor performance. RedHat should not allow them to mirror Cygwin if the mirror will not provide faster response and better connectivity. Red Hat does not control the Cygwin mirror list any more than Red Hat controls Cygwin. Cygwin is an all-volunteer project. Here is how it works: Mirror sites volunteer to mirror the Cygwin release. The site is added to the mirror list and, subsequently, a program checks twice a day to make sure that it and the other sites are up-to-date. If a site isn't up-to-date it is dropped from the list. I can't think of any useful way to determine faster response and better connectivity. If you are in Michigan and you chose a mirror in Brazil, you'd undoubtedly see poor performance in your download. If you are on a network that is being subject to a denial of service, you'd see poor performance. There are all sorts of factors which can impact *your* download performance that have nothing to do with how well-connected the mirror site is. I can imagine some kind of system which tries to figure out connectivity by checking the output of traceroute or some similar utility but I doubt it would ever be useful. I've never seen anything like this in any of the other projects which use mirrors. If you have a pointer to something that does this, however, please provide it. I assume that most users are like me. They find a mirror which works for them and they stick with it. That's what I do with cygwin, sourceforge, Fedora, etc. All of that said, however, I'm not a huge fan of setup.exe. I think it's UI sucks and I wish someone had the time to provide something better. 10 Corporate Tech Support No Yes 11 Corporate Bug Fix Support No Yes [snip] Is Cygwin/X worth it's money? Definitly yes *g* No, NOT 'definitly [sic] yes'. It depends on how much your _time_ is worth. If your time is worth little to you, or you already _have_ much expertise with X, Cygwin and Cygwin/X, then yes, it is worth it. But if you cannot afford to lose the time grappling with installations that do different things on different machines, demanding you rebuild password files but then refusing to let you do it etc, or with community support that consists of answers so terse (and all too often rude) they are harder to understand than the original problem etc, then no, it is not worth it. Right. In open source, people who answer your questions may be as rude or terse as the people who are asking for help. The answerers also may be as clueless as many tech support personnel. I do think it is pretty rare for people who are helping to comment on misspellings or bad grammar, however. YMMV. cgf
Re: 30+ reasons why X-Win32 is Better than Cygwin/X
--- Christopher Faylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I didn't read much of this email when I first responded to it since I suspected that I'd feel compelled to respond and it would interfere with my real job. I know the feeling... But, now it's Saturday, so... And it is Saturdy here, too, so you even get a timely response;) On Thu, Mar 10, 2005 at 12:57:53PM -0800, Matthew Johnson wrote: Cygwin/X installs with the cygwin setup and this is fast too. Not always. Setup.exe presents a list of mirrors with no commentary and not even a _hint_ of which is closest to the user in the Web. I tried 5 or 6 different mirrors in that list before I could find one that was fast too. That is pretty poor performance. RedHat should not allow them to mirror Cygwin if the mirror will not provide faster response and better connectivity. Red Hat does not control the Cygwin mirror list any more than Red Hat controls Cygwin. I see. Perhaps tehy should, much as Sun has at least some limited 'control' over Netbeans, even though that too is (almost) entirely a volunteer project. But really, who controls the mirror list is only secondary at best: whoever it is who is controlling it, should do some 'quality-control' on the mirror list. Cygwin is an all-volunteer project. Hopefully, this does not mean that any volunteer can 'volunteer' his contribution even when it is not a good one;) I have refrained, for example, from offering my laptop connected on a dial-up line as a mirror site! Here is how it works: Mirror sites volunteer to mirror the Cygwin release. The site is added to the mirror list and, subsequently, a program checks twice a day to make sure that it and the other sites are up-to-date. If a site isn't up-to-date it is dropped from the list. Perhaps that progam should check for more than just 'up-to-date'. I think you dismiss that idea too quickly below. I can't think of any useful way to determine faster response and better connectivity. If you are in Michigan and you chose a mirror in Brazil, you'd undoubtedly see poor performance in your download. No doubt. But that is why I also mentioned in my original email: with many of those mirrors, the setup.exe user has no idea where the mirror is physically located (too many names end in 'org'). So the poor user in Michigan cannot even guess if the mirror is in Brazil (with a few exceptions). For that matter, users can't really rely on teh domain name suffixes for geographical info either: http://www.sem40.ru, for example, _should_ be in the FSU, but is really in Israel. But many other mirror lists _do_ provide a hint (for figuring out where the server is). This is what Cygwin should also require of any 'volunteer' who want to mirror Cygwin. Some indication of the bandwidth the mirror is capable of would be good too. Again, many other lists of mirrors on the Internet already do this. If you are on a network that is being subject to a denial of service, you'd see poor performance. There are all sorts of factors which can impact *your* download performance that have nothing to do with how well-connected the mirror site is. Yet all these problems you mention have not prevented other mirror lists from providing much more help to the user by providing geographical and connectivity information to the user when he is asked to select a mirror. Sourceforge, for example, provides the geographical location of the mirror, and provides a good spread in the list presented to the user. I forget which mirrors I saw that indicate bandwidth. So the fact that denial-of-service attacks are possible is not a good reason for failing to provide this help to the user. I can imagine some kind of system which tries to figure out connectivity by checking the output of traceroute or some similar utility but I doubt it would ever be useful. I think you are too doubtful. For that matter, if you think tracert won't do the trick, you could always do occasional sample downloads and remove from the list a site that consistently does poorly -- for geography is no excuse here: connectivity really is that good (nearly) worldwide now. I can connect from California to Siberia more easily than I can connect to most of those mirrors! The only hard part I see in implementing something like this is deciding the cutoff for 'poorly'. But I think once you see the statistics, you will find that this is not as hard as you fear. And you can always err on the side of being conservative: cut off only the worst 10%, for example, after a week of testing. Even that will be a big improvement over today's situation. I've never seen anything like this in any of the other projects which use mirrors. If you have a pointer to something that does this, however, please provide it. But you must have seen at least the geographical information listed by sourceforge. Even just that would be a huge improvement over setup.exe as it is today. And it is
Re: 30+ reasons why X-Win32 is Better than Cygwin/X
Let me see if I can wrap this up since this discussion is now 100% off-topic for this mailing list. http://cygwin.com/mirrors.html shows the geographic location for mirrors. It has been suggested, on multiple occasions, that this data should also be in setup.exe, i.e., the UI sucks. The main reason for the suckage is that we have very little programming support for it, so getting changes into the program is hard. We have a hard enough time just finding people to fix real bugs. However, if you would like to volunteer a patch for the program or if you'd like to offer suggestions, then the cygwin-apps mailing list is the place to do it. cgf
RE: 30+ reasons why X-Win32 is Better than Cygwin/X
On Fri, 11 Mar 2005, Ruth Ivimey-Cook wrote: 6 Display Number Setting Manual Automatic That would be nice: tell Cygwin start a server using the next available display, rather than have to pick a specific number. However, I can't say I've lost much sleep over it's lack. 9 Multiple XDMCP Sessions Manual Automatic XWin -broadcast is what you want *g* 12 Passing of Display Number to SSH Client Manual Automatic Ugh? What is this about. This just means that the DISPLAY variable is set when ssh integration starts. 13 Integrated SSH Client with GUI No Yes This is an xserver not a multi purpose tool. With OpenSSH and Fully agree. When I want an ssh client I'll pick one. I don't need cygwin/x or starnet to be a jack-of-all-trades. I guess we need a port of xdm to Cygwin. Perhaps the cygwin/KDE project will manage topoer kdm. However, I'm not sure why you would want this, really. xdm compiles but has a silly if (uid != 0) error(xdm must be run by root) check. If there is request for it I can disable this check. But then people should be aware that it's not a Terminal Service replacement. Win32 programs will not display over X11. bye ago -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.gotti.org ICQ: 126018723
Re: 30+ reasons why X-Win32 is Better than Cygwin/X
On Wed, Mar 09, 2005 at 06:30:35PM -0500, Christopher Faylor wrote: On Wed, Mar 09, 2005 at 04:19:18PM -0500, Joseph Miller wrote: I recently received a list entitled 30+ Reasons Why X-Win32 is Better than Cygwin/X. I don't know enough at the moment (though I am learning) about the Cygwin/X server to be able to understand some of the reasons. I have already created XWinLogon (http://www.calcmaster.net/visual-c++/xwinlogon/) and I am working to work on the Cygwin/X server so that all 30+ reasons will go away. Can someone please explain the following: Out of curiousity, where did you get this list? Was it something that you asked for or something that was sent to you without asking? For those who don't know, Harold Hunt (the former main developer for Cygwin/X) now works for the company who provides X-Win32. I used X-Win32 for many years (like three or four years) before switching to Cygwin-X. For my use there is little to choose between the two of them, I simply use the X-server to display my Linux desktop on my Win2k computer. The *main* reason for me switching from X-Win32 to Cygwin/X was simply cost. X-Win32 was originally very reasonably priced for a single user licence (around $50-$60 if I remember) but is now *way* more than that and upgrades are hardly cheap either. I think it will cost $100 a year or more now to keep it up to date. Cygwin/X is a bit more hassle to set up than X-Win32, it's not quite so 'smooth and professional' but it works as well and, for me anyway, the cut and paste between Win2k and Linux works better (maybe X-Win32 has caught up on this front).X-Win32 is Better than Of the commercial X servers X-Win32 was by far the best that I could find at around $100 or less when I first looked several years ago. -- Chris Green ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) Never ascribe to malice that which can be explained by incompetence.
Re: 30+ reasons why X-Win32 is Better than Cygwin/X
On Wed, 9 Mar 2005, Joseph Miller wrote: 3-D Hardware Acceleration for OpenGL - I am told that Cygwin/X supports this, but I use XWin_GL.exe. What do they mean by this? XWin_GL links to opengl32.dll from windows and uses hardware acceleration if the video driver support it. Many video drives shipped with windows do not have full OpenGL support eg for Nvidea you need the driver from their website to use hardware OpenGL. XWin.exe is linked to Mesa which renders OpenGL in software and is much slower. But the accelerated OpenGL support still has some issues. Some programs do not display anything or textures are broken and the OpenGL overlay does not integrate smoothly with normal X11 windows. GDI Acceleration of X Graphics Primitives - I'm assuming this is a direct translation of X drawing routines to Windows drawing routines? Like writing directly to the hDC? Yes. XWin currently uses a framebuffer where all rendering is done and draws the result into the window. For some operations this is slow. But I've not noticed any major speed problems in daily use. Compensation for Cable Modem NATs (IPsmar) - I will probably look this one up myself. If you're using a cable modem and want to run X on it you've already lost. From the security view this is as good as writing your creditcard number on your webpage. Use ssh in such cases. ssh will work even with NAT, most firewalls and it's secure! Last Session Terminate Support - how might this be implemented? Perhaps I could check all top-level window titles for Cygwin? Any recommendations? The X11 specifications include a session manager specification. In theory you could query the client for it's current state, store the state and restore it in the next session. Gnome and KDE already use it. You could check xsm and smproxy from the Xorg-x11 distribution. Anyone know how support for multiple users (Terminal Services) might be implemented? It is available in X11 for years now. xdm will provide the login and multiple users can connect to the xdm server simultaniously. XWin coresponds to the Terminal service viewer not the server. I expect that all of the GUI/multiuser stuff can be added within a couple months or so. I will also be working on remote sound support and enterprise level scalability. Good to hear the number of people working on Cygwin/X is rising. bye ago -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.gotti.org ICQ: 126018723
Re: 30+ reasons why X-Win32 is Better than Cygwin/X
On Wed, 9 Mar 2005, Joseph Miller wrote: Commenting the list: 30+ Reasons Why X-Win32 is Better than Cygwin/X # FeaturesCygwin/XX-Win32 1 3-D Hardware Acceleration for OpenGLNo Yes It is work in progress but it works for a lot of programs. 2 Graphical Configuration ToolNo Yes There are a lot of tools out there but they have not been integrated into the distribution because they all depend on commercial compilers and class libraries. 3 Professional Install Engine No InstallShield 4 Download Installation Time1-3 Hours 5-10 minutes This is just plain wrong. Cygwin/X installs with the cygwin setup and this is fast too. Xming does match these criterias as well. 5 Stability Medium High Quite unclear wording. I use Cygwin/X in my daily work and this proves it's stability. The multiwindow mode still has some issues but is very stable too. 6 Display Number Setting Manual Automatic 7 Copy PasteTextText Bitmaps 8 Per User Preference Savings No Yes This coresponds to the configuration tool. Any user may give different options on the commandline. You can create shortcuts with these options and can startup different configurations with on click. 9 Multiple XDMCP Sessions Manual Automatic Not sure what they mean with it. X-Win32 does connect automaticly to all XDMCP servers in the network? *g* 10 Corporate Tech Support No Yes 11 Corporate Bug Fix Support No Yes This corresponds to bucks to pay. Cygwin/X is free and you have a community which gives support. Critical bugs are usually fixed after few days. 12 Passing of Display Number to SSH Client Manual Automatic 13 Integrated SSH Client with GUI No Yes This is an xserver not a multi purpose tool. With OpenSSH and putty there are two great ssh implementations available which are easy to use with Cygwin/X. 14 Multiple Window Mode PerformanceSlowFast/Very Stable The stability can be improved. But the performance is good. 15 GDI Acceleration of X Graphics Primitives No Yes 16 Graphical Keymap Editing Tool No Yes Cygwin/X uses XKB. There are many tools for XKB support available which are not limited to only one xserver implementation 17 Desktop Shortcut FeatureNo Yes 18 Session Organizing (by Folder) No Yes 19 RGB Editing Tools No Yes Who needs it? 20 Session Wizard No Yes 21 Selection of Which Errors to LogCommand-LineGUI 22 Error Log Presentation Text File Only GUI and Text File 23 Compensation for Cable Modem NATs No Yes -- IPsmart Use SSH! 24 User Interface Language Support English Only6 Languages 25 Size45MB19MB Xming is 9MB. Additional 75dpi and 100dpi fonts are ~10MB per package 26 Session Specific Window Modes No Yes 27 Last Session Terminate Support No Yes 28 Pre-Configured xterms for Linux, UNIX No Yes What's this? Cygwin/X ships an xterm and cygwin has the termcap for it. Where is the need for configuring xterm for different unices? 29 Session Auto Start No Yes 30 Panning Support No Yes 31 Suport for Multiple Users (e.g. Terminal Services) No Yes Is Cygwin/X worth it's money? Definitly yes *g* bye ago -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.gotti.org ICQ: 126018723
Re: 30+ reasons why X-Win32 is Better than Cygwin/X
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Wednesday 09 March 2005 6:30 pm, Christopher Faylor wrote: On Wed, Mar 09, 2005 at 04:19:18PM -0500, Joseph Miller wrote: I recently received a list entitled 30+ Reasons Why X-Win32 is Better than Cygwin/X. I don't know enough at the moment (though I am learning) about the Cygwin/X server to be able to understand some of the reasons. I have already created XWinLogon (http://www.calcmaster.net/visual-c++/xwinlogon/) and I am working to work on the Cygwin/X server so that all 30+ reasons will go away. Can someone please explain the following: Out of curiousity, where did you get this list? Was it something that you asked for or something that was sent to you without asking? For those who don't know, Harold Hunt (the former main developer for Cygwin/X) now works for the company who provides X-Win32. cgf I received the list from Paul Swart, VP of Sales and Marketing for StarNet Communications. We both mentioned Harold in our emails and the contributions that he has made to the community. - -Joseph -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFCME5LmXZROF+EADURApgMAJ4jDjD3aqkGZrcf3FEEyCcpgfdIrgCghCJf lLsYBwlMSYbQ2r6shhrR6VY= =iuj9 -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: 30+ reasons why X-Win32 is Better than Cygwin/X
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 In case anyone is interested, I will be looking into solutions for remote sound support. I realize that this is not directly an Cygwin/X issue, but it would be something that I have not seen with any other packaged X server. If anyone has some suggestions or comments about this, please email me. I have already seen projects in place that appear to work towards remote sound support but have not been integrated into anything else. Now where was that project page. - -Joseph On Wednesday 09 March 2005 4:19 pm, Joseph Miller wrote: I recently received a list entitled 30+ Reasons Why X-Win32 is Better than Cygwin/X. I don't know enough at the moment (though I am learning) about the Cygwin/X server to be able to understand some of the reasons. I have already created XWinLogon (http://www.calcmaster.net/visual-c++/xwinlogon/) and I am working to work on the Cygwin/X server so that all 30+ reasons will go away. Can someone please explain the following: 3-D Hardware Acceleration for OpenGL - I am told that Cygwin/X supports this, but I use XWin_GL.exe. What do they mean by this? GDI Acceleration of X Graphics Primitives - I'm assuming this is a direct translation of X drawing routines to Windows drawing routines? Like writing directly to the hDC? Compensation for Cable Modem NATs (IPsmar) - I will probably look this one up myself. Last Session Terminate Support - how might this be implemented? Perhaps I could check all top-level window titles for Cygwin? Any recommendations? Anyone know how support for multiple users (Terminal Services) might be implemented? I am just sending these questions out there so that everyone can see what I will be working on that I don't already know. I understand that some of these are pretty easy to find out about, but if I could be pointed in the right direction, that would be great. I expect that all of the GUI/multiuser stuff can be added within a couple months or so. I will also be working on remote sound support and enterprise level scalability. For anyone who wants to see the full list of reasons, I have attached it in this email. I converted it from an XLS to text, so it looks kinda funny. The first column is a number, the second column is the name of the feature, the third column is what support Cygwin/X has for it and the fourth column is what support X-Win32 has for it. -Joseph Miller -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFCMFC6mXZROF+EADURAkZgAJ9mJGkhd/0VPd9b3L87AXHD9RUZHQCaA4bg 5pksiMvdN21jHALuOEuF5cI= =wtxn -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: 30+ reasons why X-Win32 is Better than Cygwin/X
On Thu, 10 Mar 2005, Joseph Miller wrote: In case anyone is interested, I will be looking into solutions for remote sound support. I realize that this is not directly an Cygwin/X issue, but it would be something that I have not seen with any other packaged X server. If anyone has some suggestions or comments about this, please email me. I have already seen projects in place that appear to work towards remote sound support but have not been integrated into anything else. Now where was that project page. esd may be interesting. The server is available for cygwin. But integration into xdmcp or ssh setups may be hard. bye ago -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.gotti.org ICQ: 126018723
Re: 30+ reasons why X-Win32 is Better than Cygwin/X
First question: is this _really_ on topic for the list? I would have thought not. --- Alexander Gottwald [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Wed, 9 Mar 2005, Joseph Miller wrote: Commenting the list: 30+ Reasons Why X-Win32 is Better than Cygwin/X # FeaturesCygwin/XX-Win32 1 3-D Hardware Acceleration for OpenGLNo Yes It is work in progress but it works for a lot of programs. That is not even relevant to 'reason' #1. 2 Graphical Configuration ToolNo Yes There are a lot of tools out there but they have not been integrated into the distribution because they all depend on commercial compilers and class libraries. Then 'reason' #2 stands. For they cannot be integrated, and so are not part of Cygwin/X. 3 Professional Install Engine No InstallShield 4 Download Installation Time1-3 Hours 5-10 minutes This is just plain wrong. Unfortunately, no, it is not that simple. Cygwin/X installs with the cygwin setup and this is fast too. Not always. Setup.exe presents a list of mirrors with no commentary and not even a _hint_ of which is closest to the user in the Web. I tried 5 or 6 different mirrors in that list before I could find one that was fast too. That is pretty poor performance. RedHat should not allow them to mirror Cygwin if the mirror will not provide faster response and better connectivity. Xming does match these criterias as well. 5 Stability Medium High Quite unclear wording. I use Cygwin/X in my daily work and this proves it's stability. You are right, it is unclear. But alas, not every user can report the same high stability you have experienced. The multiwindow mode still has some issues but is very stable too. 6 Display Number Setting Manual Automatic 7 Copy PasteTextText Bitmaps 8 Per User Preference Savings No Yes This coresponds to the configuration tool. Any user may give different options on the commandline. You can create shortcuts with these options and can startup different configurations with on click. 9 Multiple XDMCP Sessions Manual Automatic Not sure what they mean with it. X-Win32 does connect automaticly to all XDMCP servers in the network? *g* 10 Corporate Tech Support No Yes 11 Corporate Bug Fix Support No Yes [snip] Is Cygwin/X worth it's money? Definitly yes *g* No, NOT 'definitly [sic] yes'. It depends on how much your _time_ is worth. If your time is worth little to you, or you already _have_ much expertise with X, Cygwin and Cygwin/X, then yes, it is worth it. But if you cannot afford to lose the time grappling with installations that do different things on different machines, demanding you rebuild password files but then refusing to let you do it etc, or with community support that consists of answers so terse (and all too often rude) they are harder to understand than the original problem etc, then no, it is not worth it. But even in that case, it is better than paying money for software and support and then finding only the same problems, which has happened all too often also. __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Small Business - Try our new resources site! http://smallbusiness.yahoo.com/resources/
Re: 30+ reasons why X-Win32 is Better than Cygwin/X
On Thu, Mar 10, 2005 at 12:57:53PM -0800, Matthew Johnson wrote: First question: is this _really_ on topic for the list? I would have thought not. If someone is talking about implementing features, then sure. cgf
RE: 30+ reasons why X-Win32 is Better than Cygwin/X
In case anyone is interested, I will be looking into solutions for remote sound support. I realize that this is not directly an Cygwin/X issue, but it would be something that I have not seen with any other packaged X server. If anyone has some suggestions or comments about this, please email me. I would love remote sound support: my Linux server is the machine I normally connect to (using xdmcp) and it would be good to be able to transport sound to my local Win XP box. I would have thought the KDE artsd remote sound or, as suggested, esd, would be good places to start. Regards, Ruth
30+ reasons why X-Win32 is Better than Cygwin/X
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 I recently received a list entitled 30+ Reasons Why X-Win32 is Better than Cygwin/X. I don't know enough at the moment (though I am learning) about the Cygwin/X server to be able to understand some of the reasons. I have already created XWinLogon (http://www.calcmaster.net/visual-c++/xwinlogon/) and I am working to work on the Cygwin/X server so that all 30+ reasons will go away. Can someone please explain the following: 3-D Hardware Acceleration for OpenGL - I am told that Cygwin/X supports this, but I use XWin_GL.exe. What do they mean by this? GDI Acceleration of X Graphics Primitives - I'm assuming this is a direct translation of X drawing routines to Windows drawing routines? Like writing directly to the hDC? Compensation for Cable Modem NATs (IPsmar) - I will probably look this one up myself. Last Session Terminate Support - how might this be implemented? Perhaps I could check all top-level window titles for Cygwin? Any recommendations? Anyone know how support for multiple users (Terminal Services) might be implemented? I am just sending these questions out there so that everyone can see what I will be working on that I don't already know. I understand that some of these are pretty easy to find out about, but if I could be pointed in the right direction, that would be great. I expect that all of the GUI/multiuser stuff can be added within a couple months or so. I will also be working on remote sound support and enterprise level scalability. For anyone who wants to see the full list of reasons, I have attached it in this email. I converted it from an XLS to text, so it looks kinda funny. The first column is a number, the second column is the name of the feature, the third column is what support Cygwin/X has for it and the fourth column is what support X-Win32 has for it. - -Joseph Miller -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFCL2hZmXZROF+EADURAuH7AJ4sMWNkewmQnemWmFqT2AeKT7XMDwCfR5o+ 8V4iPv23+sO5iInWxC++BWM= =Pmtt -END PGP SIGNATURE- 30+ Reasons Why X-Win32 is Better than Cygwin/X # FeaturesCygwin/XX-Win32 1 3-D Hardware Acceleration for OpenGLNo Yes 2 Graphical Configuration ToolNo Yes 3 Professional Install Engine No InstallShield 4 Download Installation Time1-3 Hours 5-10 minutes 5 Stability Medium High 6 Display Number Setting Manual Automatic 7 Copy PasteTextText Bitmaps 8 Per User Preference Savings No Yes 9 Multiple XDMCP Sessions Manual Automatic 10 Corporate Tech Support No Yes 11 Corporate Bug Fix Support No Yes 12 Passing of Display Number to SSH Client Manual Automatic 13 Integrated SSH Client with GUI No Yes 14 Multiple Window Mode PerformanceSlowFast/Very Stable 15 GDI Acceleration of X Graphics Primitives No Yes 16 Graphical Keymap Editing Tool No Yes 17 Desktop Shortcut FeatureNo Yes 18 Session Organizing (by Folder) No Yes 19 RGB Editing Tools No Yes 20 Session Wizard No Yes 21 Selection of Which Errors to LogCommand-LineGUI 22 Error Log Presentation Text File Only GUI and Text File 23 Compensation for Cable Modem NATs No Yes -- IPsmart 24 User Interface Language Support English Only6 Languages 25 Size45MB19MB 26 Session Specific Window Modes No Yes 27 Last Session Terminate Support No Yes 28 Pre-Configured xterms for Linux, UNIX No Yes 29 Session Auto Start No Yes 30 Panning Support No Yes 31 Suport for Multiple Users (e.g. Terminal Services) No Yes At under $200, and with so many Productivity-Enhancing Features, X-Win32 is a Bargain !!!
Re: 30+ reasons why X-Win32 is Better than Cygwin/X
I know nothing about X other than it is a good tool for some of the things that I do. I do not know if the following is of interest or not. When the codebase was changed from Xfree86 to Xorg, the Mac-on-Linux video driver for Cygwin/X no longer worked. I have been using X-Deep/32 for X usage when I need to access my Mac since. I am not complaining, I love Cygwin and X other than this one nit. I just didn't know if mentioning this might help. Thanks for everything. Ken Joseph Miller wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 I recently received a list entitled 30+ Reasons Why X-Win32 is Better than Cygwin/X. I don't know enough at the moment (though I am learning) about the Cygwin/X server to be able to understand some of the reasons. I have already created XWinLogon (http://www.calcmaster.net/visual-c++/xwinlogon/) and I am working to work on the Cygwin/X server so that all 30+ reasons will go away. Can someone please explain the following: 3-D Hardware Acceleration for OpenGL - I am told that Cygwin/X supports this, but I use XWin_GL.exe. What do they mean by this? GDI Acceleration of X Graphics Primitives - I'm assuming this is a direct translation of X drawing routines to Windows drawing routines? Like writing directly to the hDC? Compensation for Cable Modem NATs (IPsmar) - I will probably look this one up myself. Last Session Terminate Support - how might this be implemented? Perhaps I could check all top-level window titles for Cygwin? Any recommendations? Anyone know how support for multiple users (Terminal Services) might be implemented? I am just sending these questions out there so that everyone can see what I will be working on that I don't already know. I understand that some of these are pretty easy to find out about, but if I could be pointed in the right direction, that would be great. I expect that all of the GUI/multiuser stuff can be added within a couple months or so. I will also be working on remote sound support and enterprise level scalability. For anyone who wants to see the full list of reasons, I have attached it in this email. I converted it from an XLS to text, so it looks kinda funny. The first column is a number, the second column is the name of the feature, the third column is what support Cygwin/X has for it and the fourth column is what support X-Win32 has for it. - -Joseph Miller -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFCL2hZmXZROF+EADURAuH7AJ4sMWNkewmQnemWmFqT2AeKT7XMDwCfR5o+ 8V4iPv23+sO5iInWxC++BWM= =Pmtt -END PGP SIGNATURE- 30+ Reasons Why X-Win32 is Better than Cygwin/X # Features Cygwin/X X-Win32 1 3-D Hardware Acceleration for OpenGL No Yes 2 Graphical Configuration Tool No Yes 3 Professional Install Engine No InstallShield 4 Download Installation Time 1-3 Hours 5-10 minutes 5 Stability Medium High 6 Display Number Setting Manual Automatic 7 Copy Paste Text Text Bitmaps 8 Per User Preference Savings No Yes 9 Multiple XDMCP Sessions Manual Automatic 10 Corporate Tech Support No Yes 11 Corporate Bug Fix Support No Yes 12 Passing of Display Number to SSH Client Manual Automatic 13 Integrated SSH Client with GUI No Yes 14 Multiple Window Mode Performance Slow Fast/Very Stable 15 GDI Acceleration of X Graphics Primitives No Yes 16 Graphical Keymap Editing Tool No Yes 17 Desktop Shortcut Feature No Yes 18 Session Organizing (by Folder) No Yes 19 RGB Editing Tools No Yes 20 Session Wizard No Yes 21 Selection of Which Errors to Log Command-Line GUI 22 Error Log Presentation Text File Only GUI and Text File 23 Compensation for Cable Modem NATs No Yes -- IPsmart 24 User Interface Language Support English Only 6 Languages 25 Size 45MB 19MB 26 Session Specific Window Modes No Yes 27 Last Session Terminate Support No Yes 28 Pre-Configured xterms for Linux, UNIX No Yes 29 Session Auto Start No Yes 30 Panning Support No Yes 31 Suport for Multiple Users (e.g. Terminal Services) No Yes At under $200, and with so many Productivity-Enhancing Features, X-Win32 is a Bargain !!!
Re: 30+ reasons why X-Win32 is Better than Cygwin/X
On Wed, Mar 09, 2005 at 04:19:18PM -0500, Joseph Miller wrote: I recently received a list entitled 30+ Reasons Why X-Win32 is Better than Cygwin/X. I don't know enough at the moment (though I am learning) about the Cygwin/X server to be able to understand some of the reasons. I have already created XWinLogon (http://www.calcmaster.net/visual-c++/xwinlogon/) and I am working to work on the Cygwin/X server so that all 30+ reasons will go away. Can someone please explain the following: Out of curiousity, where did you get this list? Was it something that you asked for or something that was sent to you without asking? For those who don't know, Harold Hunt (the former main developer for Cygwin/X) now works for the company who provides X-Win32. cgf
