On Wednesday 24 May 2006 15:46, Fabian M. Schindler wrote: > Here come my two cents: > > Humm... You make some good points, however, I agree that Xgl should be > > near the bottom of the priority list until Titanium. My goals for > > contributing to yoper is to get a stable working distro first. By my > > current observations, the system itself is not very stable. > > Agreed, stability is a priority for an OS. > > > What good is eyecandy without a stable system? Just > > re-wrapping a live distro and adding some eyecandy does not provide a > > good foundation for the future of Yoper. > > Agreed. And with regard to this argument: > > > 1.) Yoper's aim is to be the best looking distro. How can you claim > > > that if you do not have Xgl? > > I need to say that XGL might be some nice eye-candy, but XGL itself does > not give you a good looking distro. Take a look at e.g. OSX. It does not > have XGL, yet it looks very polished. XGL can even reduce the > functionality of a desktop! Furthermore, if XGL is included by default, > less and less users will be able to use Yoper at all as it will require > even better hardware that many people refuse to buy. Yoper would take > the route of Windows with its ista release. Vista doesn't work on your > system? Buy better hardware! No, this path will only add more > frustration than a fan following if you ask me. Thus, XGL should imho > only be an extra option, but never (!) part of a default installation. > > Cheers, > Fabian > Got to agree. Xgl would slow down the system - especially for less powerful machines - requiring lots of ram purely for effects. I tend to use Fluxbox or a cutdown KDE etc to permit maximum power for computing, not to run eye candy. I agree it should be available if possible as an extra from the repository, but not part of the default install.
Mark _______________________________________________ yoper-dev mailing list [email protected] https://morpheus.pingos.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/yoper-dev
