Linked by Kroc Camen on Thu 1st Oct 2009 21:02 UTC
We reported earlier on a blog post entitled "Ubuntu Report Card (2009)" where the author detailed how they felt the Ubuntu experience had improved over the years. In a follow-up series of articles looking at the future, Tanner Helland has written 10 different broadly-scoped feature requests that [he] 'and many others would like to see by the time Ubuntu 10.10 rolls around'.
Permalink for comment 387372
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
What use is a network transparent design that doesn't get used? Even on Linux today most people use VNC, RDP, Citrix to access remote resources because they don't really require any special command line options to get them to work. There are real issues with X, performance is one of the top complaints against it. The real problem with X is that it wasn;t designed with real desktop use in mind, instead its getting retrofitted for that purpose and it shows. IMO, it probably would have been easier to start something new and there have been plenty of opportunities for this to happen but we keep chinking away at the same old codebase in hopes of making it work properly. Why, because of compatibility which is something we constantly berate MS for doing with windows. X is no different. X itself is the least forward thinking part of Linux.
Like I said before, once the drivers are removed from X and put in the kernel where they belong then it would be much easier to replace X altogether if that is what the community chooses to do (and I hope they do). There are alternatives in the sideline waiting to take its place. Wayland is a great candidate, imo.
Member since:
2007-02-17
What use is a network transparent design that doesn't get used? Even on Linux today most people use VNC, RDP, Citrix to access remote resources because they don't really require any special command line options to get them to work. There are real issues with X, performance is one of the top complaints against it. The real problem with X is that it wasn;t designed with real desktop use in mind, instead its getting retrofitted for that purpose and it shows. IMO, it probably would have been easier to start something new and there have been plenty of opportunities for this to happen but we keep chinking away at the same old codebase in hopes of making it work properly. Why, because of compatibility which is something we constantly berate MS for doing with windows. X is no different. X itself is the least forward thinking part of Linux.
Like I said before, once the drivers are removed from X and put in the kernel where they belong then it would be much easier to replace X altogether if that is what the community chooses to do (and I hope they do). There are alternatives in the sideline waiting to take its place. Wayland is a great candidate, imo.