Linked by Eugenia Loli on Mon 17th Mar 2003 22:49 UTC
Graphics, User Interfaces So many operating systems and so many graphical desktop environments... This article is a comparison of the UI and usability of several Desktop Environments (DEs), that have been widely used, admired and reviled: Windows XP Luna, BeOS 6 (Dano/Zeta), Mac OS X Aqua and Unix's KDE and Gnome. Read on which one got our best score on our long term test and usage.
Permalink for comment
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: gnome is b*tt ugly - Remote X is just slow
by Janne on Tue 18th Mar 2003 17:39 UTC

"XP's RDP can play VCD (mpeg1 video) over a network and run MacOS emulation with a decent frame rate - doing similar things in X is either impossible or with an unusable performance."

X can do that too. In fact, there is a video-playback-software designed perticularly for client-server operations (www.videolan.org)

"if X, or XFree86's impl. of X is fast, why there is the need for the linux kernel patch to improve UI responsiveness???"

If changes can be made to improve desktop-experience, why shouldn't that be done? People have happily used X on desktops for years, and now the Linux hackers just thought that "Hey, if we did this, we could make their experience even better", so they did it. The responsivness-thingy isn't due to X, but due to Linux-kernel. FreeBSD has coped better on that regard. Kernel-hackers just fixed that thing, that's all. So far, Linux kernel has handled the desktop OK. 2.6 will handle the desktop really, really well.

To my knowledge, XAA (X Acceleration Architecture) has been benchmarked to be fast, even faster than equivalent systems on Windows.

I have used remote X on a LAN without any problems. People have used remote X back when networks were alot slower than they are today. If I'm short on bandwidth, I would use something like TightVNC