Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 2nd Mar 2006 12:58 UTC, submitted by Rahul
X11, Window Managers The cooperation between the XGL and AIGLX projects to bring better interfaces for the Linux desktop continues as David Reveman (Novell) of XGL has agreed to adopt many changes from the AIGLX project sent in by Kristian Hogsberg (Red Hat).
Thread beginning with comment 100836
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[3]: Too little too late
by segedunum on Thu 2nd Mar 2006 22:08 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Too little too late"
segedunum
Member since:
2005-07-06

GDI+ uses hardware acceleration for many things, so yeah, I'd say that Linux is behind it currently as well.

Errr, anything using OpenGL can be hardware accelerated on a Linux system. Hardware acceleration is transparent to GDI and applications using OpenGL.

Vista is something like 8-9 months away from shipping, and is already feature-complete. The betas that have been released so far are quite usable, just buggy.

Whether you like it or not, Linux *is* currently behind, and will be behind for the next while.


Windows Vista is Windows XP with a 3D desktop that will require some pretty hefty 3D hardware, and I know, because we have MSDN subscriptions and we get the releases. The only other thing it seems to have is some multimedia stuff, and the interface is obviously as a result of a great deal of soul searching within Microsoft as they wish for something that Apple has and they haven't got - style.

Goodness knows what it will consume when people use the full 3D, hardware accelerated desktop and then run a full 3D game on top of it. There is absolutely nothing that is revolutionary or different about it from a usability or functionality point of view. It's the same old update to Windows, and when it gets released people will say "Oh right" and then carry on with what they were doing before, just like they did with Windows XP and just like they did with Windows 2000 when that was promised as an uber advanced OS for the next ten years.

I'd actually say that Linux is going to end up being ahead, because the approach of XGL and AIGLX is to be able to use compositing in an efficient manner so you won't need full hardware acceleration for everything.

Windows Me

"Windows Me: PC Health Features Keep PCs Stable, Secure and Reliable -- and Take the Frustration Out of Computing for Home Users"

http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/features/2000/sept00/09-05winme....

Windows 2000

"Our primary goal is to improve security and safety for all our customers -- consumers and businesses, regardless of size -- through a balance of technology innovation, guidance and industry leadership," Gates said. "We're committed to continued innovation that addresses the threats of today and anticipates those that will undoubtedly emerge in the future."

http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/press/2005/feb05/02-15RSA05Keyno...

Windows XP

"Windows XP is the most secure and dependable operating system we have ever produced."

http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/press/2002/aug02/08-30WinXPSP1PR...

Windows Vista

"In Vista, it should be much more difficult for unauthorized programs (like Viruses and Trojans) to affect the core of the OS and secretly harm your system."

http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,1697,1931914,00.asp

If you're lucky, all of the stuff in there may work by the next version of Windows.

Reply Parent Score: 5

RE[4]: Too little too late
by aanund on Thu 2nd Mar 2006 22:35 in reply to "RE[3]: Too little too late"
aanund Member since:
2005-09-30

I enjoy Linux just as much as the next guy, but honestly...

Vista is out, I have it on one of my computers, albeit it is a "beta" release.

XGL (and the like) is also out, I have it on one of my other computers, and just like Vista, it is a beta release.

I would like someone to step forward and make the claim that XGL (and the like) are stable and/or "finished", and I will easily point out an idiot.

Reply Parent Score: 0

RE[5]: Too little too late
by archiesteel on Thu 2nd Mar 2006 23:14 in reply to "RE[4]: Too little too late"
archiesteel Member since:
2005-07-02

I would like someone to step forward and make the claim that XGL (and the like) are stable and/or "finished"

Finished? No. Stable? Quite, but of course YMMV.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[4]: Too little too late
by Tom K on Thu 2nd Mar 2006 22:59 in reply to "RE[3]: Too little too late"
Tom K Member since:
2005-07-06

Please.

Will you people drop the "hefty requirements" argument already? Refuting it is getting to be too painful to bear.

Reply Parent Score: 0

RE[5]: Too little too late
by archiesteel on Thu 2nd Mar 2006 23:16 in reply to "RE[4]: Too little too late"
archiesteel Member since:
2005-07-02

Heftier than XGL/AIGLX, it seems.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[5]: Too little too late
by segedunum on Fri 3rd Mar 2006 15:31 in reply to "RE[4]: Too little too late"
segedunum Member since:
2005-07-06

Will you people drop the "hefty requirements" argument already? Refuting it is getting to be too painful to bear.

I'm sure we could all run Windows XP on 128 MB of RAM, but of course, no one does. Why? Because getting the OS up and running is one thing, but getting it up and running, installing software and using it on a regular basis is something entirely different.

Reply Parent Score: 2