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 100916
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[4]: Too little too late
by sbergman27 on Fri 3rd Mar 2006 00:57 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Too little too late"
Member since:

> So many Linux folks continue to ignore this reality.


I hope you believe me when I say that I am sincerely baffled when I hear people say this.

I use Linux/X on my own desktop. My machine is pretty respectable and the card is a pretty nice AGP card. So it's not surprising that I find my own desktop to be pretty snappy.

However, my major business is supporting clients running Linux terminals running off of Linux desktop servers via XDMCP sessions over 100mbit ethernet and over WAN connections using the Nomachine NX protocol.

The remote clients are usually configured to use the vesa driver for a number of reasons. (My custom CentOS kickstart CD set uses very conservative settings for maximum compatibility, since I want my clients to be able to install on new workstations without my help.)

At any rate, with the vesa driver there is no hardware acceleration for 2d, let alone 3d. A number of the Linux boxes I have out there are converted win98 machines with 64mb RAM and whatever crufty old video chipset that came installed in them. Others are new machines.

We run Gnome desktops from a CentOS 4.2 server.

And screen update performance has simply never been an issue. In fact, the only comments that I have gotten from users wrt performance regard how much *faster* they are after the conversion. (This is not a gui issue, but a result of the server being faster than their machine.) I would consider this a worst case scenario for X.

On the remote boxes, I can tell that I am not running on the server console. But I would hardly say that there is any usablility problem.

It is simply not an issue for me and my customers.

I've come to the conclusion that people must mean that with X you can sometimes notice that something was not absolutely instant.

All I care about is that everyone has usable desktops. "Improve screen update performance" is item 137 on my todo list. Why do people nitpick so?

Is there some combination of hardware and software out there in which X responsiveness is a significant problem that I have simply never run across? I'd have thought that the vesa driver on an old machine via remote XDMCP would be about as bad as it could get.

Reply Parent Score: 4