Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sat 19th Aug 2006 22:32 UTC
X11, Window Managers "In the last few months, there has been a lot of talk about Xgl, compiz, AIGLX et cetera. It seems that 'Xgl' has become a synonym for fancy desktop on Linux - but no one seems to talk about the alternatives or how it all works. I have had a little look into this and am going to summarize it for y'all. I will explain where the following come from and how they work: Xglx, Xegl, Luminocity, and AIGLX."
Thread beginning with comment 154206
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: MacOS X and Vista
by Oliver on Sun 20th Aug 2006 15:06 UTC in reply to "MacOS X and Vista"
Oliver
Member since:
2006-07-15

If this is all, nonone really wonders why Microsoft is that triumphant. And noone really wonders why Apple can sell a parody of a Unix system, with a little bit of eyecandy and highpriced design. Most of the glorious MacOS X depends on opensource. So be quiet, if your are not able to part fiction from reality. A small hint, OpenStep - the foundation of the Apple display system, is based on ideas from Apple and Sun! Complete userland in MacOS is from GNU and FreeBSD, part of the kernel too. KHTML is the html render engine for Safari and so on.

Just my x cents, for people not able doing their homework.

Reply Parent Score: 5

RE[2]: MacOS X and Vista
by muratmat on Sun 20th Aug 2006 15:21 in reply to "RE: MacOS X and Vista"
muratmat Member since:
2005-08-04

So why Apple can close the work and produce something tens light years forward respect to the opensource counterpart?
If the base is the same...could it be due to the model itself?
These are the "big" questions.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[3]: MacOS X and Vista
by sbergman27 on Sun 20th Aug 2006 15:31 in reply to "RE[2]: MacOS X and Vista"
sbergman27 Member since:
2005-07-24

Not to take your side on this, but it is worth noting that OSS's current most viable solution, the one that arrived first, was created Cathedral style like Apple's was.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[3]: MacOS X and Vista
by thebluesgnr on Sun 20th Aug 2006 18:36 in reply to "RE[2]: MacOS X and Vista"
thebluesgnr Member since:
2005-11-14

So why Apple can close the work and produce something tens light years forward respect to the opensource counterpart?

Fist of all, Mac OS X is not "tens light years forward" compared to free operating systems. You're limiting your view to the desktop, I'd like to see you compare GNU/Linux and Mac OS X server on a server.

I'm not saying Mac OS X is way ahead in the desktop either. It's better in many areas, and worst in others. The sum depends on the user; that doesn't equal light years ahead in my book. The editor of this very site decided not to buy a Mac to use SLED 10 instead.

But to address your concern that the open source model doesn't work; please keep in mind that Apple had a huge head start. They bought Mac OS X in 1997, and it was already a complete operating system in 1989. The GNOME desktop used in SLED 10 that I mentioned above started from scratch in 1997.

Reply Parent Score: 2