"I've written a lengthy article covering what I learned during the last two years building the Xegl display server. Topics include the current X server, framebuffer, Xgl, graphics drivers, multiuser support, using the GPU, and a new display server design. Hopefully it will help you fill in the pieces and build an overall picture of the graphics landscape."
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:Yes, you are missing something. GTK+ and Qt are _not_ moving in the direction of sidestepping X completely.
Owen Taylor on GTK+: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/xorg/2005-August/009356.html
Lars Knoll on QT:
http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/xorg/2005-August/009362.html
The mailing lists archives are open to everyone, especially those who open their mouths without knowing what they talk about (sheesh!). And if you're really interested, subscribe and lurk around for a while. Most comments on OSNews regarding X.org (and X in general) get to be pretty funny if you do.
Member since:2005-07-06
I don't see that the incremental people have won. Actually, from the look of it, it is the other way around. XEGL and XGL are about accelerating X apps. THIS is the incremental approach (am I wrong about this?).
EXA is the incremental approach. XEGL is about switching the core API to OpenGL and providing compatibility. EXA is about incrementally extending the X server API to encompass more features of the 3D hardware.
Member since:
I don't see that the incremental people have won. Actually, from the look of it, it is the other way around. XEGL and XGL are about accelerating X apps. THIS is the incremental approach (am I wrong about this?).
GTK+ (Gnome) and KDE (Qt) apps are moving in the direction of sidestepping X completely. GTK+ will use Cairo and KDE will use Arthur, both of which render using X. However, they can also render directly to glitz/OpenGL (with hardware acceleration, without X).
Apps written directly to X will be supported with a rootless X server rendering to bitmaps (as with OSX and Cygwin) which are then rendered to the screen by a OpenGL window manager as textures. These X apps won't see any real hardware acceleration since they are rendering to bitmaps, but this is the legacy path.
A new networked "X-ish" protocol would certainly be nice for the future, but I don't necessarily see it as important for having an eye-candy heavy accelerated desktop.
The main conclusion I get is that there are currently a lot of projects out there with conflicting goals that don't really fit well together. Somebody (X.org) needs to try to work out a roadmap and get everyone working in the same direction (hopefully through consensus building).
Am I missing something here?