Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 2nd Jun 2009 17:15 UTC, submitted by lemur2
X11, Window Managers FSM has an article about improvements coming our way in X.org. "There's more coming our way than 'mere' graphical goodness: Xorg developers are about to unleash upon us more performance and ease of use than X ever knew before. Not only that, the work being done now will allow older hardware to perform better and new hardware to be supported faster."
Thread beginning with comment 366686
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
a fun read.
by renhoek on Tue 2nd Jun 2009 21:23 UTC
renhoek
Member since:
2007-04-29

From the unix haters handbook : http://www.art.net/~hopkins/Don/unix-haters/x-windows/disaster.html

I do not have a lot X experience, but i always got the feeling X was far too low level and too network oriented. Almost nobody does the remote display as primary method of running programs. Anyway, it seems to work quite fine nowadays, although some redesigning might not be a bad idea.

Whow! xorg.conf is gone! Thank god! The horrors i had with that file. Maybe there is hope afterall.

Reply Score: 1

RE: a fun read.
by phoenix on Tue 2nd Jun 2009 22:03 in reply to "a fun read."
phoenix Member since:
2005-07-11

From the unix haters handbook : http://www.art.net/~hopkins/Don/unix-haters/x-windows/disaster.html

I do not have a lot X experience, but i always got the feeling X was far too low level and too network oriented. Almost nobody does the remote display as primary method of running programs.


We had ~40 elementary school labs running networked X systems (thin-client setup).

We've since moved over to a diskless client setup (graphics run locally), but we still use networked X to run the occasional software that won't run on the 800 MHz Via CPUs/OpenChrome GPU.

We also provide NX access to our ~15,000 students, to allow them to login to their Linux accounts from home. This uses the network X features behind the scenes.

We also use the network X features to manage our VMWare servers (ssh to server, run vmware, console appears on your local screen).

Just because Joe Bozo may not use the networking features on his single home Unix computer doesn't mean that enterprise, small businesses, school districts, and such aren't using it.

Reply Parent Score: 13

RE[2]: a fun read.
by ggeldenhuys on Wed 3rd Jun 2009 10:27 in reply to "RE: a fun read."
ggeldenhuys Member since:
2006-11-13

Just because Joe Bozo may not use the networking features on his single home Unix computer doesn't mean that enterprise, small businesses, school districts, and such aren't using it.

I can't agree more. I'm primarily an application developer. My own system is a 32bit system. I often ssh to our 64bit development server and run our X11 based IDE their which then displays on my local screen. I then do development work as normal. It's as if my own system is a 64bit server. Awesome!

So yes, I use remote features in X11 often!

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[2]: a fun read.
by werpu on Fri 5th Jun 2009 13:25 in reply to "RE: a fun read."
werpu Member since:
2006-01-18

One of the main problems is that the x network protocol itself is in its drawing routines very low level, a lot of clients with complex uis can bog down a network significantly. Sure there is help with compressors and protocol mappers but none of those is really standard.
The funny thing is that X is more advanced than other remote protocols in its possibilities but it shows its age in real world useage significantly!
And I agree 99% of all users do not use the remote capabilities but complexity has increased tenfold because of the 1% who need that functionality. I just ask myself often if an approach like rdp to just make hooks were remote functionality can be hooked in is not the better approach!

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE: a fun read.
by 3rdalbum on Wed 3rd Jun 2009 01:41 in reply to "a fun read."
3rdalbum Member since:
2008-05-26

I do not have a lot X experience, but i always got the feeling X was far too low level and too network oriented. Almost nobody does the remote display as primary method of running programs.


It is RIDICULOUSLY useful on home servers; you can access GUI configuration tools running on a headless server. If forwarded X can save 100 people from having to learn how to manually edit their smb.conf, then it's worth it! :-D

Whow! xorg.conf is gone! Thank god! The horrors i had with that file. Maybe there is hope afterall.


Just as long as there's a good way to manually pass settings to Xorg. For the past year or so, X has been able to come up without an xorg.conf anyway.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE: a fun read.
by Doc Pain on Wed 3rd Jun 2009 17:27 in reply to "a fun read."
Doc Pain Member since:
2006-10-08

Whow! xorg.conf is gone! Thank god! The horrors i had with that file. Maybe there is hope afterall.


As long as the autodetection works properly, a fine situation. BUT in many settings, usually such involving hardware that's not up to date, it can be required to make settings through xorg.conf in order to get a working system.

My home system is such a case. Autodetection leads to completely stupid screen width and height (it's a 21" Eizo CRT). In older XFree86, everything worked fine, but X.org required some additional settings. The xorg.conf file was the only reason I got a running X again.

With the rise of HAL and DBUS, xorg.conf has furthermore lost the control over things like keyboard language settings (X-wide, not just regarding KDE or Gnome).

The great deal of not having to use xorg.conf is its use on live system CDs or bootable USB drives. It's not needed anymore to run detection means across the graphics hardware in order to compose a xorg.conf file.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE: a fun read.
by tobyv on Sat 6th Jun 2009 23:22 in reply to "a fun read."
tobyv Member since:
2008-08-25

X-Windows is the Iran-Contra of graphical user interfaces: a tragedy of political compromises, entangled alliances, marketing hype, and just plain greed. X-Windows is to memory as Ronald Reagan was to money.

Good Grief! Iran-Contra and Reagan jokes? This book has dated poorly.

Reply Parent Score: 1