Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sat 15th Aug 2009 17:55 UTC
X11, Window Managers Over the past couple of months, and especially over the past couple of weeks, I've been working very hard to write and complete my thesis. I performed all the work on Windows 7, but now that the thesis is finally done, submitted, and accepted, I installed Ubuntu - and immediately I was reminded of why I do not do any serious work on Linux: the train wreck that is X.org.
Thread beginning with comment 378825
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[3]: The best thing
by samad on Sun 16th Aug 2009 13:58 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: The best thing"
samad
Member since:
2006-03-31

I don't know how Vista/Win7 works, but Quartz in Mac OS X is nothing like X.org. It does NOT adopt a client/server paradigm the same way X does.

X requires clients to send simple, 80's-style graphics commands. Quartz has taken an approach more evolved, where applications send it PDF commands that are automatically antialiased and are resolution independent.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[4]: The best thing
by werpu on Sun 16th Aug 2009 17:34 in reply to "RE[3]: The best thing"
werpu Member since:
2006-01-18

I don't know how Vista/Win7 works, but Quartz in Mac OS X is nothing like X.org. It does NOT adopt a client/server paradigm the same way X does.

X requires clients to send simple, 80's-style graphics commands. Quartz has taken an approach more evolved, where applications send it PDF commands that are automatically antialiased and are resolution independent.

It used to do, NeXT still had display postscript and I am not sure if the Apple remote desktop in their server edition still uses it. The normal desktop uses just VNC for remote connection.

Anyway as for Xs remote capabilites RDP nowdays runs circles around X and rdp originated from a framebuffer protocol. The reason for this is that the network primitives of X do not scale well they easily can clog up your network connection if you run a modern desktop, you can add various non standard compression schemes to it but in the end there is no real standard to do this.
I personally think this is a joke in itself. One of the reasons of the complexity of X is that it is network enabled by default, but it scales worse than all other remote desktop protocols which do it in a simpler way on modern user interfaces.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[4]: The best thing
by zlynx on Sun 16th Aug 2009 22:20 in reply to "RE[3]: The best thing"
zlynx Member since:
2005-07-20

If you don't like calling it a graphics server with clients, then how would you like to describe it?

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[5]: The best thing
by samad on Mon 17th Aug 2009 08:45 in reply to "RE[4]: The best thing"
samad Member since:
2006-03-31

Quartz by itself does not have the capability to run client applications over a network socket. X does.

Edited 2009-08-17 08:46 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2