Linked by Kroc Camen on Mon 24th Aug 2009 13:09 UTC
Linux user Tess Flynn joins us to follow up on the feedback from last week's episode about Xorg.
Thread beginning with comment 380380
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[7]: I want to hear more on XOrg future
by jabjoe on Mon 24th Aug 2009 20:15
in reply to "RE[6]: I want to hear more on XOrg future"
News
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/22/13 22:23 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/22/13 13:38 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/22/13 13:30 UTC, submitted by JRepin
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 22:06 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 21:45 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 15:53 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/20/13 22:43 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/20/13 21:50 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/19/13 23:15 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/19/13 23:11 UTC, submitted by Drumhellar
More News »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2007-07-20
Probably the impressions Xorg is decrepit is Xlib, which IS kindof old and crusty.
It was funny because I was doing some blender/Xlib stuff (blender uses Xlib directly, no qt/sdl/gtk).
And I asked the guys in #Xorg if Xlib was a low level lib that was really powerful, in a similar way to how some low level languages can be fast.
And they are like "No, its just verbose and crap"
- so it doesn't seem like theres much benefit from Xlib, aside from your apps being able to run over a network.