Linked by Hadrien Grasland on Sat 15th Jan 2011 18:02 UTC
Graphics, User Interfaces As an answer to someone asking whether Unity will require a working OpenGL stack to operate in Ubuntu 11.04 "Natty Narwhal", Mark Shuttleworth announced that Canonical would offer an optional, QT-based, "2D" implementation of Unity. Here is a video, too.
Thread beginning with comment 458200
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Wow
by Roguelazer on Sat 15th Jan 2011 18:20 UTC
Roguelazer
Member since:
2005-06-29

It's exactly as unattractive as the 3D version. And it'll have the bonus of pulling QT into RAM for a primarily GTK-based application-set, so future Ubuntu users will get to enjoy default memory bloat regardless of whether they have 3D support or not.

Cool.

Reply Score: 0

RE: Wow
by Neolander on Sat 15th Jan 2011 18:23 in reply to "Wow"
Neolander Member since:
2010-03-08

It's exactly as unattractive as the 3D version. And it'll have the bonus of pulling QT into RAM for a primarily GTK-based application-set, so future Ubuntu users will get to enjoy default memory bloat regardless of whether they have 3D support or not.

No, those who have 3D support won't bother using this and will be using Unity 3D instead without even knowing that Unity 2D is there.

Edited 2011-01-15 18:24 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: Wow
by cdude on Sun 16th Jan 2011 16:20 in reply to "RE: Wow"
cdude Member since:
2008-09-21

Well, the 2D is already way faster. Also 2D does profit from 3D thansk to QML and QGraphicsview plus QML allows way greater customizing. The only thing missing in 2D are the compiz-like 3D-effects but then you can still add compiz on top of the 2D unity or maybe even switch the WM to e.g. KWin. Such a combination would rock the house.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE: Wow
by cdude on Sun 16th Jan 2011 15:43 in reply to "Wow"
cdude Member since:
2008-09-21

First I am actually using only a very small number of GTK-based applications.
Second even if not those additional 100kb are so important for you cause of.......?

Reply Parent Score: 1