Linked by David Adams on Thu 29th Sep 2011 23:47 UTC, submitted by lucas_maximus
Linux Linux is struggling on the desktop because it only has a small number of "great" apps, according to the Gnome co-creator. Miguel de Icaza, co-creator of the Gnome desktop, told tech journalist Tim Anderson at the recent Windows 8 Build conference "When you count how many great desktop apps there are on Linux, you can probably name 10," de Icaza said, according to a post on Anderson's IT Writing blog. "You work really hard, you can probably name 20. We've managed to p*** off developers every step of the way, breaking APIs all the time."
Thread beginning with comment 491425
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[5]: Misleading article title
by JAlexoid on Fri 30th Sep 2011 14:39 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Misleading article title"
JAlexoid
Member since:
2009-05-19

Well... Lack of Games just shows that the only party interested in PC gaming was Microsoft. OpenGL was really stuck in 1990-ies for far too long, due to all those squabbles in the community.
Granted, it's not actually FOSS community's fault, but lack of interest in the matter has always been "strange" for me. Only with emergence of mobile OpenGL we start seeing some interest in 3D graphics that don't rely on D3D. Not to mention that current Linux graphics stack is a total resource hog*.

* - If you disagree, then tell me why my powerful desktop box with latest nVidia drivers(which are quite good on Linux) uses 2x more CPU to project any video onto the screen, than Windows(anything post XP) installed on an Atom N270?

PS: I'm on Ubutnu for 4 years now and quite literally hate Win7 and that mess that is it's UI.

Reply Parent Score: 2

jabbotts Member since:
2007-09-06

Wasn't the issue with GL that it started under proprietary development stagnated by it's parent company allowing DirectX to replace it and dominate game development?

Reply Parent Score: 3

JAlexoid Member since:
2009-05-19

Wasn't my point... My point was that no-one cared about it enough to offer a competing open-source thing.

Reply Parent Score: 2

dnebdal Member since:
2008-08-27


Not to mention that current Linux graphics stack is a total resource hog*.

* - If you disagree, then tell me why my powerful desktop box with latest nVidia drivers(which are quite good on Linux) uses 2x more CPU to project any video onto the screen, than Windows(anything post XP) installed on an Atom N270?


It could be that the windows side does more on the GPU than the Linux side? The hogginess of the display layer isn't the most important factor if the Windows side does more of the actual video decoding on the GPU.

Reply Parent Score: 1

JAlexoid Member since:
2009-05-19

If I were stupid, I would have tested it with an accelerated video format. But since I'm not, I tested with universally unaccelerated WebM.
Why does it take 20% of a CPU core to project a video stream in X? It's not the constant % of CPU X uses, but the jump while playing video...
On Atom N270 with GMA950 anything in 720p and up is not even worth trying in Linux, while Windows manages to play 720p files, without any acceleration.

PS: Windows XP does not do it's graphics on the GPU. And I tested with Win7 and WinXP.

Reply Parent Score: 2