Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 20th Dec 2005 13:03 UTC, submitted by zam001
X11, Window Managers Aaron Siego of KDE: "It would be very nice if our X server could use OpenGL directly for its display and composition. Because then we could have hardware accelerated effects that are not only cool looking, but also very useful. Well, there is just such a project underway, called XGL. But don't hold your breath. The development of XGL has been largely removed from the community and is being done behind closed doors. Who is this company, you ask, that would take the development of something as potentially important as this out of the community and put it behind closed doors? Novell."
Thread beginning with comment 76053
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Don't know...
by fooo on Tue 20th Dec 2005 16:02 UTC
fooo
Member since:
2005-09-21

I don't know how to take this. It does seem a little off. Yes it is better than nothing I guess but it doesn't seem like good OSS ediquete either.

It makes me wonder about their motives. Open is good because it allows you to have oversight and understanding. If they are keeping it closed my real questions isn't about the lack of being able to test it (that would be nice) but about their motives. Why why why? Makes me suspicious.

You put that next to:

a) their track record as a big nasty evil company
b) their use of Mono which is known to have some very dangerous licensing associated with it

and you get a company that I am really starting to distrust as a linux/gnome user.

PS - anyone who feels like arguing the Mono thing (aka ass holes who scream "FUD!!!" as soon as someone says something they don't like. are they being paid by MS?) just google around for old posts of mine or Seth Nickels very well written blog on this subject.

Reply Score: 0

You need to explain...
by on Tue 20th Dec 2005 17:34 in reply to "Don't know..."
Member since:

What are you talking about?

"a) their track record as a big nasty evil company"

I don't know what this is about. I've not had that image of Novell. Microsoft, yes. SCO...well, little nasty evil company, not big. Oracle, in some ways. IBM, much improved, but not perfect. Novell? They've become a great example of what we *would* like to see from a large player in the industry. Not sure what your beef is.

"b) their use of Mono which is known to have some very dangerous licensing associated with it"

You don't have to use Mono if you don't want to. Personally, I won't ever use anything associated with .Net. At the same time, you're probably one of those who whine against Sun for not fully open-sourcing Java, even though there are OSS JVMs available. I don't know what the Mono licensing is, not having looked at it, but I'd suspect it is the way it is because of legal necessity - that's what happens when you reverse-engineer someone's virtual machine and framework and produce a port of it.

So...yes, I guess my summary of your comments is: FUD. Bring real-world complaints or else stay in your playpen.

Reply Parent Score: 0

RE: You need to explain...
by amadeo on Tue 20th Dec 2005 17:40 in reply to "You need to explain..."
amadeo Member since:
2005-07-06

"a) their track record as a big nasty evil company"

"b) their use of Mono which is known to have some very dangerous licensing associated with it"


????? Who are you talking to? I can't find anithing like this in aseigo's blog...

Reply Parent Score: 1