Linked by Eugenia Loli on Mon 27th Feb 2006 07:10 UTC, submitted by fsmdave
X11, Window Managers 3D graphics on X11: XGL vs AIGLX. This article delves into the inner workings of XGL and AIGLX. It shows that there are many similarities between these two competing/co-operating "rivals" and plenty of room for growth.
Thread beginning with comment 99829
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[3]: Inaccurate
by somebody on Mon 27th Feb 2006 22:19 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Inaccurate"
somebody
Member since:
2005-07-07

hen if it is such a nice drop in solution that will work out of the box with all x programs, why isn't there more support int eh distributions for it?

If you ask that if project will work out, as in the future, talk about the project that was started in the present (two weeks ago), then don't use past for reference. It sounds lame trollish, nothing else.

But then again, I'm gonna bite this one. Why AIGLX for JoeUser on Linux
- NVidia opted for AIGLX instead of XGL (or at least the spec)
- DRI opted for AIGLX instead of XGL. (or at least the spec)
- less ram consumption
- direct control over 3d from inside, meaning easier plug for legacy 3d software

Meaning most of the 3d drivers selected AIGLX. Support will come, soon.
- NVidia support in the next driver release
- some DRI drivers already provide support for AIGLX
- ATI? They don't provide Linux drivers (or at least their efficiency is near 0). So,... probably,... no.
- XGL is also changing some parts to combine with AIGLX

If developers of different projects can cooperate (read mailing list on XOrg, cooperation between XGL and AIGLX is very visible), if proprietary companies can cooperate with OSS (NVidia is helping with suggestions too), then answer me this. How it is possible that some users can't cope with the facts which are not their problem?

No one says XGL sucks, it is official, it is a JAW-DROPPER and davidr deserves to be named as one of the "Linux on desktop" prophets. It will be used where it is better and more suitable tool than others. Same goes for AIGLX and XeGL too. It is a fscking rendering mechanism, for gods sake.
If you read mailing list archives, you can finaly realize that you'll (or at least you should) be able to run compiz under all 3 (same goes for any WM). Compiz is just a WM. And in the middle there is a libCM, which should become a platform for exchanging effects, used by WM and rendered by rendering mechanism.

Edited 2006-02-27 22:36

Reply Parent Score: 5