Home > Wayland > Cairo, GTK+, X11 Coverage from XDevConf Cairo, GTK+, X11 Coverage from XDevConf Eugenia Loli 2004-04-30 Wayland 49 Comments Federico Mena-Quintero continues his coverage from XDevConf regarding X11 technologies. About The Author Eugenia Loli Ex-programmer, ex-editor in chief at OSNews.com, now a visual artist/filmmaker. Follow me on Twitter @EugeniaLoli 49 Comments 2004-05-01 12:09 am Anonymous After all this recent admiring comments for NX http://www.nomachine.com/ : Are the NX developers also present at this conference? It would be very cool if this technology could be integrated into next generation X….. 2004-05-01 12:17 am Anonymous ” User experience now: no excuse for visible redraws, inconsistent response times. Cut-and-paste and drag-and-drop not Just Working. ” It’s interesting how developers can go where advocates fear to tread. Reading further, I’m glad to see a more holistic approach being adopted with regard to the integration of X and toolkits. The whole ‘x is slow’ argument comes mainly from slow toolkits rather than any problem with X itself, so there are significant gains to be made here. 2004-05-01 1:19 am Anonymous KDE is mostly not present, but there’s no fact that they wouldn’t be invited. They seem more like they’re not interested. KDE was always self-centred, and I must admit that I was surprised when they started communicating with freedesktop.org initiative. GTK is slow? Not for me:) but,.. heh, from version to version both Gnome and GTK are going faster. And if I remember correctly GTK2.6 should start implement Cairo as it’s main drawing engine, which means Glitz. Many advocates use KDE? Ok, I use gnome (as many other) but, wouldn’t it be better to say “use Linux” 2004-05-01 1:23 am Anonymous Seriously Glade has to be the worst RAD tool ive ever used. Apparently v3.0 is going to be a complete rewrite. That ill be looking forward to. 2004-05-01 1:49 am Anonymous @Rayiner Hashem The old Gtk is slow argument again I see? Did you notice in this latest update how Owen Taylor reiterated that XRENDER was to blame and that someone should PLEASE OPTIMIZE XRENDER 8) I tend to agree… I know rasterman would… 2004-05-01 1:52 am Anonymous Go read weblogs by KDE devs. They want to work with GNOME devs, but GNOME is self-centred. 2004-05-01 2:04 am Anonymous Well, if Miguel de Icaza commentaries could raise some concern about what future Longhorn technologies could do to Linux desktop-market acceptance, it is relieving to see that requiered OSS technologies to deal with it are under way. Composition engines are the future of GFX desktops (and present for MacOS X users). Now, if I could only get 3D Support for my ATI IGP 320M today …. 2004-05-01 2:08 am Anonymous Now, if I could only get 3D Support for my ATI IGP 320M today …. isnt that already supported by the latest DRI snapshots? 2004-05-01 2:33 am Anonymous I have it from August, working without problems. 2004-05-01 2:33 am Anonymous the key word is SNAPSHOT. that is not here, that is almost here. 2004-05-01 2:46 am Anonymous > KDE is mostly not present, but there’s no fact that they wouldn’t be invited. They seem more like they’re not interested. Very few KDE hackers showed up to XDevConf because of it’s geograhical location. I suppose it if the conference were in Europe, it would do better in the standpoint of KDE hackers. Chris Lee (aka clee), of KDE fame, did show up however, since he is from the area, and he posted some of his thoughts about Looking Glass on slashsot. http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=105848&cid=9010073 http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=105848&cid=9010181 2004-05-01 2:54 am Anonymous I’m just calling it like I see it. If my main experience with Linux apps was GTK+ 2.x apps and OpenOffice, I’d think the Linux GUI is slow too. However, I use Qt/KDE apps, and it feels pretty competitive with Windows for the most part. As for blaming XRender: Qt seems to have no problems with it… 2004-05-01 3:02 am Anonymous Hmmm I tried to make it work from snapshots … All I got is a Server Crashed with signal 11 msg or something of that sort (tried the common & radeon Snapshots and the XFree4.bz2 from DRI with kernel 2.6.6rc2)…any suggestions? It is funny, support already exists for that video card, but one can get it only from SNAPSHOTS (some of them unstable). The official Xfree4.4 does not have support for it (3D), neither the X.org server. It will be another 6 months probably for an official release of either of those … 2004-05-01 3:49 am Anonymous Qt also forces all OSS developers into GPL also, which is really not cool. 2004-05-01 3:57 am Anonymous hehe, funny, I’ve seen the exact oppasite, even using a heavily pixmaped theme… hmm… then again, I am not a linux user… 2004-05-01 3:58 am Anonymous I have a laptop with a P2-400Mhz and an ATI Rage with 8MB dedicated vram and 192MB ram. It’s running 2000Pro currently, but it can handle XP fine. For some reason Gnome and KDE are simply unbearable on it. I know it’s not exactly bleeding-edge hardware, but it’s hardly obsolete, and yet as much as i wish it wasn’t the case, Linux is simply not an option. Isn’t it Windows that takes crap for being bloated and inefficient? 2004-05-01 4:08 am Anonymous I don’t know what’s going on with your system. I’ve seen linux running on a 100 MHz Pentium machine with the latest KDE release at a reasonable rate. The guy who showed it to me had recompiled his kernel beforehand to help improve the performance, but didn’t do anything drastic. What distro are you using? Maybe if you try slackware or gentoo it’ll be faster. Good luck! 2004-05-01 4:09 am Anonymous Make sure X is using the right settings drivers. If you using XFree86(yes, others exist), make sure to be using atleast 4.3 and preferably 4.4. Don’t use a crappy WM (over weight ones that over very little if any thing over lighter ones… but are often the defualt WM). And if you do want to use Linux for your UNIX-like OS of choice, then you will want to use atleast 2.6, the ones prior to that have scheduling problems or something… Don’t want linux, then there is FreeBSD, which should work nicely on the hardware you listed. 2004-05-01 5:28 am Anonymous Remember that Qt is liscensed so that you only have to pay money if you don’t want to share the source. That’s perfectly acceptable for any project; if you’re not going to share the source, you’re going to try to make money off of it, which means that you can afford a cheap liscense. And if you’re developing non-open, free software, there’s something fishy about your business tact 2004-05-01 5:39 am Anonymous Maybe you are using only the VESA drivers that’s why its slow. 2004-05-01 5:42 am Anonymous There you go again. I’m still awaiting the movie clips you promised to provide demonstrating GTK+’s “slowness” as compared to Qt. I mean, isn’t this argument is getting stale especially when you don’t provide any scientific benchmarks/illustrations corroborating your supposed observations? 2004-05-01 6:02 am Anonymous > KDE is mostly not present, but there’s no fact that they wouldn’t be invited. George Staikos is there. But of course the location is a big reason. 2004-05-01 6:08 am Anonymous I stand by what I said. We can sit here and flame about which we prefer, but the simple fact is that with Qt, you either share the source (albeit with the GPL liscense, which just makes sure that everything keeps free), or you fork over a little cash. I think the GPL is a lot like a parent. You may disagree with it constantly, but decades down the road, it’s the foundation of who you are. Alright, not the best analogy, but you get what I mean . Basically saying, in 10 years, wouldn’t it be nice to ensure that your base system was 100% free and forced to always be free? LGPL, BSD, etc. are all liscences you could use on for anything *you* develop, using libs that tote your prefered liscense, and they’d be independant of the free base system. 2004-05-01 7:04 am Anonymous ” I honestly don’t give a rat’s about free… just freedome and quality… of which gpl denies me of one of those so thus I don’t use it and make my stuff a hassle to integrate with it…” Would your stuff be closed source? It seems to me that the gpl is very good at one thing…keeping the playing field level. If you want to develop closed source, then you have to pay for a license. I personally feel the BSD license is an aweful license for open source development. If I write a program that I want open source, the gpl protects me from having someone fork the code into a closed source program. I don’t care if other people use my work, or for that matter make a profit, as long as their changes are open, so the rest of the community can benefit. What I would care about is if my work was leached by a company that had no intention of contributing back new code. A good comparision would be any buisness that sells a product to make money, with open source you “sell” your program, but the money is the code that is released by the “buyer” to improve it. Anyways, just my musings on the topic Michael Moran 2004-05-01 8:06 am Anonymous Um, you do know that Qt is also available under the QPL? That license allows you to link Qt with any Free Software license (not just the GPL compatible ones). If you don’t like the GPL, use the QPL version instead. 2004-05-01 8:10 am Anonymous As someone who has just switched to gnome because of 2.6, I would say the speed difference is neglible most of the time. Gnome apps seem to take slightly longer to start, but starting apps is hideously slow anyway for me (can’t find the problem, could be X maybe). In general use, both KDE3.2 and Gnome2.6 feel just as responsive. Having said that, at Uni I use Ion, and desktop startup (as in login) is instant, so Gnome and KDE could both learn something there… 2004-05-01 8:14 am Anonymous Oh yeah, here’s a link to the text of the QPL: http://www.trolltech.com/licenses/qpl-annotated.html Also note that when Qt was freed, they first used the QPL. The GPL was only added after people (well, mostly Debian) managed to convince them that the QPL was GPL incompatible (making e.g. the KDE license inconsistent), and that using the GPL was safe, i.e. it doesn’t permit proprietary software to use the free version of the library. 2004-05-01 9:41 am Anonymous –> KDE is mostly not present, but there’s no fact that they wouldn’t be invited. <– Correct. –> They seem more like they’re not interested. <– Not correct. See — KDE is largely community driven. Not many rich backers. Not many full-time marketeers. No-one who is constantly hyping any new technology. In fact, KDE is now grown to probably the largest “single” Free Software project (in terms of active contributors, mailing lists, lines of code, etc.). Despite of its deep roots in the community, and its volunteer-driven work, KDE is on very friendly terms with companies and corporations. It is just that this hasn’t been translated into a constant flow of cash and travel sponsoring by companies. Name the people representing GNOME at that conference. Look up who pays their salaries. See my point? So — next time, next X.org conference: if you find a company or someone else who funds 5 air tickets for KDE hackers, we’ll send 5 KDE hackers. For sure. Kurt (Co-organizer of “KDE Community World Summit 2004”: http://conference2004.kde.org/ ) 2004-05-01 10:07 am Anonymous SUSE, Mandrake, Lindows, listen to what kurt is saying. 2004-05-01 12:58 pm Anonymous When people say that gtk+ is slow they usually mean “redraw”. It is slower then Qt in that respect. That’s just the fact and is finally being acknowledge by gtk+ developers. Now with Cairo coming eventually becoming the back-end this will eventually go away, but don’t bury your head in the sand and act like it’s not there. 2004-05-01 1:01 pm Anonymous I don’t know what’s going on with your system. I’ve seen linux running on a 100 MHz Pentium machine with the latest KDE release at a reasonable rate. Give me a break! If you’re going to lie like that, you might as well go for the big one and just say that the latest KDE will run at a reasonable rate on a 386-33. Everybody on the planet that has ever used linux knows that latest KDE will not run at an acceptable rate on a Pentium 100. What was the purpose of you lying like that? 2004-05-01 1:19 pm Anonymous Maybe with “latest” he meant KDE 1.0? That *does* run fine on a Pentium. 2004-05-01 1:38 pm Anonymous Actually I’ve seen KDE running on similary low speced machines… like 133MHz 586s or so, but that was something like 2 or 3 years ago… or something like that. 2004-05-01 1:40 pm Anonymous If your business was developing a cross-platform toolkit and selling it to your customers how would you licence it so that it could be used both in proprietary, closed source software and also in free, open source software? 2004-05-01 1:46 pm Anonymous Hmm, cool. Forgot about that. /me likes the original It provides a nice and effective licenses. 2004-05-01 1:49 pm Anonymous Check out QPL ^_^ 2004-05-01 3:24 pm Anonymous Bah. I’m not even the only one that sees GTK+’s speed issues, judging by the fact that the X developer seem to see the same. But in any case, those videos are forthcoming — I have to wait ’till tomorrow when I can get back and get my webcam. The screencapture software caused too much of a slowdown to be really usable (1600×1200 screen = 8MB per frame, downloaded over the ridiculously slow AGP bus). 2004-05-01 3:34 pm Anonymous Would your stuff be closed source? It seems to me that the gpl is very good at one thing…keeping the playing field level. I guess I’m the only one here that sees ‘level’ as being ‘equal for all groups’. If fully believe that core operating system components, such as desktops, should not try to dictate the license that software using that core component must use. Core components should also not ‘prefer’ one type of license over another. I should not have to pay money just because I want to write a proprietary program. QT and KDE do not meet my idea of a standardized open platform. Rather one that is split between pushing FSF ideals and making money. 2004-05-01 4:13 pm Anonymous >Core components should also not ‘prefer’ one type of license >over another. the gnome and kde which forms “core components” are here to protect an ideals _too_. here the gpl but it’s true, people should have choice to create _applicatins_ with whatever licence they want. but _ME_ I prefer to see GPL applications for all needs. it’s good for people. about GTK2. I don’t think GTK2 so “slow” beside a windows or even osx. GTK2 has still some redraw problems (some applications seems to do twice redraws sometimes), but to call gtk2 “slow” and qt “fast” seems to be : -x11 drivers with problems for gdk -prejudices because of too much love for kde or whatever (and it’s reasonnable to have too much love for kde ) I use a radeon VE. qt or gtk ? same fight. and it’s not worth the time to do “video capture of gtk slugginess”, some developpers (and _even_ qt ones) knows toolkit NEEDS improvments, and X.ORG/xserver will provide new facilities for theses complexes toolkits, but it needs time. please. now XFree core team is supersed by X.org/xserver, I think we will see huge improvments in 6month/1 year. you have no time to wait ? too bad 2004-05-01 6:54 pm Anonymous go to the gentoo forums and serch for igp 320. and you will have your answer many guides to get it working there. use the love-sources for linux then you will have the radeon dri patch and working fbdev . use X.org xserver or 4.3.99 xfree and use the patch for xfree that they discus in the forums. thats the way i did it 2004-05-01 6:58 pm Anonymous In gentoo forums then … ok, i’ll try. What is love-sources? Is there any place to get a RPM for XFree 4.3.99? My PC is a portable with slow HDD and don’t want to compile for like forever … 2004-05-01 7:04 pm Anonymous love source is a hevy patched kernel. for exampel this are the patches for the newest love source well atleast the new patchest that wasnt in the older love sources. if you have new hardware love is the way to go and its really great for nforce borads no need for the nvidia drivers patch-2.6.6-rc3 | Latest Prepatch 2.6.6-rc3-mm1 | -mm BadRAM-220.127.116.11 | Work around for BadRam acerhk | Acer Hotkeys acpi-dsdt-initrd-patch | Custom dsdt table 2.6.6-rc3-mm1-v30d.patch | nick’s scheduler v30d acx100-0.2.0pre7-linux2.6.2 | ACX100 Support bd-claim | EVMS dealie bootsplash-3.1.4-2.6.6-rc 2 | Bootsplash config-nr-tty-devices | Change # /dev/tty* gcc-3.4-rcupdate.h-warn-fix | Warning fix iteraid_1.44 | GiGaRaid layer7-kernelpatch-nf-0.4.0 | Packet Classifier linux-2.6.0.dxr3.20031229 | DXR3/H+ Support linux-2.6.4-Walken | Walken Boot Logo lirc-2.6.4-20040318 | LIRC Support love_ppm | Love Boot Logo lufs-0.9.7-2.6.0-test9 | LUFS Support menuconfig-NAME-v1.0 | Do Something With Name move-__this_module-to-modpost | For Nvidia orinoco-0.13e-patch | Monitor Mode patch-2.4.x-vesafb-rrc | Vesafb Hack patch-2.6.4-am9 | Autoswappiness patch-2.6.4-amd76x_pm | AMD Power Management sii-3512-update | SII Updates squashfs1.3r3-patch | SquashFS supermount-2.0.4-2.6.2 | SuperMount via-v4l-1.4a-drm | Epia DRM viafb_02 | Epia FB -R populate-rootfs-later.patch | bootsplash fixes cflags-selection.patch.bz2 | cflags selection patch iriver.patch | iriver support nforce2-disconnect-quirk.patch.bz2 | nforce2 fixes hopefully ipw2100-2.6.4-0.40-pre-patch.bz2 | Intel PRO/Wireless 2100 Driver for Linux mki-adapter26_1_3_4.patch.bz2 | something needed by win4lin Kernel-Win4Lin3-2.6.5.patch.bz2| win4lin 2004-05-01 7:12 pm Anonymous are those Gentoo specific? I use Cooker source (MDK). So far I know DRM for IGP is supossed to merged in any 2.6.3 + kernel. Besides that, I only d/l DRI Common/Radeon snapshots and the XFree executable (in dri.sf.net they said all I need is to replace that one). But Signal 11 msg is not very specific on what went wrong. I’ll start checking this forums … BTW, thax 2004-05-01 7:24 pm Anonymous It’s just a kernel patch really. It’s a great patch imho, and I’m using it on this slackware-current system. Working great. I wish they would get reiser4 support, though. That’s one fast filesystem. Crom 2004-05-01 10:28 pm Anonymous Would have thought this debate would have been over years ago, but I guess not… If people don’t WANT you using their hard work without giving anything back to them, thats their perogative. No one is forcing you to use that code, re-implement it yourself and you wouldn’t need to use it. If you want corporations to be able to steal your work and not give a thing back to you, use a BSD license. If you are OK with knowing some of the richest men in America are making money from your work while you dig through the cusions of your couch to scrap some money together for foot, thats fine. The very reason GPL offerings are prefered by people like IBM and HP is because they are helping out their foes. They don’t want their competition having an unfair advantage. If everyone is FORCED to give back, then it forces them to WORK TOGETHER. Without GPL, Linux etc would be no better then FreeBSD today. While FreeBSD isn’t a bad OS, it certainly isn’t competing with any large companies for market share… _____________________________________________________ Also, in the case of Qt, it appears in either situation (proprietary charge, open source no cost), Trolltech stands to gain. At once, they get some free hackers, and the oppertunity to make money from those that CAN pay. No point charging those same people who are digging through their couch for change, but KDE is the reason I have heard of Trolltech, so I would say that allowing people to hack on the Toolkit has indeed allowed Trolltech further reach. 2004-05-01 11:05 pm Anonymous Frank, this debate is only starting to heat up as Linux moves from the hobbyist desktop onto the corporate desktop. The very reason GPL offerings are prefered by people like IBM and HP is because they are helping out their foes. They don’t want their competition having an unfair advantage. If everyone is FORCED to give back, then it forces them to WORK TOGETHER. You’re confusing GPL with LGPL. With the LGPL you have to contribute back if you modify the libraries and distribute, but your apps that use that library can remain proprietary. Qt is all GPL or you buy a license from Trolltech. The best thing to happen is if for someone like IBM to buy trolltech and LGPL the whole thing. That way Trolltech dudes get paid and people aren’t stuck with a viral license like the GPL. 2004-05-02 12:26 am Anonymous Actually, there are better methodes for protecting hardwork than GPL… check out QPL and LGPL… Well it can easily compete with Linux, so I would say it is definitely not a bad OS… /me is sad to see some of his comments where uselessly modded down while just as inflamitory pro-gpl comments where allowed to stay… 2004-05-02 12:31 am Anonymous Si, that would rock It would then make KDE/Qt actually viable in OSS out side of FOSS… allowing for easier creation of standards and the like on those systems. BTW to all ppl saying just reimplement it, with increation complexity it is not all ways easy, especially when something is needed quickly for getting some standards out the door with something needed to allow for quick adoption of them. With out that it is to easy for some on to take it and make it proprietary and put up hurdles and the like while it is still catching on. Quick growth is good. ^_^ 2004-05-02 1:36 pm Anonymous He is not lying in any way. The latest KDE 3.2 runs just fine and acceptable on a 100Mhz Pentium given a KDE-friendly configuration. The last part is important, most 100Mhz pentiums do not have 128-256Mbyte RAM, but if you put that in the machine, KDE would run just fine and be fast and responsive. Also remember that KDE is in a reverse resource-spiral. The KDE3 series uses much less resources than the KDE2 series, and the lastest KDE 3.2 has been vastly optimized compared to KDE 3.0. The biggest performance issues with KDE is having enough memory, and fast disks for application start-up.