There was quite a discussion about that on XFree86 mailing list last month. As far as I understood from the discussion there are several contributors to XFree86 behavior compared to Windows/OSX (in random order): * Kernel process switching * Toolkit implementation (which is my opinion is the most important) * Application implementation * XFree86 features
So maybe the problem is the lack of cooperation between X11 and toolkit developers to achieve a common goal...? -----Original Message----- From: Meir Kriheli [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, August 29, 2003 11:55 PM To: Oded Arbel; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: OS-X rules, X sucks (Was: Forthcoming "Blitz" of Announcements) On Friday 29 August 2003 07:13, Oded Arbel wrote: > On Monday 25 August 2003 10:05, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > The things I think are the most useful in the OS-X interface are: > > > > 1. The ability to sort of "zoom out" where all the application windows > > are resized to be small enough so they don't overlap, in that state you > > can pick the window you want to switch to, then all windows resize > > back to their normal state. They'll keep updating in that "smaller" > > state too. > > The reason you can do that, and all other neat things OS-X does, is what > apple calls "Quartz Extreme". its very simple concept and not far from > other things people are playing with on Linux: they map each window as a > texture map over a rectangular 3D object using the graphic's hardware 3D > acceleration mode. after you do that, you can manipulate the window in > hardware - resize it, make it translucent, swipe it here and there, etc' > all in hardware and as long as you keep updating the texture bitmap that > represents the actual content of the window, users' will be non the wiser. > > Only problem is : you can't do it in X, because X was designed a long time > before any decent 3D hardware acceleration was even thought of, and as a > result X sucks. > Linux GUI will always be a rag tag collection of graphical elements > straigning against the weight of the windowing system for as long as people > won't ditch X and pursue greener pastures. IMO - X is the single reason why > Linux and other free OSs do not have the same desktop market share as they > do for server installation, and probably it diminishes acceptance in that > sector as well. > X is a piece of software most in need of a redesign if I ever saw one. Shouldn't the toolkit handle it instead of X ? Take a look at evas, for example, used in upcoming enlightenment (anyone knows when ?): http://www.enlightenment.org/pages/evas.html -- Meir Kriheli MKsoft systems <http://www.mksoft.co.il ================================================================= To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] ================================================================To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
