91–100 of 160 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
How? From what I gather, Wayland is better for the mobile/touch space, servers don't use GUIs and there's not much that uses only X...
So, did you post that comment from a mobile phone or a server? Oh yeah, there's this thing called a "workstation". I hear there are a few in existence...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
How? From what I gather, Wayland is better for the mobile/touch space, servers don't use GUIs and there's not much that uses only X...
So, did you post that comment from a mobile phone or a server? Oh yeah, there's this thing called a "workstation". I hear there are a few in existence...
I have no idea how this comment mixup happened...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Window management is largely pushed to the clients, they draw their own decorations and move and resize themselves, typically implemented in a toolkit library. Well, there's a bad idea. I suppose I could see an X replacement which incorporated window management into the server, instead of into a special client; but letting all the clients draw their own borders is a recipe for chaos.
Isn't an X window manager just another X client too at the moment? Couldn't that system still work on Wayland? I might be completely wrong about this though, so someone more knowledgeable please explain. :-)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Wayland uses OpenGL ES for rendering, preparing Ubuntu for handsets. Ubuntu must be eying a future alongside Android, which is an excellent bet. There have been many attempts at X replacement, all well justified, and if Wayland is the best of them, it would still be better than the baroque X protocol. Like almost every C++ programmer working in the early 00s, I too hacked on Berlin :-|
This seems less ambitious than Berlin in a lot of ways. One big difference is that Berlin aimed for network transparency (like X, but ideally done even better), while Wayland is local-only. That might simplify enough things to make it more likely to succeed. For me personally, now that nx makes X's network transparency actually usable, I'm not in a big hurry to go back to a non-network-transparent windowing system wi…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'd rather see Wayland implement the X protocol themselves rather than proxy to Xorg. Running X and Wayland simultaneously could have performance implications on older computers or netbooks, two of Ubuntu's biggest targets.
Why would running two systems help performance. A better designed system that doesn't have to have network transparency code paths should be able to run faster than X and Linux applications are written in Qt or GTK anyway. Port those two and call it done.
Ubuntu is really setting itself apart as its own OS rather than just another Linux distro.
It might take about two years for this whole thing to sort of stabilize (Wayland + Unity), but when it does, Ubuntu will be kick-ass like it's never been before.
I love it when people step outside the box.
With the Software Center, Unity interface, and now a new display server, looks like Ubuntu is shooting for the mainstream OS business. Interesting to see an Linux distro trying so hard to set itself apart.
Ubuntu has always been shooting for the mainstream, it is the central goal of the project. Just look at bug 1.