Slashdot Mirror
Berlin 0.2.0 Released
starseeker writes: "The Berlin people have released version 0.2.0. Check out the new screenshots.Talk about your awesome graphics!" For a project that's had a lot of smoke over the years, it's pretty nice to see something tangible.
What if your monitor's fallen over? Seems like this would be a good way to get around the problem.
That said, I think it's time I changed my
Their Berlin vs X document makes a big thing of pixel independence, but I see this as a disadvantage. Present displays, and future ones for that matter, still have pixels that are big enough to see, and the difference between a 1 pixel line and a 2 pixel line is significant. As a result I'm not ready to go for pure non-pixel metrics yet, although I grant that they are increasingly useful.
I also worry a bit about the CPU/GPU overhead of all this stuff, although I grant that this is a pretty short term concern. Modern high-end graphics cards can do this stuff at the necessary speeds without problems, so its only 2-3 years until the bog-standard consumer PCs have this capability.
Paul.
You are lost in a twisty maze of little standards, all different.
Nice screen shots. The only problem is that beauty isn't really what Berlin aims to fix. The weaknesses in X are well known but I will list them here for those who are unaware.
1. Size. X 3.x eats up 16 megs of RAM If you run it on 8 MB ( I have ) you will notice a distinct crawl caused from swapping.
2. Speed. X is fast but not quite fast enough. On a low end Pentium Linux runs wrings around NT or 95 for most things. The GUI is only a little faster however. I won't be happy until the *nix GUI is 3X the speed of the Windows GUI on the same Hardware.
3. You can't resize the desktop without shutting down X. Yes I know you can switch resolution but the Virtual desktop size will remain the same. I.e. this is good for Zooming in on fine print or small pictures. Nothing much else. If you use Mac, Windows or OS/2 you know why someone would resize a whole desktop.
4. X is not stable. Sure most of us hardly ever get a GUI lockup or spontaneous X server termination. Too many of us have seen this though. I have never seen an E-Smith server go down without massive hardware failure. Same goes for Cobalt Cube. X doesn't approach the stability of Linux or Apache or SaMBa. Bad Applications can't take down the Kernel. It can take down the GUI however. I.e. Sometimes Alpha quality KDE from CVS dose this for me.
Everything else that people see as wrong with X can be fixed at a higher level. If these problems can be fixed without ditching X then by all means do so. If X must be replaced then so be it. Berlin will still run X apps. It won't matter if it doesn't.
--= Isn't it surprising how badly I spell ?
Microsoft thinks, "Well the command line is not very useful to the average computer user, let us do away with it."
Unix programmers think, "Well I do not think rotating windows in 3d is useful, but let us keep this feature, someone else may have a use for it."
Keep this in mind... it is hard to find a use for something that does not exist!!!
--
May the source be with you!
--
May the source be with you!
Jason Zwolak
Think of Berlin as something that is rather useless right now, given current hardware constraints, but will become a very nice graphical interface once we have monitors with pixel spacing more comparable to paper.
Given a future world where such hardware exists, it's easy to see where current windowing systems (X and MS Windows in particular) are woefully inadequate. Anyone who has a high-end monitor and has set the resolution to something like 1600x1200 knows what I'm talking about. All the fonts are way too small. So then you go and change the default font size. *Then* you find out that there are a lot of application developers who never tested their applications with a larger font size.
Berlin will be a good basis for a future windowing system. It's time will come.
I'm a leaf on the wind. Watch how I soar.
Hyping this as ready would surely be a mistake, but I am not sure you quite "get it". SlashDot is not a marketing forum. I don't expect my manager to come up to me later today and say, "Hey we really need to start using Berlin, I was reading about how it is no longer vapor on slashdot".
There may be a growing number of non-programmers on slashdot, but many of us code (and code and code). Interesting product announcements draw the interest of programmers, which in turn increases the speed of development (slashdot/freshmeat you decide :-). In a sence you are correct to say this is similar to trying to raise IPO capital, projects are trying to raise intellectual capital of programmers (and testers/documenters/etc) who can make a contribution.
My name is not spam, it's patrick
Home Automation & Linux -- now I know I'm a geek
The most interesting Berlin idea IMO is the change in the client-server protocol : in Berlin protocol, ASAIK, the presentation details (like repainting a window when exposed ) are in charge of the server. In X, they are in charge of the client ( though they are handled by the toolkit for standard widgets ).
This should greately reduce the communication flow between client and server, therefore making it possible to implement it over low-bandwith connections ( as is the Internet for most people ).
Also, this should also make possible for applications to be truly and easily toolkit-independent.
Ciao
----
FB
Sure, the effect is silly, but what it says about the software's architecture is not.
What this is meant to demonstrate is that the software design is highly orthagonal -- that you can make a list of objects going down the page and a list of operations going across, and if you checked out which operations apply to which objects, nearly all the cells would be checked.
Orthagonality is a desirable property for two reasons. First, it implies flexibility. One of the most frustrating things when using other peeople's designs is to find out you can't do x with y because the developer never thought anyone would need to. Secondly, it eases the learning curve. When you wonder "Can I do x with y?", the answers is likely to be yes and you are less likely to have to refer to the manual on a regular basis.
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
Berlin is not a replacement to GTK/Qt or to GNOME/KDE or to any of the window managers that run on top of any of the previous. It is a replacement for X, an attempt to redo what X did, only more intelligently, with a knowledge of the limitations of X and taking into account the developments of the computer industry and for that matter the new needs of the computer industry.
X is powerful but there are several areas where it cannot be revised and extended without breaking all the other applications which currently depend on X. Sooner or later you need to throw out the old software and do a clean start.
The real significant developments in Berlin are the fact that it uses CORBA for brokering the API, a well thought out approach to client/server distribution of resources over the network and the support of resolution independent graphics as well as other features of modern graphics hardware.
Why not use X? Because X was designed in a far more different era than the one we have now. It is better to have a system that is optimized for modern computing uses and has room for growth.
Why would anyone switch from X? As has been commented over on the Berlin site, one can create an XLib compatibility layer, and between that and ports of GTK and Qt, which are designed to be insulating layers between programs that use a GUI and the underlying graphics API, running existing software on Berlin shouldn't be that difficult. Modular software design in the Unix world has its overhead but there are advantages to it.
Unix needs to evolve with the times. Yes, there is power in continuity and well-hammered tools that have survived the test of time, but that should not be a barrier to progress. That includes things that are technically separate from Unix but closely associated with it, such as X. Apple keeps pushing the standard for graphics forward and OS X has raised the bar for graphics technology. The Berlin people have a moving target to hit.
People may wonder at the hype of a 0.2 release, but the fact is that Berlin is slowly starting to move from the 'interesting toy' level to something more along the lines of a serious prototype for a new windowing system. Hopefully it will start reaching the point where it attracts more developers interested in a cool windowing system.
The second step is the XLib and GTK/Qt porting support, at which point the number of applications that can run on Berlin shoots up dramatically.
The real goal is to get software driver support for Berlin on the order of support for XFree86. That is going to be a pain in the neck unless someone can figure out a brilliant way to get device drivers for X to be used by Berlin. Those systems with open source drivers will probably have drivers written by motivated developers.
I'd like to see a real competition for developer mindshare between Berlin and XFree86 on the order of GTK/Qt or GNOME/KDE. Competition can only benefit the consumer.
I think this is a reasonable summary:
X and Berlin are the core graphical interface programs which allow graphics to be drawn on the screen, although that isn't even a sketch of the multitude of capabilities they offer. See their documentation for a detailed description.
Things like icewm, windowmaker, twm, enlightenment, qvwm, etc. are window managers, which provide basic functionality such as windows for applications, logout prompts, menus, etc. and run on top of something like X. (Right now, most run ONLY on top of X, but that may change.)
KDE and GNOME are desktop environments, not window managers. This means that they provide advanced hints for applications which allow for a common look and feel, and advanced interface features like the GNOME panels and menus and providing common functionality to programs that request it. KDE contains its own window manager, but GNOME requires a window manager in addition to itself to function properly.
Basically, X is the only viable alternative at the low level right now. In the case of window managers there are an enormous number of choices. Right now KDE and GNOME are the two major desktop environments.
Compatibility is largely a question of having the necessary libraries for KDE and GNOME applications. You can run KDE apps under GNOME, and vice versa, if your libraries are in place. At the window manager level there shouldn't be a problem - the applications are normally seperate from the window manager and work within its framework.
Hope that is of some help. Look around the internet for more complete listings - some good initial places to start are freshmeat.net and linuxberg.com
"I object to doing things that computers can do." -- Olin Shivers, lispers.org