picoGUI: An X Alternative?

bockman writes "While started as a PDA-oriented project, the picoGUI people seem to be implementing many ideas which I think would be good also for a desktop graphics server ( high-level client/server protocol, presentation layer in the server _but_ modular, application management also modular,...). So I wonder: what would it take (apart porting tons of applications) to make it a suitable alternative to X+[your toolkit of choice]+[your window manager of choice]?"

Comments

For the SI prefix challenged

[Anonymous Coward]

pico == 1e-12. So if your average GUI takes 1 GB, this one should take 1/1000 byte.

Re:For the SI prefix challenged

[PhysicsScholar]

Let's see, so if a byte is 8 bits, and picoGUI is supposed to take 1/1000 of a byte, then the code for the entire graphical user interface subsystem has been compressed into 0.008 bits.

The entire source probably looks something like the following: .

I didn't realize DNA computing had arrived so quickly. God bless those researchers!

Re:For the SI prefix challenged

[twoslice]

Let's see, so if a byte is 8 bits...

and if 25 cents is 2-bits then a byte is worth a dollar!

Re:For the SI prefix challenged

[Sri Lumpa]

"pico == 1e-12 [wikipedia.org]. So if your average GUI takes 1 GB, this one should take 1/1000 byte."

That's because you are approaching the problem from the wrong angle.

The picoGUI takes at most (so I am told) about half a megabyte.

This means that it has the equivalent functionality of an average GUI taking 1/2*1e12 or 5e11 megabytes. That is the picoGUI packs up in half a megabyte the functionality of a GUI of approximatively 500 petabyte!!!

Certainly such a GUI must put to shame the Star Trek LCARS and AUI (Acoustic user interface, when they alk to the computer directly), let alone such puny GUIs as what Windows Blackcomb isn't yet and MacOS X.

Bad screenshots

[blogan]

Take a look at the screenshots. There are no xeyes running! How can we take any X alternative seriously when they don't bother to port xeyes.

When I first showed my wife Linux, the first thing she asked was "What do those eyes do?" My reply, "Some people use them as a status indicator for predictive multitasking thread optimizer, but mine just look at the cursor." "Cool"

Most important...

[Eric_Cartman_South_P]

Before consulting in other areas, as someone who worked as a developer focusing on User Inferfaces, and having studied Human Factors and Usability guidlines and best practices, I can safely say that the best way to make an interface more usable and better for the end user is to give it a bright green "Start" button and a rolling hill background. That's all you need to do.

Re:Why picoGUI?

[Doug Neal]

Yes, Berlin has matured as a windowing system and is very nice. Why just earlier I was using it to play the newly released "Duke Nukem Forever"!

What's next?

[MainframeKiller]

viGUI? emacsGUI?

How long before a cease and desist ...

[d0n quix0te]

... from Apple for blatantly ripping off the Aqua GUI?

Come on guys, lickable buttons and pin stripes are so last year ;)

Re:You can't really replace X (or windows)

[sabaco]

Wow this comment is almost perfect for a generic "you shouldn't rewrite software xyz" post. Look at how easy it converts to a senseless Windows vs linux post:

Basically, everything depends on Windows, so you can't really replace Windows and maintain backwards compatibility. In order to have backwards compatibility, you would need to provide all the services provided by Windows, so you would, in effect, just be writing a new Windows.

If you really want to replace Windows with some other system, then you could probably get pretty far by just porting MS Office and Internet Explorer over to the new system. This should pick up quite a few apps. I have no idea how hard this would be.

But, by and large, it's silly to constantly rant and rave about Windows. It's just an abstraction for hardware that allows you to effortlessly run multiple programs. It is so low level, that it almost doesn't make sense to criticize it. And I think many of the critics don't really understand fully what Windows is.

For example, if you don't like the performance, then that is a complaint against the specific hardware or drivers you are running, not against Windows itself.

If you don't like the program crashing, then that is a complaint against the programs you are using (Office, IE, ICQ, etc.). This has nothing to do with Windows.

As far as features go, if you really want a feature and Windows does not provide it, then you have a legitimate complaint. But really, what more do you want from a video (and mouse and keyboard) driver than the ability to get information about GUI events and to paint the screen in any fashion you desire?

To sum up, I don't see that Windows is inherently problematic. I think that most complaints about it are misplaced, and should be directed elsewhere.

Furthermore, when people talk about replacing Windows, they seldom seem to appreciate the benefits of allowing multiple applications to run on screen at once. This is one of Windows's strongest points, yet most people seem to want to replace it with what amounts to software rolled up with a kernel.

Well, that's my $0.02.

... That second to last paragraph needs some work, but otherwise I think it went very smoothly. :)