DRI Comes to DirectFB

Pivot writes "To further heat up the discussion about the future of the graphical desktop on open source OSes: Now the DirectFB project works with DRI!. Screenshots are available. I guess what is lacking now is only XAA driver support, or native drivers for your favourite graphic card." We've mentioned DirectFB before.

Comments

Oh, by the way...

[Anonymous Coward]

What the fuck is DirectFB anyway?

This will kill X in the long term.

[Krapangor]

DirectFB has much more capabilities to compete with high performance desktop systems like MS Windows XP. We might get some DirectX alike stuff very soon which enables Linux to be a real gaming platform.
Many people will shout now: "Behold the holy X-protocol ! For it is network transparent and make your desktop run everywhere." But how often you really need X these days ? Most remote work done is professional admin or research stuff. All people I know working in this area use just a plain text shell. This graphics stuff is for admin job completely obsolete. And if you are kinky-winky then you could always get a secure admin-webinterface using OpenBSD.
Face it: we don't need X any longer.
The X window system has it's roots in the ole mainframe area where people had slow, cheap terminals and there was a big mainframe in the cave together with a group of homo neandertalis.
But these days are gone. Today every kiddy has the capacity of the mainframe on/under his desktop. We don't need bloated, slow graphics protocols anymore for doning work on the big iron. The big iron is under your desk.

I think the linux community should switch it's direction on the desktop completely and drop the bloated X Windows support. Just port QT to DirectFB and we are done - KDE works automatically. And this would weed out Gnome this obsolete, second desktop system which just draws resources from the KDE pool and thus slows down advancement of open source systems.

The French do suck

[Anonymous Coward]

You fuck.

No fun for nVidia users.

[Jacek Poplawski]

Maybe now you realize why closed source drivers are worse.

Usual discussion

[Anonymous Coward]

Crowd: X is bloated
X DefenderS: X is not bloated it is just everything else on top of X
Crowd: Network Transparency is a hog
X Defenders:No it isn't there is just not a single app which does it right, why do have apps use for instance something like fonts, pine doesn't need it either
Crowd: X is slow
X Defenders: No it isn't run two X servers side by side and see that they have comparable speed
Crowd: X is bloatware
X Defenders: No every single line of the 7 million lines of code is needed, even the code from the flight sim
Crowd: Look there is something better and faster
X Defenders: We don't need that we have network transparency (which implicietly is unusable over slower lines)

I guess there are another 100 points which can be added

Re:Usual discussion

[Natalie's Hot Grits]

I never said i was against X, idiot.

I use it every day for remote desktops. XFree86. I also use it locally on Linux. Every day.

I just happen to know (unlike you) that its not optimal for local display. There are better solutions out there that are faster, more efficient, and more suited for local desktop use. Sure, XFree86 does the job. But far from optimal. The competition has proven this. XFree86 was designed to display remotely. That is what the entire X protocol is used for. It just so happens that you can use the same principles to display locally

Until you realize that XFree86 is slower than most 2d desktop rendering systems when used locally, you will be blind of the facts. Its as simple as that.