Slashdot Mirror


Fedora's OpenGL Composite Desktop

An anonymous reader writes "First we had Novell's XGL and Compiz technology, which allows for OpenGL-based composite rendering on the Linux desktop. Now Fedora has created the Advanced Indirect GL X project, which aims for similar desktop effects but with a simpler implementation. Sure, at the end of the day it's just eye candy, but make no mistake - the Linux desktop is due for a massive shake-up!"

7 of 392 comments (clear)

  1. "Just eyecandy" by Tim+C · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I spend upwards of 10 hours a day staring at a computer screen; what I'm looking at had better be aesthetically pleasing.

    It *does* serve a purpose - it makes my day that little bit more enjoyable. Decorating your house serves no real purpose (unless you're trying to sell it), but most people want something a little nicer than bare walls. People decorate their cubicles and offices - a photo here, a plant there.

    I don't see why a desktop should be any different.

  2. OpenGL a big win by andrewzx1 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Having increased OpenGL support for Linux and gathering development support for advanced graphics toolkits will be a big win for Linux desktop. Having a sexy and slick interface has helped make OSX very popular. Sexy graphics for Linux will open new possibilities for interfaces, data display, games, and more.

    Let us pay homage to Silicon Graphics, the originators of OpenGL. They may not live out the year.

  3. Re:There go the distros again.. by tuffy · · Score: 3, Insightful
    Making incompatible forks, each one trying to be different from another insetead of collaboring to rush development of unified tools.

    What part of "This is code that was done entirely upstream in concert with the rest of the X community." do you not understand?

    --

    Ita erat quando hic adveni.

  4. Re:Are we wasting our efforts? by chrismcdirty · · Score: 5, Insightful

    allowing any user to load and install any application or hardware accessory

    Isn't that part of the reason Windows is so insecure? Any user can install an application (when using default setup, as most people use), so the exploits can do more than screw with the user's home directory.

    --
    It's like sex, except I'm having it!
  5. The "eye candy" mentality by skryche · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Having watched the movies, I am greatly unimpressed. The reason the Mac UI works so well is that its eyecandy is a method of subtly including information that might otherwise be lost. For instance, when you minimize a window in MacOS (if I remember correctly), it slides down to a nice little parking place on the dock. In the first movie, the minimized document shrinks down in a nifty animation but shows no relationship between it and the button at the top of the screen. The second movie solves this problem (so why even have the first) but is slow (can you imagine minimizing eight windows? What a mess!).

    Similarly, in the third example -- what information is being given to the user by fading the menus? I'm not sure what it is; instead, it just looks messier, and therefore less useful.

    A side note: I knew this whole "No! Vorbis is the format! OGG is just the container" idea would bite me on the ass some day, and it looks like today's the day. I clicked on the movie links only to have my Winamp playlist destroyed. Even worse, Winamp didn't even know how to play the file. Is there a solution to this absurd problem?

  6. Re:Are we wasting our efforts? by paulpach · · Score: 4, Insightful

    You are right, we should forbid X developers from working on X until your issues are solved.

    What we should do is grab the X developers ( which some are volunteers, which are giving this away for free ) and force them to work on a Microsoft Active Directory clone. Given the extensive experience X developers have in directory service, forcing them to work on it is a no brainer.

    What should happen is that all development on linux should stall until we get your issues solved. People with no interest whatsoever in Active Directory should be forced to work on it. This of course should include Gnome, KDE, and all of GNU products.

    Also, Microsoft Active Directory is TOP priority, nobody in their house can do anything usefull without it. And it is well known that 87% of the desktop computers are using Active Directory.

    so I agree, STOP WORKING ON X, YOU ARE KILLING LINUX

  7. Re:Goose for the gander by WhiteWolf666 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Vista's eye candy has tremendous system requirements. On X, if you can offload window operations to an OpenGL compositor, you save a significant number of CPU cycles.

    Yes, there is a difference. Take a look at your system. Turn off NVIDIA's custom render accel, and watch X's CPU usage while moving windows around, or resizing, or scrolling.

    Install XGL, or this new Fedora thing.

    Play a video on X, run a background compilation process, and then resize your video window. It'll stutter like mad. Try the same thing on XGL; its fluid. Watch all the fluid animations, and watch what happens to your CPU usage. With any accelerated video card (even ancient POS like Intel's i810, or Radeon 7500+, or older low-end Geforce) you'll see negligble CPU impact.

    Contrast that with Vista's requirements for the full "Aeroglass" experience. You can do the same thing on XGL at a far, far lower cost of system resources.

    One approach makes your computer faster. The other requires a faster computer. Understand?

    --
    WhiteWolf666 an exBush supporter. All you new-school,compassionate,save the children Republicans can rot in hell