Slashdot Mirror


Kernel 2.6.31 To Speed Up Linux Desktop

Dan Jones writes "As the Linux community looks forward to another kernel release, the kernel hackers have been working on improving the memory management so that the X desktop responsiveness is doubled under high memory pressure. The result is an improved desktop experience. Benchmarks on memory-tight desktops show clock time and major faults reduced by 50 per cent, and pswpin numbers (memory reads from disk) are reduced to about one-third. Another improvement coming with 2.6.31 is kernel mode-setting support for ATI Radeon graphics cards, enabling faster user switching and a more seamless startup experience. Peripheral developments that will also improve the Linux desktop experience include support for the new USB 3.0 specification and a new Firewire stack. Even minor Linux releases have heaps of new features these days!"

360 comments

  1. Obligatory XKCD by Aggrajag · · Score: 5, Funny
    1. Re:Obligatory XKCD by marcansoft · · Score: 0, Troll

      That's one of the more annoying XKCDs as far as I'm concerned. It seems to imply that the full-screen Flash video woes are somehow the kernel's fault. I used to like XKCD, but it seems to be getting dumber and dumber each day.

    2. Re:Obligatory XKCD by abigor · · Score: 3, Insightful

      No, it doesn't imply that at all. It's simply saying that Linux desktop users brag about irrelevent new "features", while basic things that everyone else takes for granted don't work properly.

    3. Re:Obligatory XKCD by marcansoft · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Whichever way you put it, the fact that this "basic thing that everyone else takes for granted" doesn't work is is Adobe's fault, not the Linux community's fault. It would have made a lot more sense if the complaint were about some actual bug in Linux distros, not a problem with a historically shoddy proprietary plugin.

    4. Re:Obligatory XKCD by McGiraf · · Score: 0, Redundant

      I have a Linux kernel on my computer. I would like to try the Linux desktop you talk about. You have a link? is better than Gnome?

    5. Re:Obligatory XKCD by ScytheBlade1 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It may seem to imply that, but that isn't the goal. The goal of that comic is to show the difference between linux gurus who can rebuild their kernel six times a day and get it right every time, and "your average XP --> Ubuntu switcher."

      I'm a guy who took gentoo and rebuilt it in my home directory about fifty times with a set of scripts I developed, getting smaller and more specific every time until I could write it to a CF card and drop it in my embedded router that runs at 33MHz, and still run/startup faster than your average home router.

      I have a friend who uses Kubuntu (which really is a terrible KDE distro) who is definitely more adept in linux than your average switcher, but he doesn't spend his time memorizing internals or rebuilding kernels either.

      To me, I can see that comic and go "neat, that's a lot of CPUs" along with pegging Adobe for being a problem: "yeah, adobe sucks at cross platform." My friend goes "neat, that's a lot of CPUs" and "yeah linux is terrible in that area."
      Both pairs of statements are true. (And don't call me on the technicality that "linux is terrible in that area." Quit being hyperliteral; that's my entire point!)

    6. Re:Obligatory XKCD by sammyF70 · · Score: 1

      hmm ... it implies that the people implementing the "irrelevent new features" can automagically do what Adobe is apparently not capable of. In other news, most common hardware is recognized out of the box in newer Linux distros, while a lot of plastic is wasted on dated drivers for windows which included in the packaging process. OSX, obviously, doesn't even qualify, as it doesn't support anything apart from apple hardware (or equivalent)

      --
      "DRM is like the Ford Pinto: it's a smooth ride, right up the point at which it explodes and ruins your day."-C.Doctorow
    7. Re:Obligatory XKCD by maxume · · Score: 3, Insightful

      As someone who uses Windows but has an open mind, I don't care who is at fault.

      --
      Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
    8. Re:Obligatory XKCD by Randle_Revar · · Score: 1, Insightful

      full screen flash is a dumb idea anyway

    9. Re:Obligatory XKCD by d3vi1 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Actually the fault is split. 2D acceleration in Linux for most video drivers is shabby at best.

      On the other hand, Adobe doesn't really put that much engineering force into X11 optimizations. Adobe Flash on a non-accelerated Mac OS X (hackintosh using the included Vesa 3.0 driver) is still faster than on X11/Linux.

      I can't really blame Adobe for this. There are quite a lot of ways in which you can accelerate SOME drawing operations, but they are not available on all desktops. Clutter comes to mind right now, but it's not really the best option for QT/KDE users. It's hard to create an accelerated, desktop environment independent piece of software.

      --
      UNIX was not designed to stop you from doing stupid things, because that would also stop you from doing clever ones.
    10. Re:Obligatory XKCD by MPAB · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The comic didn't imply the kernel. Purists that wash their hands while saying "Linux is just a kernel, not my fault if it cannot (run x, recognize y or perform z)" are the target of this comic which tries to explain why linux (as a whole OS-and-software alternative) is not ready for the desktop.

    11. Re:Obligatory XKCD by Locklin · · Score: 1

      Flash is a dumb idea anyway.

      --
      "Knowledge is the only instrument of production that is not subject to diminishing returns" -Journal of Political Econom
    12. Re:Obligatory XKCD by JWSmythe · · Score: 1

          It was a dumb episode. The only folks who use Flash fullscreen are people watching online porn. :)

          Well, and YouTube, so they can see their little friends ramble on about nonsensical stuff in a global environment. I still haven't figured that crap out yet. Why, oh why, do you want to post a video of you talking about your life for the rest of the world to watch. Let me give you a hint. The rest of the world called. We don't give a shit.

          Sometimes there's something good on YouTube, but you really have to look for it. Your eyes will usually start to bleed before you find it though.

      --
      Serious? Seriousness is well above my pay grade.
    13. Re:Obligatory XKCD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Obligatory post pointing out there is more to XKCD than just the image. Mouseover text is part of the comic: http://xkcd.com/619/

    14. Re:Obligatory XKCD by Anarchduke · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Hey, you want to know why linux doesn't have more desktop market penetration? Guess what, the average person would try linux and open their favorite youtube video and get pissed off at linux because it doesn't do full screen flash well.

      You think that in the same situation Microsoft wouldn't have somone calling Adobe to get the full screen flash video working properly? They understand that it is always the operating system's fault when something goes wrong, no matter what the truth is.

      Microsoft may be a giant corporate asshole, but they understand that people's perceptions no matter how misguided will impact the popularity of their product. Look at Vista, at release there were a lot of problems. Now at service pack 2, Vista is performing much better, but its brand name is still mud because of the problems. I personally think this was part of the plan. Windows 7 is coming out, and it is looking to be what Vista should have been.

      In the end, the "Windows" brand hasn't been damaged, the "Vista" brand was. And Windows 7 will hit the market sounding like some sort of savior for computers.

      Meanwhile, Linux advocates still want to know why the average person won't leave windows.

      --
      who prays for Satan? Who in 18 centuries has had the humanity to pray for the 1 sinner that needed it most? ~Mark Twain
    15. Re:Obligatory XKCD by marcansoft · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Linux isn't broken because Flash sucks, the "Ready For the Desktop" moniker is broken if people consider it to imply Flash support. Flash is a closed technology (the spec is only open if you're not writing a player), which puts any problems with Flash playback anywhere squarely into Adobe's hands. If being "ready for the desktop" implies "Adobe plays nice with you" and there is nothing you can do if they don't, something is really wrong. What is the Linux community supposed to do, hold Adobe at gunpoint until they fix Flash?

      I'm not saying Linux is otherwise ready for the desktop (and complaints about issues with Linux desktops themselves are perfectly okay), but Flash brokenness is a silly example.

    16. Re:Obligatory XKCD by julian67 · · Score: 1, Offtopic

      Linux users are all albinos?

    17. Re:Obligatory XKCD by rohan972 · · Score: 1

      I have a Linux kernel on my computer. I would like to try the Linux desktop you talk about. You have a link? is better than Gnome?

      Much better, it's a solid hardwood desktop. I don't have a link, I will send it to you. I've packaged it in sawdust format for ease of transportation. Just reassemble it and you're right to go.

    18. Re:Obligatory XKCD by pjt33 · · Score: 2, Funny

      linux gurus who can rebuild their kernel six times a day

      How did they manage that before support for 4096 cores?

    19. Re:Obligatory XKCD by reub2000 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      What's broken here is that a completely closed off format has become standard on the internet.

    20. Re:Obligatory XKCD by Randle_Revar · · Score: 1

      I watch a fair bit of stuff on youtube - funny clips from various shows, weird Japanese stuff from nico nico douga, Carl Sagan, James Burke, Linux demos, TED...

      None of it in full screen, though, and not just because full screen doesn't work well.

    21. Re:Obligatory XKCD by jdoverholt · · Score: 3, Funny

      Gentoo?

    22. Re:Obligatory XKCD by marcansoft · · Score: 1

      Slow fullscreen is still Flash's fault. It may be [i]tolerable[/i] with certain card drivers and if your screen resolution is low enough, but the bulk of the problem is still Adobe's. I have an Nvidia that works great for everything else, but fullscreen Flash is unwatchable at 1920x1080.

    23. Re:Obligatory XKCD by marcansoft · · Score: 1

      Damn, somehow my brain was in BBCode mode. My apologies for that.

    24. Re:Obligatory XKCD by centuren · · Score: 4, Insightful

      ScytheBlade1 is right:

      The comic didn't imply the kernel. Purists that wash their hands while saying "Linux is just a kernel, not my fault if it cannot (run x, recognize y or perform z)" are the target of this comic which tries to explain why linux (as a whole OS-and-software alternative) is not ready for the desktop.

      Indeed, the xkcd in question (a link to the page, not the image) doesn't hang on technical accuracy. It's absolutely a commentary on issues with the "Linux Desktop", with developers putting a relatively rare server concern such as support for thousands of CPUs ahead of something that pretty much every PC user expects to have (the ability to watch Hulu smoothly).

      To nit-pick, however, the comic does seem to imply the kernel. In the alt-text you find:

      "I hear many of you finally have smooth Flash support, but me and my Intel card are still waiting on a kernel patch somewhere in the pipeline before we can watch Jon Stewart smoothly."

      The author is waiting on a Linux kernel patch to fix the Flash issues he has with his Intel card.

      That's one of the more annoying XKCDs as far as I'm concerned. It seems to imply that the full-screen Flash video woes are somehow the kernel's fault. I used to like XKCD, but it seems to be getting dumber and dumber each day.

      When Markansoft says the above, it's clear that he prizes technical accuracy in the comic enough to forgo appreciation of the general point of humour. However, is the comic's implication really wrong? I don't know much about how Flash works with hardware, or if it requires any specific support for a chipset. The author seems pretty sure he needs a patch for his hardware set up before he can get the same quality of Flash performance already enjoyed by other Linux users. That certainly doesn't remove Adobe and their cross-platform unfriendliness from the situation, but Linux distros are made from work arounds, and the comic's target is the priorities of developers, not Adobe's open source policies.

    25. Re:Obligatory XKCD by sconeu · · Score: 1

      Why do you believe Kubuntu is a terrible KDE distro?

      What would you call a "good" KDE distro?

      I've used both Mandriva and Kubuntu...

      --
      General Relativity: Space-time tells matter where to go; Matter tells space-time what shape to be.
    26. Re:Obligatory XKCD by MPAB · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The same way mp3 became a standard and "linux" users must install codecs "at their own risk".
      The same way linux-verboten WinModems became a standard that faded only when they couldn't keep up with ADSL.
      The same way Realtek and Broadcom WiFi cards have become a standard in most notebooks (and some desktops) and they still perform very poorly under "linux".
      The same way NVidia and ATI have become the video adapter standards and none has yet got full support (not even mentioning double screens) under Linux.

      I'm not blaming linux for any of this, but I do blame those that cry over the fact the rest of the world has accepted and can get along with those de facto "standards".

      With the right kexts and a couple of clicks, my Leopard hackintosh install gets a much better grab of my hardware than both my Ubuntu and Debian installs, over which I'm endlessly trying new drivers and recompiling the kernel.

    27. Re:Obligatory XKCD by Trepidity · · Score: 1

      You could say that about any platform, though. OS X sucks because it lacks ports of most major PC games, for example. Maybe it's not Apple's fault, but as someone who plays games, I don't care who is at fault.

      (Also, Windows sucks, because to get lots of stuff working you have to deal with half-ported abominations in cygwin.)

    28. Re:Obligatory XKCD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The community could, for example, finish Gnash...

      The alternative to the "broken" as you've put it "ready for the desktop" criteria is "ready for people who don't expect Flash apps and 3D games to work". I think using the latter definition is just shooting yourself in the foot and alienating yourself from the general public, even if it makes more sense to you.

    29. Re:Obligatory XKCD by Inner_Child · · Score: 1

          It was a dumb episode. The only folks who use Flash fullscreen are people watching online porn. :)

      Or Hulu, or CBS, or NBC... yeah, there are a lot of uses for fullscreen Flash that don't involve porn.

      --
      Today is red jello day - all workers must eat all of their red jello. Failure to comply will result in five demerits.
    30. Re:Obligatory XKCD by negRo_slim · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The only folks who use Flash fullscreen are people watching online porn. :)

      Well, and YouTube,

      and Hulu.

      --
      On the Oregon Cost born and raised, On the beach is where I spent most of my days
    31. Re:Obligatory XKCD by Unoriginal_Nickname · · Score: 1

      It is Apple's fault. Porting games to OSX is ghastly and laborious.

    32. Re:Obligatory XKCD by Tumbleweed · · Score: 1

      > linux gurus who can rebuild their kernel six times a day

      How did they manage that before support for 4096 cores?

      They used a Beowulf cluster.

    33. Re:Obligatory XKCD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Slackware, Arch, Pardus ...

    34. Re:Obligatory XKCD by bjourne · · Score: 1

      The Flash video format was opened long time ago. Adobes Linux Mozilla plugin is still proprietary and sucks monkeyballs of course. But there is nothing stopping any open source developer from writing a good plugin themselves. That no developer has done that is not Adobe's fault. Meanwhile, if you know what you are doing (check the /tmp directory!), you can download the video and it will play perfect in fullscreen in any gstreamer based player such as totem.

    35. Re:Obligatory XKCD by Deagol · · Score: 1

      PCLinuxOS is a pretty good KDE-based distro.

    36. Re:Obligatory XKCD by causality · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I wish there were a Greasemonkey script for Slashdot that would remove from visibility any and all posts containing "XKCD". That way my view of the discussion would look like no such posts existed. While I'd love to endlessly debate the intended message of a guy who draws stick figure comics, it really doesn't have much to do with the latest improvements to the Linux kernel other than mentioning the words. That, and I just don't find XKCD to be endlessly interesting the way a lot of folks here do. It doesn't help that most of the ones mentioned here are quite stereotypical (like the whole "geeks care about things that average users don't, whodathunkit?!" theme). Even if I did find XKCD to be endlessly interesting, I wouldn't bring it up at every possible opportunity. Now go ahead and flame me because I don't think your trendy (around here, anyway) comic is all that clever.

      --
      It is a miracle that curiosity survives formal education. - Einstein
    37. Re:Obligatory XKCD by marcansoft · · Score: 2, Interesting
      • MP3 is an open format, just a patented one. Big difference. There are tons of MP3 implementations and they can talk to each other. And Fluendo makes a free-as-in-beer fully legal MP3 codec for Linux.
      • Some WinModems had drivers for Linux that worked decently. It varied from vendor to vendor. And you could always buy a real modem.
      • As far as I know, WiFi support for most chipsets is quite decent on Linux these days. But that's irrelevant, because you have a choice - you can buy another vendor's card, and they all interoperate with the same open WiFi specification. This is very different from the Flash issue.
      • NVidia has relatively great drivers for Linux, including multiple screens. I'm using xinerama right now and all I had to do was plug the second monitor in and open nvidia-settings to tell it how the monitors should be arranged. It was about the same, if not easier, than doing the same thing under Windows. And at least you get to pick between NVidia, Intel, or ATI

      Users have a choice with every one of those 4 examples. They do not have a choice with Flash, as there is only one vendor with a half-decent implementation and they block any potential competitors from using their specification.

    38. Re:Obligatory XKCD by Sique · · Score: 1

      My colleague used to have a T-Shirt: "My kernel compiles in 2:06 min. How fast is yours?" (Build machine was a mere 80 cores cluster).

      --
      .sig: Sique *sigh*
    39. Re:Obligatory XKCD by marcansoft · · Score: 1

      Gnash will never be finished because it relies on reverse engineering Flash files and the like. Gnash developers cannot see or use Adobe's specification, as doing so would be violating Adobe's terms.

      Make no mistake, Adobe is trying to block any competing Flash players as much as the law will allow them to.

    40. Re:Obligatory XKCD by TheSunborn · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Not anymore. (From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adobe_Flash)

      In May 2008, Adobe launched the Open Screen Project (Adobe link), which made the SWF specification available without restrictions. Previously, developers couldn't use the specification for making SWF-compatible players, but only for making SWF-exporting authoring software. The specification remains incomplete, however, as it does not include any details regarding RTMP or Sorenson Spark,[27] both of which are widely used to distribute video through Flash.

      So the only missing piece is the video encoding and that can be handled by mplayer already.

    41. Re:Obligatory XKCD by mysidia · · Score: 3, Insightful

      This is no excuse. The Open Source community has brought us Samba for goodness sake.

      Reverse-engineering and making an open implementation of a simple web plugin should be harder than reverse-engineering and implementing Windows domain, RPC named pipes, and file sharing protocols? :)

      Not to mention the fact that Adobe has made SWF, FLV, and RMTP open specifications.

    42. Re:Obligatory XKCD by ion.simon.c · · Score: 1

      After such ringing endorsements, the response in the free Flash community makes for an almost comical contrast. "Our reaction is pretty much, 'Ho-hum,'" said Rob Savoye, lead developer for the Gnash project, which is creating a free Flash player. "It's a really good thing when corporations figure out that being more open to the community is important but, at the same time, it's not a huge deal."
      ...
      One reason for the lack of excitement over the project in the free software world is that it omits "huge amounts" of information needed for a complete implementation of Flash. In particular, Savoye points out that the announcement contains no mention of the Real Time Messaging Protocol(RTMP) that is required for the Flash media server. Nor does it mention the Sorenson Spark Codec that is used for video encoding in Flash 6 and 7, and remains the choice of some users still for Flash video because other formats convert easily to it. Both may be encumbered by patents but, without them, the information that Adobe has released is of limited use.

      Just as important, what Adobe released is not new to the free Flash community. "Pretty much all of that stuff was known," Otte says. Savoye agrees, remarking, "We figured that all out years ago, or we wouldn't have gotten as far along as we have." Moreover, although Gnash and Swfdec are clean room implementations -- that is, developed without the aid of any information from Adobe -- Savoye suggests that, "Most of this documentation, if we really wanted it, has already leaked out on the Internet years ago."

      Via
      http://www.openmedianow.org/?q=node/21

    43. Re:Obligatory XKCD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Er, TV show episodes?

    44. Re:Obligatory XKCD by mysidia · · Score: 1

      It has ports of the only PC games that really matter:

      • World of warcraft
      • Warcraft III
      • World of Goo
      • Starcraft
      • Diablo II
      • Spore
    45. Re:Obligatory XKCD by Dragonslicer · · Score: 1

      I use Kubuntu, and I wouldn't call it terrible, but it does suffer from being a second-class citizen to Ubuntu. A lot of the KDE-specific work gets passed over in favor of Gnome-specific work.

    46. Re:Obligatory XKCD by mysidia · · Score: 1

      They used distcc, which required multiple pieces of hardware.

    47. Re:Obligatory XKCD by schon · · Score: 1

      The author is waiting on a Linux kernel patch to fix the Flash issues he has with his Intel card.

      OK, so do tell. How exactly is a kernel patch going to fix a problem with a proprietary browser plugin?

      On my machine, I can watch FLVs, full screen, with a variety of players (Xine, Mplayer, MythTV). It's only Flash player that's broken.

      So, considering that the problem is demonstratably with the Flash plugin, how will a kernel patch fix it?

    48. Re:Obligatory XKCD by mysidia · · Score: 1

      I'm not sure what Y and Z are, but I know Linux can run X... My web browser is running under X. :)

    49. Re:Obligatory XKCD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Care to link straight to the RTMP spec, because I don't seem to be able to find it?

      Also, "long time ago" implies something else to me than "last year", which is actually the reality.

    50. Re:Obligatory XKCD by jmorris42 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      > As someone who uses Windows but has an open mind, I don't care who is at fault.

      Fair enough on one level but totally unfair on the one that matters here. If the criticism of the Linux community is they concentrate their effort on things that mortals care little for this one doesn't work since the performance of Flash Player is entirely out of their hands.

      Flash sucks everywhere, just to varying degrees depending on platform. Go watch the fun in the netbook space as the Intel Atom is being unfairly blamed by clueless pundits for the inability of netbooks with the newer 1280x720 and 1388x768 displays to play full screen Flash video (on Windows XP btw.). We nerds on slashdot know better of course, the problem is Adobe being mindless idiots who can't figure out how to properly use a scaled video surface.

      I'd like some green group to calculate how many YouTube videos have been played and how many GigaWatt Hours of electricity have been wasted on software colorspace conversion and scaling because Adobe can't figure out how to use well documented and commonly available features on every video card made in the last fifteen years.

      --
      Democrat delenda est
    51. Re:Obligatory XKCD by marcansoft · · Score: 2, Informative

      FLV is a flash video format. Mplayer already plays FLVs just fine. This has little to do with flash video sites, which use SWF to create their own players for FLV content (and often the FLV location is obfuscated and keyed, so you need to interpret the SWF to get to it). It is impossible to get YouTube to work with only an FLV player. Crude hacks like using Adobe's plugin to download the video to /tmp and then playing it with mplayer aren't really viable for end-users.

      The SWF format was completely closed until May 1, 2008, and even now it's still missing bits and pieces. Gnash devs have had less than a year and a half to work with a real specification, so it's no surprise that they're still quite a ways behind the official Adobe Flash.

    52. Re:Obligatory XKCD by ion.simon.c · · Score: 1

      I can't see why Flash should need *any* HW accell to do video playback. A while back, I investigated performance of Flash on Linux and Windows, and mplayer on the same. I found that mplayer's *unaccelerated* [0] fullscreen playback of a particular HD video scraped from YouTube was 80-90% faster than doing the same with the latest Windows-based Flash plugin.

      tl;dr: Flash *SUCKS* for video playback.

      I *really* wish that my google-fu was not so weak today... I'd love to find the comment where I detailed all of this.

      [0] x11 video out under Linux and -IIRC- directx:noaccel under Windows.

    53. Re:Obligatory XKCD by marcansoft · · Score: 1

      I take that back then. I hope Gnash makes significant improvement in the following years. Then again, if "it's not a huge deal" I wonder why they aren't progressing faster. I was under the impression that Gnash was moving slowly because the project had to be quite picky about developers to remain legal, since the existing spec was off-limits.

    54. Re:Obligatory XKCD by marcansoft · · Score: 3, Informative

      Flash is by no means "simple". There are a bunch of different speficiations and sub-specifications to be implemented (ActionScript, FLV, RTMP, ...).

    55. Re:Obligatory XKCD by bertoelcon · · Score: 1

      FLV is open, but SWF is not.

      --
      Anything can be found funny, from a certain point of view.
    56. Re:Obligatory XKCD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And worse still, this closed off format still doesn't offer flash in 64bit. Getting flash to 64bit will make 64bit mainstreaming more plausible.

    57. Re:Obligatory XKCD by XFire35 · · Score: 1

      I have two monitors on an nVidia card in Archlinux, they work brilliantly. But I am using the nVidia drivers, which I have no objection to. Also, nVidia drivers come with this handy setup GUI dohicky.

    58. Re:Obligatory XKCD by MostAwesomeDude · · Score: 4, Informative

      [citations needed]

      EXA is the backend acceleration we use right now in X. It works.

      Full EXA is provided for radeon, nouveau, and intel, the Big Three. A lot of esoteric chips are supported too. They might not be super-fast, but they're still fast enough to do nearly anything. (Getting that vaunted 1m glyphs/sec is tough though.)

      Flash is a piece of shit. I most certainly can and will blame Adobe for not putting more than one person on the Linux Flash team, and I can point to the incomplete, buggy, largely hacked-up Gnash as an example of a software rasterizer that moves much faster than Flash despite also being lame.

      Don't even get me started on Flash Video.

      --
      ~ C.
    59. Re:Obligatory XKCD by Hurricane78 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Well, with SVG and the video tag, that is about to change! Big time!

      I'm a professional, and man, watch those demos in at least Firefox 3.5 (or something comparable): http://people.mozilla.com/~prouget/demos/

      The ability to integrate Flash-like FX, Video and Audio SEAMLESSLY with (X)HTML and CSS (and every other supported XML language, like MathML), is just beyond words... It's what I'm waiting for, for at least a decade! And the performance of both environments gets closer and closer to being equal.
      With that, soon nobody needs or even wants Flash anymore.

      I'll just use those features, and frankly, I can stand "losing" even 50% of the users for it. Those are the dumbest part of the population anyway. You only have problems with those. They can go to AOL or whatever. I have enough clients. :)

      --
      Any sufficiently advanced intelligence is indistinguishable from stupidity.
    60. Re:Obligatory XKCD by causality · · Score: 1

      FLV is a flash video format. Mplayer already plays FLVs just fine. This has little to do with flash video sites, which use SWF to create their own players for FLV content (and often the FLV location is obfuscated and keyed, so you need to interpret the SWF to get to it). It is impossible to get YouTube to work with only an FLV player. Crude hacks like using Adobe's plugin to download the video to /tmp and then playing it with mplayer aren't really viable for end-users.

      The SWF format was completely closed until May 1, 2008, and even now it's still missing bits and pieces. Gnash devs have had less than a year and a half to work with a real specification, so it's no surprise that they're still quite a ways behind the official Adobe Flash.

      If I understand correctly, the obfuscation of the actual video file that you mention is the main reason why major sites like Youtube use such an asinine proprietary format. It seems to me that the solution is to produce better tools for getting around such obfuscation and downloading the video files and then to make them both very easy to use and universally available. When such obfuscation becomes a complete failure, will major sites have any remaining reasons not to just embed a standard file format and let the users' choice of media player take care of it?

      --
      It is a miracle that curiosity survives formal education. - Einstein
    61. Re:Obligatory XKCD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The same way mp3 became a standard and "linux" users must install codecs "at their own risk".

      Actually, mp3 is patented, but there are multiple implementations. Patents are only a problem in the USA and a couple of other retarded countries.

      The same way linux-verboten WinModems became a standard that faded only when they couldn't keep up with ADSL.

      Winmodems were trash, and anyone who actually cared used a real modem (which usually meant an external modem). Winmodems used too much CPU and were also inferior as modems.

      The same way Realtek and Broadcom WiFi cards have become a standard in most notebooks (and some desktops) and they still perform very poorly under "linux".

      Can't argue there, mainly because I have no experience with them.

      The same way NVidia and ATI have become the video adapter standards and none has yet got full support (not even mentioning double screens) under Linux.

      Nvidia, at least, has excellent double screen support in my experience, I use it often when giving talks (so I don't have to turn around to look at what's being projected), or at home with a secondary screen. The drivers are closed and not the best, but I don't really miss anything from Windows.

      I'm not blaming linux for any of this, but I do blame those that cry over the fact the rest of the world has accepted and can get along with those de facto "standards".

      With the right kexts and a couple of clicks, my Leopard hackintosh install gets a much better grab of my hardware than both my Ubuntu and Debian installs, over which I'm endlessly trying new drivers and recompiling the kernel.

      I haven't had to compile a kernel in several years, I don't think most linux users I know do it, either.
        Overall, the latest linux versions have better hardware support than any MS Windows version.

    62. Re:Obligatory XKCD by JWSmythe · · Score: 1

          Er, that's what they make that new fangled "TV" thing for. :)

      --
      Serious? Seriousness is well above my pay grade.
    63. Re:Obligatory XKCD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Bollox! Never heard of openGL?

    64. Re:Obligatory XKCD by zdzichu · · Score: 4, Funny

      Fedora developer read it for sure:

      * Fri Aug 07 2009 Kristian HÃgsberg - 2.8.0-4
      - Add dri2-page-flip.patch to enable full screen pageflipping.
          Fixes XKCD #619.

      xorg-x11-drv-intel-2.8.0-4.fc12

      --
      :wq
    65. Re:Obligatory XKCD by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      Well, if your definition of "games that really matter" is "games that run on OS X", then sure. If you rather go by popular releases, it's not anywhere as good. Speaking of the recent stuff, where's GTA4? Left 4 Dead?

    66. Re:Obligatory XKCD by MPAB · · Score: 1

      Yes. I had a choice of buying a U.S.R. modem that cost 4-5 times as much. Same with WiFi cards, if I even get the choice to change the one that will come with the laptop. (And not buying a laptop that costs US$ 300 - 500 more from a more expensive vendor)

      Everybody brags about WiFi support for Linux in these days, but it's of no use to me because no Ubuntu will work in my Gateway 7422gx laptop, nor in my Compaq Presario V5000 without ndiswrapper and it took bloddy ages to adapt a working driver for my ASUS PK5-E WiFi mainboard (which was almost wiped in an Ubuntu automated kernel upgrade). Debian just didn't mind there being any WiFi cards on board.

      Got to remember, also, that most cheap brands (common stuff @ town stores and mega-buy-your carrots-and-your-LCD-TV-here-malls) don't disclose the innards of their products: not in the envelope nor in the website; so one must guess it by examining the PCB after having opened the package, which is usually clamshell.

    67. Re:Obligatory XKCD by Hurricane78 · · Score: 1

      LOL. The demo effect in action! I'm truly sorry! Forgot the slash in the closing <strong> tag (and the preview function I guess ;). After being awake for 36 hours and being sick like a dog, I should go to bed. Wait... one more story... ;))

      --
      Any sufficiently advanced intelligence is indistinguishable from stupidity.
    68. Re:Obligatory XKCD by The+MAZZTer · · Score: 2, Insightful

      As someone who uses Windows who sees exactly the same poor performance in Flash, I KNOW who's at fault.

    69. Re:Obligatory XKCD by Mouldy · · Score: 1

      Oh please, GTA 4 wasn't even ported to PC/Windows properly. What chance do they have with Macs?

    70. Re:Obligatory XKCD by marcansoft · · Score: 1

      The only real way around that obfuscation is making a fully compliant player. Video sites keep changing URL and keying schemes around. That's kind of the point. By the time you've broken the obfuscation universally, you've made a flash player clone (at least everything but the actual rendering to the screen).

    71. Re:Obligatory XKCD by Xabraxas · · Score: 1

      64-bit Flash is available and I have been using it for months now.

      --
      Time makes more converts than reason
    72. Re:Obligatory XKCD by maxume · · Score: 1

      Sure, but I think that is a more reasonable interpretation of the comic than "teh Linux is the suck" (some AC linked the actual comic page, rather than the image, and the alt text implies that Mr. Monroe uses Linux anyway, which alters the message quite a bit).

      There certainly are people in the Linux community concerned about desktop adoption, and eventually, they are going to have to start working on finding ways to improve things that are out of their control.

      --
      Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
    73. Re:Obligatory XKCD by mysidia · · Score: 1

      Sure there are multiple specifications involved, but there's demonstrably open source work, so it can't be _that_ hard:

      VLC is an open source media player and can play FLVs.

      The Open source media player XBMC has some support for playing RTMP streams.

      Not to mention rtmpdump

      And Gnash claims to support most SWF v7 and v8 features.

      There is also an open-source Action script compiler called MTASC

      If we have open source tools to actually generate the bytecode... is it not a reasonable thought that tools could have been developed to actually run that bytecode?

    74. Re:Obligatory XKCD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In addition to not being developed slowly, it could also not run slowly.

    75. Re:Obligatory XKCD by Aggrajag · · Score: 1

      To be honest, I read that earlier.

    76. Re:Obligatory XKCD by Ant+P. · · Score: 1

      2D acceleration in Linux for most video drivers is shabby at best.

      The biggest 2D performance hog I've ever used, KDE 4, has never given me a severe problem. So far I've used it on a Radeon 9250, an Intel i915, and a SiS 630. I've heard nightmare stories about it on nVidia cards with the proprietary driver though.

      Flash, flash has never been usable. Standard-def youtube video will bring my Pentium 4 to its knees (if the video works at all), yet it plays fine when I plug the URL into mplayer.

    77. Re:Obligatory XKCD by babblefrog · · Score: 1

      Reality has a known literal bias.

    78. Re:Obligatory XKCD by sandGorgons · · Score: 1

      @ScytheBlade1, Slitaz needs you ;)

      I hope the kernel gurus focus on power. With the nearly double battery performance of Win7 X64 on my laptop as compared to Jaunty X64, I am really having trouble getting people to move to Linux.

      'tis the time of horizontal scaling - lets make things more power efficient please

    79. Re:Obligatory XKCD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Did you try?. Besides the protocol was almost completely reverse engineered over two years ago thanks to the red5 project. And most flash video sites does not use RTMP anyway.

    80. Re:Obligatory XKCD by Sir_Lewk · · Score: 1

      Fedora has always been a pretty solid KDE distro in my experiance. I used to use Kubuntu but have since stopped. All the reasons there are to use Ubuntu are pretty much negated in Kubuntu, it's basically the red-headed stepchild of that whole meta-distro-ish thing.

      --
      "linux is just DOS with a UNIX like syntax" -- Galactic Dominator (944134)
    81. Re:Obligatory XKCD by assert(0) · · Score: 1

      Seriously, spectacular waste of transistors, megajoules and CO2 emission there! My kernel builds in 5:22 using ccache. Single core machine.

      Advise colleague to spend some time removing the cruft colleague doesn't have/use from config. It's worth it.

      --
      (founded 95,000,000 yrs ago, very space opera)
    82. Re:Obligatory XKCD by bjourne · · Score: 1

      I'm aware of the difference between flv and swf. But most video sites only use swf for the player which merely fetches the flv file from somewhere and streams it. That is only a small subset of the whole swf specification. While the specification was closed until last year, there still existed dozens of third party decompilers, encrypters and other kind of tools for swf, so it appears that it wasn't all that hard to reverse engineer the format.

      And no offense to the Gnash developers, but they haven't gotten very far since the swf format was opened.

    83. Re:Obligatory XKCD by billcopc · · Score: 1

      If common non-hacker priorities are "dumber" to you, well I do wonder where you find the time to post here because your mind must be bursting with revolutionary kernel enhancements for your Top100 cluster.

      For everyone else, we don't give a flying fuck whose fault it is. We just care that it's broken, has been for a long time, and upon seeing countless changelogs that amount to little more than kernel hacker epeen comparisons, a lot of us have given up hope for a truly omnipotent Linux desktop.

      My office PC is a Linux desktop, with Windows in a VM. It works well for me, as a sysadmin, since every single thing I do in my job is network-based. My desktop is quirky as hell, and a lot of things just don't work right, or lag like Michael Jackson's burial. Flash video is one such pain, multi-monitor support is another (inequal-sized monitors ? FAIL!). I put up with it because it kicks ass for 95% of what I have to do, but that last 5% is a nail-biter.

      For similar reasons, I have a somewhat sleeker build on my laptop, mostly due to KDE4, that shiny bug-infested mess of a Vista clone. It's a pain to get basic things like power management to work reliably, and a few kernels ago my backlight controls decided to quit, along with Suspend-to-RAM and my battery status. All this despite my carefully configured kernels and hours of ACPI troubleshooting. What's the use of a fast kernel if it makes my machine virtually unusable ?

      It's real cute that they improved responsiveness under load, but how often does a average Linux desktop run out of memory ? If it weren't for all my VMs, I could run comfortably with 512mb, or so free/top/gkrellm would suggest. I just don't know which user base they're trying to please with this release, it's definitely not me.

      --
      -Billco, Fnarg.com
    84. Re:Obligatory XKCD by Arancaytar · · Score: 1

      Fuck, who cares about some stupid Flash and desktop performance? When will I finally be able to install Linux on my 8192-core computer, that's what *I* want to know. :P

      This rocks, though. My laptop stutters when I have Pidgin, Firefox and Thunderbird running at the same time; I hope that I will see a much smoother X performance with this next version.

    85. Re:Obligatory XKCD by billcopc · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      If choosing Linux means I have to buy rare and expensive hardware, how can we call it free software ? "Free with a catch" is not actually free. I'm willing to spend the money if the end result is more reliable or better performing, but that's ignoring the people who stand to benefit from free software the most, those with tight budgets, also known as the majority of the goddamned world. For Linux-based systems to gain traction, we need to get those millions of not-so-wealthy folks on board, and for that, we need to support the cheap hardware they can afford.

      WinModems were only named as such because Linux hackers couldn't be bothered to make them work. A more appropriate term would be "Software-driven modem", but then you can't make the oh-so-trendy us vs them pun, and that rivalry is, in my not-so-humble opinion, everything that's wrong with the Linux ecosystem. Too much infighting, too much whining, too much "I hate Alan Cox, therefore your distro sucks" bullshit. That's not what it was about, and frankly I think the key people in this scene are taking too much bad example from Linus' elitism.

      We should be getting all that nice cheap hardware to work on Linux, because cheap hardware + free software is a winning combination; that much should be obvious to anyone with a functioning brain.

      --
      -Billco, Fnarg.com
    86. Re:Obligatory XKCD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Last time I checked the nvidia driver supports dual screens as well as in windows. Good luck with ATi though.

    87. Re:Obligatory XKCD by vintagepc · · Score: 1

      Just off the record- it works fine on my nvidia card, w/ proprietary drivers. The interesting thing is that I do get the impression it lags more than my Intel 945 laptop, but that may be because I have a giant 3360x1050 desktop, whereas my laptop is only 1280x800 Frankly, with my measly 8600GT, I wouldn't expect too much performance running a 3d FPS at that resolution.

      That said, yes, earlier releases were buggy with nvidia drivers, and I've had my fair share of quirks. But, I've followed the development stream, and am somewhere midway between 4.2 and 4.3 (I'd rather not update all my KDE packages over dial-up!!), and it runs beautifully.

      --
      Evolution - Est. 4500000000 B.C. Don't piss in the gene pool.
    88. Re:Obligatory XKCD by gbarules2999 · · Score: 1

      Hey, you want to know why linux doesn't have more desktop market penetration?

      Because Windows has a monopoly on vendors, drivers and OEM's. There are no other reasons.

      Hey, you want to know what really annoys me? People posting as if they have a god-given answer to Linux's possible success. Or how it's going to all be fixed if Linux changes this or that. I only have one thing to say: good luck with that.

      You think that in the same situation Microsoft wouldn't have somone calling Adobe to get the full screen flash video working properly?

      Of course they would, because they can. They're fucking Microsoft. They can do whatever the hell they want. Do think Adobe's going to pave the floor with gold for Red Hat's call waiting?

      They understand that it is always the operating system's fault when something goes wrong, no matter what the truth is.

      Which is why they owned up to all of those Vista drivers that didn't exist for two years, right?

      In the end, the "Windows" brand hasn't been damaged, the "Vista" brand was. And Windows 7 will hit the market sounding like some sort of savior for computers.

      "Windows" is not a brand that people love or hate. If people understand the difference between a computer and its OS, then they usually don't like Windows or know that it has some things wrong with it. There are very few Windows fanboys that know what they're talking about (or aren't being paid my Microsoft). Everybody else equates Windows to their computer. There's no distinction between hardware and software.

      I'm not saying Linux is perfect. God no. But the things they really, truly have to fix are sometimes geeky. Package management should be confined to a common package format. The audio nonsense should be converted back to OSS. A regular user wouldn't understand these sentences, but they will benefit from them whether they know it not. After the base is complete, then it's just a constant movement to fix bugs, such as full screen Flash support. Not that Flash support has been a really huge issue for a while anyway.

      Windows gets away with being the leader through consumer ignorance. Granted, that's not going to be the situation for long. Check back in ten years and you'll see a very different scenario as more and more users enter the marketplace with more of a computer knowledge and understanding. This will continue to grow until ignorance won't be the only thing Windows can hold onto. It will be interesting to see what happens.

      Meanwhile, Linux advocates still want to know why the average person won't leave windows.

      Because they can't. They don't know how. And if OS installs are ever mainstream in this current marketplace, you can go ahead and shoot me then.

    89. Re:Obligatory XKCD by marcansoft · · Score: 1

      Free-as-in-freedom, not free-as-in-beer. Look it up. Linux isn't a promise for zero monetary cost (you still have to buy a computer, don't you?)

      Some hardware may work better for Linux, but it's not necessarily rare or expensive. Now keep in mind that, in fact, Linux runs on much lower cost systems than your average PC (for example, ARM-based platforms). You won't find Windows running on your $30 WiFi router.

      You're right, WinModem is an inaccurate term (as I said, I've used "Win"modems under Linux), but it's well-known and has stuck (and besides, this is obsolete technology anyway), so let's not argue over terminology. I don't see how this extrapolates to rivalry. Somehow you've managed to extract a bucketload of hate from a single term.

    90. Re:Obligatory XKCD by Kjella · · Score: 1

      Fair enough on one level but totally unfair on the one that matters here. If the criticism of the Linux community is they concentrate their effort on things that mortals care little for this one doesn't work since the performance of Flash Player is entirely out of their hands.

      Fair enough on one level, but totally unfair in a way too. The desktop can probably wait until hell freezes over before Microsoft will port their chat client - a pretty basic need. Instead we got clients like pidgin and kopete that use those protocols as replacements. The lack of a flash replacement is valid criticism of the Linux community, gnash doesn't really come close.

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    91. Re:Obligatory XKCD by marcansoft · · Score: 1

      For everyone else, we don't give a flying fuck whose fault it is. We just care that it's broken, has been for a long time, and upon seeing countless changelogs that amount to little more than kernel hacker epeen comparisons, a lot of us have given up hope for a truly omnipotent Linux desktop.

      That's because most of the work to improve the desktop happens outside the kernel. If you're looking for changelogs relevant to desktop stuff, look at Xorg or the KDE project or whatever.

      Also, you forget one case where every Linux desktop and laptop runs out of memory: hibernation. Specifically, they reduce their memory usage to 0 when that happens, by paging out most stuff and then making an image of the rest. These changes should help post-resume performance after hibernation, during those initial seconds where switching applications takes a while as everything is being paged in. That's quite relevant to desktop usage, don't you think?

      As for ACPI issues, do take note that manufacturers tend to suck at ACPI implementations. So some issues will come and go - Windows has an inherent advantage in that manufacturers explicitly test (and work around bugs) for Windows compatibility. I've had to fight with my laptop's ACPI support. Half got fixed with a few kernel patches to work around bugs, and half got fixed after the third BIOS update (one year after I bought the machine). None of the issues would have happened if the laptop's ACPI implementation weren't so buggy. Keep that in mind when you see complaints about ACPI issues - most often, they're the manufacturer's fault, and they take a while to get worked around or fixed.

    92. Re:Obligatory XKCD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The rest of the world? Meaning the hardware manufacturers have written drivers for Windows and Mac, but not for Linux? How's this Linux fault?

      Btw. recompiling the kernel to get new drivers is not necessary. I haven't recompiled a kernel in years. Most things do actually just work.

    93. Re:Obligatory XKCD by wringles · · Score: 1

      Linux is just a kernel, not my fault if it cannot run x

      But it does run X.

    94. Re:Obligatory XKCD by brainkidabc · · Score: 1

      actually i have a broadcom card with ubuntu (though i switched from vista) one kernel upgrade and smooth sailing

    95. Re:Obligatory XKCD by Blakey+Rat · · Score: 2, Interesting

      As an ex-Mac user, and a video game fan, the rule is that the Mac version of the number 1 game usually comes out about 3 months after everybody else has already gotten sick of playing it to death.

    96. Re:Obligatory XKCD by Blakey+Rat · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      If the open source community had been innovative enough to come up with something like Flash back before Flash existed, then the open source community could make the call whether to open-up the file format or not.

      The solution to your issue is to *anticipate* software that is needed, and have it ready *before* it's popular. Instead of just waiting to see what Microsoft and Adobe do, then come up with a crappy clone of same.

    97. Re:Obligatory XKCD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is no excuse. The Open Source community has brought us Samba for goodness sake.

      I'd wager that more programming dollars exist for Samba development than browser plug-in development for Linux. Samba matters more to the organizations who pay programmers to work on Linux. Simply put, Linux server dollars > Linux desktop dollars.

      Saying that the two tasks are similar in implementation difficulty doesn't mean they'll both develop just as fast. It still comes down to developer interest and time. Employers (aka the ones that put a roofs over heads) seem to be able to attract a lot of time and interest from programmers. Not sure why.

      If that's not enough of an "excuse" I don't know what is. I'm sorry you are confused about free software. It doesn't mean developers work for free. It doesn't mean developers are all about some fictional utopian world where everyone contributes for free at the whim of some end user voting system. Yes sometimes it can happen to some extent but shit. Unless you're paying the programmer or are a programmer submitting patches you really don't have room to demand anything.

    98. Re:Obligatory XKCD by amn108 · · Score: 1

      It is not the same plugin. Go visit Adobe.com and see for yourself. They have separate Windows and Linux versions. They are called versions for a reason. Part of code is shared, yes, but a good share of it is parts that interface the system, which are obviously not shared - because the systems are different.

    99. Re:Obligatory XKCD by Velex · · Score: 1

      This rocks, though. My laptop stutters when I have Pidgin, Firefox and Thunderbird running at the same time; I hope that I will see a much smoother X performance with this next version.

      Not to troll, but I had a similar experience that I fixed by uninstalling Firefox in favor of Midori, although it looks like I may be giving this Uzbl thing mentioned in another article a spin shortly. I'm not sure whether there's legitimacy to the Firefox devs' complaints about X, but I don't really care if there are browsers out there that don't bring my whole system to a halt to load a webpage.

      --
      Join the Slashcott! Stay away entirely Feb 10 thru Feb 17! Close all tabs to prevent autorefresh!
    100. Re:Obligatory XKCD by hairyfeet · · Score: 2, Insightful

      No shit. Trying to sell Linux at retail is a fricking nightmare from hell. Which printers on sale at Walmart this week work in Linux? Will these wireless cards at Best Buy work out of the box? Damned if I know, and the poor bastard behind the counter at Staples sure as hell ain't gonna know either. Which is why i have said time and time again there needs to be a stable ABI and a "Tux the penguin" certification process. That way retailers like me can just go "look for the fat penguin" and know that the items will "just work".

      So while I congratulate the kernel guys for these new tweaks, until any of my customers can walk into Walmart and buy hardware without it being a minefield I don't really see this helping Linux adoption much. The Windows customers can look for the "works with Windows x" Winflag, the Apple customers look for the Apple logo, the Linux customers are just SOL unless they study like it was a fricking test just to buy some hardware at Staples. Until that changes getting better memory response isn't really gonna help much IMHO. It is like those OSes that fit on a single floppy. Good for a little "how did they do that" entertainment but not really usable for the vast majority.

      I personally hope for the day I see just as many Linux laptops as Windows ones in Walmart, and little fat Tux logos on nearly every piece of hardware, but with the zealotry of RMS and the "source code or nothing!" crowd I won't hold my breath. Damned shame, as the newer Linux distros are really nice, with lots of cool features, but trying to find hardware that works is just too big of a PITA to allow me to sell them at retail.

      --
      ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
    101. Re:Obligatory XKCD by Baloo+Uriza · · Score: 1

      ...then you're a retard. You're right up there with the guy who blames the electrician for the low flow toilet that takes two flushes to clear the bowl on a high-flow sewer pipe...

      --
      Furries make the internet go.
    102. Re:Obligatory XKCD by Baloo+Uriza · · Score: 1

      I can't really blame Adobe for this

      Yes. Yes you can. And you should. It's not like the information to fix the problem isn't available to them, and it's not like it's desktop-environment specific under X (hell, to them all environments are web browsers and dealing with the DE is the browser's problem, not flash's). It's not like the source to that product is available to us.

      There's two ways they can solve this: Fix it or let us fix it.

      They're choosing: Leave it broken and blame the next guy down the line.

      You chose: To drink the Flavoraid.

      --
      Furries make the internet go.
    103. Re:Obligatory XKCD by Baloo+Uriza · · Score: 1

      I have to wonder just how badly you have to sell out to someone (either literally or psychologically) to come up with that cosmic leap in logic (or if you're not sober, who your dealer is). The comic didn't mention anything about Linux not being ready for the desktop, it was social commentary about a problem we'd all like to fix but are utterly cripped by a retarded vendor on. It's called subtle humor, read upthread; marcan explains the joke for the logic impaired.

      --
      Furries make the internet go.
    104. Re:Obligatory XKCD by maxume · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You are conflating things. I am not (hypothetically here) raging at the Linux community to fix flash, I am simply not experimenting with Linux because I care about flash working reasonably well, and apparently, it doesn't. The underlying reason isn't particularly relevant if I care about having flash.

      So again, the point isn't that I will capriciously blame anyone and everyone for anything, the point is that if I see a problem that prevents me from doing something I want to do day-to-day, I'm not even going to try. That the community bears the brunt of Adobe's lack of interest is unfortunate, but there you go.

      --
      Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
    105. Re:Obligatory XKCD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Holy! Isn't the SiS 630 like uh, 10+ years old?

    106. Re:Obligatory XKCD by Baloo+Uriza · · Score: 1

      I guess the other part is I don't get the punchline's literal premise, which is that fullscreen Youtube videos don't play smoothly on Linux (I have other complaints about Flash, largely in that it's usually used as a replacement for XHTML or hiring someone who knows what they're doing). Is Debian doing something different that every other distro is getting wrong or something? I'm using the Adobe flash plugin and fullscreen flash video plays smoothly for me.

      --
      Furries make the internet go.
    107. Re:Obligatory XKCD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Support for large scale servers are the basic features most of the developers get paid for.

      It is a basic requirement of the server providers that Linux works well on their hardware. They hire and pay core developers for this critical work.

      Adobe are free to do the same for their needs.

    108. Re:Obligatory XKCD by kelnos · · Score: 1

      No, not really. I was looking for a particular post from Benjamin Otte, the latest swfdec maintainer, but I couldn't find the one I wanted This one paints part of the picture, but not the whole thing.

      The problem is that the Flash spec is very incomplete. It doesn't specify how errors should be handled, and, while it does specify what Adobe *wanted* the official Flash player to do, the official Flash player has tons of subtle bugs, many of which lots of real-world Flash apps depend on to function properly. So implementing the Flash spec isn't enough to run anything but trivial Flash apps. After you implement the spec, then you have to guess how various errors are handled, and compare it to how the official player does it. Then you have to figure out all the places where the official player deviates from the spec, and effectively make your player buggy. And then you have to take behavior that's specified as being undefined by the spec, and implement it in the exact same "undefined" way that the official player does. Unfortunately, they only way to find most of these things is to throw a *lot* of flash files at your player and then painstakingly debug to figure out why they don't work.

      It's a mess, and of course Flash is a moving target, which doesn't help matters.

      --
      Xfce: Lighter than some, heavier than others. Just right.
    109. Re:Obligatory XKCD by walshy007 · · Score: 1

      I'm using the Adobe flash plugin and fullscreen flash video plays smoothly for me.

      seconded, using fedora, after reading the xkcd comic the first time I tested and there was no issue.

    110. Re:Obligatory XKCD by walshy007 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Which is why i have said time and time again there needs to be a stable ABI and a "Tux the penguin" certification process.

      Certification process fair enough, but a stable ABI is not needed for that, any piece of hardware that has a recognized in kernel tree driver driver should simply be plugged in and see if it works, if it does without any real issues, certification can be done

      Trusting random companies with ring 0 privileged code your machine is a big leap of faith when you can't see the code, almost all of the bsod's you see these days on windows aren't microsoft's fault at all, but the fault of shitty drivers by third party companies. Some of us like the quality ensured by having in kernel frequently audited drivers

      But still, allowing binary blobs is not needed for certification that *blah* works on linux. Linux does have the largest in-built hardware support of any modern os.

    111. Re:Obligatory XKCD by Maguscrowley · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      I had heard that there was a community for gay Linux users, but was disappointed when I saw they all ran ubuntu. It was like going like going to a gay bar and finding out everyone there was "bi-curious" c.c I'm a gentoo boy and I appreciate a man who can compile his own binaries. You'd be over your shoulder checking out my "pasty white" ass too so can it.

      Dear Troll: I'm gay, I'm a Linux user, I'm a geek, and I'm Fierce. So get off my lawn bitch!

    112. Re:Obligatory XKCD by abigor · · Score: 1

      Windows 3.11 is better than Gnome.

    113. Re:Obligatory XKCD by Maguscrowley · · Score: 1

      My post looks REALLY out of context without the troll parent ... Guess I should have known better then post in a troll thread.

    114. Re:Obligatory XKCD by abigor · · Score: 2, Interesting

      You're sure about that?

      http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=126369

      * Fri Aug 07 2009 Kristian HÃgsberg - 2.8.0-4
      - Add dri2-page-flip.patch to enable full screen pageflipping.
          Fixes XKCD #619.

    115. Re:Obligatory XKCD by walshy007 · · Score: 1

      Package management should be confined to a common package format.

      I keep hearing this all the time from people, but they fail to see it as a non-issue. Repository packages have to test their requirements against the other packages and it's all an interconnected system for a given distribution. People seem to think 'if redhat went with .deb we could use fedora packages in debian without any fuss!!' not the case. And making packages for the different formats is trivial, and is done as you can see that there are pre-packaged forms of most poplar software for all the major distros.

      As for sound, that is a more legitimate gripe however going back to OSS is not the way, OSS is way too limiting in it's capabilities, The pro audio sector pretty much dictates alsa + jack, but the 'desktop' crowd seem to be standardising on alsa + pulseaudio, which has so much latency it isn't funny, not to mention unable to do half the things jack can in regards to dealing with audio streams

    116. Re:Obligatory XKCD by linzeal · · Score: 1

      I can't kill Nazis in any of those games. Fail.

    117. Re:Obligatory XKCD by harmonise · · Score: 1

      I'm tired of seeing this same cartoon in every slashdot story. In any case, full screen flash video works fine on my system. HP 6910p running Ubuntu 9.04.

      --
      Cory Doctorow talking about cloud computing makes as much sense as George W Bush talking about electrical engineering.
    118. Re:Obligatory XKCD by mysidia · · Score: 1
    119. Re:Obligatory XKCD by julesh · · Score: 1

      Certification process fair enough, but a stable ABI is not needed for that, any piece of hardware that has a recognized in kernel tree driver driver should simply be plugged in and see if it works, if it does without any real issues, certification can be done

      Yes, but the problem is that a very large quantity of modern hardware does not have a driver in the kernel tree. Most video cards rely on a vendor-supplied non open-source driver to function correctly, and most low-cost wireless networking cards are on chipsets that aren't supported by stock kernels (e.g. rt2500 -- there are open source drivers available, but you have to download them, compile them and install them yourself; the lack of a stable ABI makes the process difficult and time consuming, putting it beyond the scope of an average user).

      Linux does have the largest in-built hardware support of any modern os.

      Unless it supports (nearly) everything, the problem the GP mentions is still relevant: you can't just go to the shop, pick up some hardware, and expect it to work. You need to know what chipset works, you need to find a manufacturer who uses that chipset, and you need to pray when you get to the shop that they haven't switched chipsets since the compatibility lists were last updated. This isn't a theoretical objection -- I've been an active Linux user for the last 15 years, and I've lost count of the number of times this kind of shit has happened to me. Over time the hardware in question changes; once upon a time it was ISDN TAs and video capture cards that were hard to shop for, now it's wireless networking cards. But it's still there. And until it has _entirely gone_, Linux is not ready for the average consumer.

    120. Re:Obligatory XKCD by walshy007 · · Score: 1

      e.g. rt2500 -- there are open source drivers available, but you have to download them, compile them and install them yourself; the lack of a stable ABI makes the process difficult and time consuming, putting it beyond the scope of an average user).

      I have an rt2500 based one and it works fine, didn't until about six months ago when the drivers went mainline, but anyway back to the main point

      you seem to have missed the point, certification would be great, but a stable ABI is not needed for it.

      Do you really think that magically every piece of hardware work would if we had a stable kernel ABI? there would still be lots of hardware not supported, even with a certification ("blah works on linux") program that would still be the case but at least you could tell what is and isn't supported before you purchase it.

      The general idea with this isn't "get everything working" it's "let people know what will and won't work".

      As you've said currently when you buy a piece of hardware you can never be sure what chipset etc you're getting or whether it will work. Add in some manner of linux tag where you can only add it to the product if the mainline kernel detects and uses it, and you would know what will or won't work out of the box, changing to an unsupported chipset would be grounds for removal of the use of the tag, make sense?

      All of this would allow people to identify what works, and what doesn't, without a stable ABI, the reasons the ABI isn't stable are technical ones, I see no reason to gimp the linux kernel at the request of people who are not part of it's main development.

    121. Re:Obligatory XKCD by mooterSkooter · · Score: 1

      **Top Tip**

      I watch full screen youtube, except I use the zoom function of the compiz desktop thingy. Much better than flash fullscreen!

      I just wish the cursor would become invisible when in zoom mode...some hacking may be in order!

    122. Re:Obligatory XKCD by j_sp_r · · Score: 1

      I would go with OpenSuse, which has really good and up-to-date packages for KDE (4.3.1 at the moment)

    123. Re:Obligatory XKCD by Patch86 · · Score: 1

      What you say is completely valid and understandable, but it's a bit rich for people to raise such things in a thread like this.

      This is a thread about a new kernel release, and it lists the new features said kernel release brings. Although broken Flash may be more pressing to you than anything listed in TFA, the kernel team who have made the release have absolutely no power to fix it. Complaining that "they should be fixing Flash, not mucking around with all these new features nobody needs" (as Xkcd does) is pointless, seeing as the two things are absolutely nothing to do with each other.

      Incidentally, I still harbor the childish fantasy that Google will ride in on a white charger, smite the evil Flash, and establish a utopian video format to replace it (afterall, the owner of You Tube has plenty of incentive to do so). I mean the chances are looking slim now, but a boy can dream...

    124. Re:Obligatory XKCD by Patch86 · · Score: 1

      It's "not a big deal", because the things they actually need to make progress haven't been made open. Adobe essentially only released what their rivals already knew- sort of "barn-door-after-horse-has-bolted" territory.

      As such, Gnash's position didn't really change much when they did that, except by allowing them to feel slightly less in danger of being sued.

      IMO, trying to reverse engineer Flash is stop-gap at best. Flash is hideous, and a decent long-term strategy should always involve ditching it for something better. Gnash is doing a great service in trying to break dependency on Adobe, but it shouldn't be seen as the solution to the problem.

    125. Re:Obligatory XKCD by msormune · · Score: 1

      It really does not matter why it does not work properly. It just doesn't, period. In the mean time the "shoddy plugin" has worked in Windows since the beginning.

    126. Re:Obligatory XKCD by Patch86 · · Score: 1

      Indeed, the xkcd in question (a link to the page, not the image) doesn't hang on technical accuracy. It's absolutely a commentary on issues with the "Linux Desktop", with developers putting a relatively rare server concern such as support for thousands of CPUs ahead of something that pretty much every PC user expects to have (the ability to watch Hulu smoothly).

      There is there the danger of getting carried away with "Linux on the desktop". Although Linux can be and is a desktop OS now, with all that that entails, it was originally, is primarily, and influentially will continue to be a top-dog server OS. It is in use in a huge number of server environments, and super-computer environments too. Features that benefit said servers and super-computers are important, just so much as the features for the desktop users.

      Expecting the kernel team to abandon their primary market just because desktops are now important too would be a daft thing to expect.

    127. Re:Obligatory XKCD by jonadab · · Score: 0, Troll

      Actually, I think it just implies that Linux users have different priorities from Windows users.

      Personally, I cannot imagine wanting to use Flash to play full-screen video. Totem or vlc, yes. Flash? You've got to be kidding.

      Flash is NOT a media player. It's a browser plugin, of questionable usefulness. It plays tiny little swatches of badly encoded 320x200 video at a low framerate, and then you usually wish you hadn't bothered, because the content of said YouTube video, recommended to you by a Windows-using friend, is almost always the sort of thing that wouldn't be worth your time even if it WERE a quality recording, which it never is. Why would you EVER want to watch that junk in full-screen?

      Granted, I don't need support for 4096 processor cores either. But I can imagine that *someone* would legitimately need such a feature, which is more than I can say for full-screen Flash video.

      It isn't just processor core numbers and Flash plugins, either. This is a minor symptom of a much larger disconnect between people who actually understand computers and *use* them to get useful things accomplished, versus people who play around with whatever annoying thing gets their attention. Windows is loaded with stupid features I can't imagine ever having any real use for. Debian is loaded with features that I actually use.

      --
      Cut that out, or I will ship you to Norilsk in a box.
    128. Re:Obligatory XKCD by DaVince21 · · Score: 1

      As someone who uses Linux, I don't care who is at fault either. Just let them fix it already.

      Gnash has been making jumps and leaps lately. If it turns out that the next release of it is actually faster than Adobe's, I'm switching.

      --
      I am not devoid of humor.
    129. Re:Obligatory XKCD by DaVince21 · · Score: 1

      Are you implying that Gnome is a kernel, here?

      --
      I am not devoid of humor.
    130. Re:Obligatory XKCD by vivaelamor · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I don't think reverse engineering a network protocol is anywhere close to as hard as reverse engineering something like flash.

    131. Re:Obligatory XKCD by DaVince21 · · Score: 1

      It is? Watching cartoons and video material sure becomes a lot more useful, rather than having to look at that tiny space on my monitor...

      Yes, I'd rather have that HTML5 video supported easy fullscreen switching, but still, Flash is in a lot of places, especially cartoon/animation sites, so the fullscreen thing only seems useful.

      --
      I am not devoid of humor.
    132. Re:Obligatory XKCD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Agreed, AND full screen flash doesn't work smoothly on windows, so...?

    133. Re:Obligatory XKCD by centuren · · Score: 1

      The author is waiting on a Linux kernel patch to fix the Flash issues he has with his Intel card.

      OK, so do tell. How exactly is a kernel patch going to fix a problem with a proprietary browser plugin?

      On my machine, I can watch FLVs, full screen, with a variety of players (Xine, Mplayer, MythTV). It's only Flash player that's broken.

      So, considering that the problem is demonstratably with the Flash plugin, how will a kernel patch fix it?

      You tell me. I consider the author to be reasonably competent, purely by impression. He's obviously not talking about FLVs, but rather Flash (indicated by wanting to watch John Stewart). As I said, I don't know how the Flash player interacts with hardware, only that he reports other Linux users not having the same issues watching Stewart (i.e. Hulu) that he is having with his particular hardware configuration.

      So, considering that the problem is demonstratably with the Flash plugin, how will a kernel patch fix it?

      You have failed to demonstrate anything of the sort (by missing key details), a more informative reply would be technical information Flash's use of hardware resources.

    134. Re:Obligatory XKCD by Rogerborg · · Score: 1

      The classic Open Source bug resolution: Works For Me, Fuck You Guys.

      --
      If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
    135. Re:Obligatory XKCD by centuren · · Score: 1

      Expecting the kernel team to abandon their primary market just because desktops are now important too would be a daft thing to expect.

      The key was "rare server concerns" versus "something pretty much every PC user expects". Nothing about abandoning their primary market. If servers with over 4,000 CPUs are really driving Linux, then I'll concur that the comic is off base.

      Without looking into it in detail, 4,000+ CPU support versus smooth Flash playback seems to illustrate the comic's point well.

    136. Re:Obligatory XKCD by centuren · · Score: 1

      I wish there were a Greasemonkey script for Slashdot that would remove from visibility any and all posts containing "XKCD".

      That sounds pretty simple for any computer literate to create, but would you really wish MORE Javascript into the Slashdot discussion page?

      Even if I did find XKCD to be endlessly interesting, I wouldn't bring it up at every possible opportunity. Now go ahead and flame me because I don't think your trendy (around here, anyway) comic is all that clever.

      The "community" isn't one person rushing out to fix every bug or develop an OSS solution to every problem. I don't think you or anyone believes this is so. Knowing that, it's simply idiotic to imply that anyone is bringing xkcd up at every possible opportunity, regardless of how often you might see a reference. Find someone who has cited the comic in more than 25% of his or her most recent posts if you can. Every slashdot article could have many xkcd references without any one person doing it more than once. I don't think I'm flaming you. I'm certainly not offended, and I've never introduced xkcd into a discussion (although I have here expanded on an xkcd tangent).

      I'm more feeling compelled to point out that your phrasing is off the mark (sure, you are tired of seeing xkcd references on Slashdot, but none of your extrapolations from there make sense). Flame or not, I only started this response because of how you opened it. A Greasemonkey script to do what you want isn't something you have to resort to wishing for. If you'd spend a wish on it, why not spend the 5-10 minutes required to implement it.

      If your post was meant to not actually result in producing a Greasemonkey script OR a nonsensical claim that some users are out there putting xkcd references out at "every possible opportunity", then, of course, my time responding is wasted:

      tl;dr "causality doesn't like seeing xkcd discussion tangents."

    137. Re:Obligatory XKCD by reub2000 · · Score: 1

      For a while gnash played youtube videos. Then adobe updated the player, and gnash no longer played youtube videos. Everything else on the Internet is covered by some standard, yet this one tiny format that makes a significant amount of content out there is completely proprietary.

    138. Re:Obligatory XKCD by RiotingPacifist · · Score: 1

      tbf, all kde distros are pretty up-to-date (if you want that)
      fedora11 is on 4.3.0
      kubuntu has PPAs that must be fairly recent

      --
      IranAir Flight 655 never forget!
    139. Re:Obligatory XKCD by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      I'm with you 100%. Adobe has never put any actual effort into supporting Flash on Linux. One can only imagine this will change with the continued release of Linux-powered portable devices like the Pre and the Nokia N900... but the situation is pretty dismal. I've posted about it repeatedly, but I have netbooks which give better flash performance running Windows than my Athlon 64 X2 4000+/8600GT system running 64 bit Linux with 64 bit Swiftweasel (which, yes, IS faster than Firefox at all operations) and 64 bit Flash. Anyone who tells you that Adobe has made any significant effort to support Linux desktop Flash is a liar.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    140. Re:Obligatory XKCD by RiotingPacifist · · Score: 1

      As a new fedora user (from kubuntu) i think there still are reasons to use kubuntu
      *apt based (yum is good, but many people, including me prefer apt)
      *ubuntu's popularity ( and there seam to be more ppas, support, etc )
      *apparmor is easier to configure (and understand) than selinux
      *reliable 6month cycles (some people prefer RR(arch), some prefer 2year(debian), but if you want 6month then its an advantage)
      *easier to install 3rd party drivers (well i haven't run into a gui tool. although tbh i haven't looked)

      none of these are kde specific and ubuntu(gnome) always get much more attention, however apart from kpackagekit nothing in fedora that i like is missing from kubuntu

      --
      IranAir Flight 655 never forget!
    141. Re:Obligatory XKCD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I laughed when I saw the original XKCD, but not for the reason most people did.

      I had just gotten a 1080P widescreen monitor... and flash occasionally has jitters when showing full screen video... and I use WINDOWS!

    142. Re:Obligatory XKCD by KamuZ · · Score: 1

      Damn you! Rickrolled!

    143. Re:Obligatory XKCD by cenc · · Score: 1

      To do that, we also need a certification program to handle management / sorting of open source projects. Putting a 5 star super program on a new retail computer, when the frigen open source projects is blowing apart from internal political issues can be as damaging to open source adoption as few bugs. This is problem corporations face in adopting open source.

      For example, would anyone selling a netbook today with linux on it install a drive with reiserFS format on it? Perhaps, but it might not be my first choice if I was retailer trying to evaluate what to put on my shelfs, or as a netbook maker trying to decide what to load on the next version. There is likely better examples, but you get my point.

      I would no more select a open source software package built by an imploding open source project, than I would select closed source from a company going bankrupt. There is much more to open source adoption than the quality of the code. Please spare me the 'but you can fork it yourself' bs. Users and companies often do not have the time or the resources, to take over some project because there is no longer any support. Only in the most desperate situations is that possible. They move to something else. What to move on to, is the issue. Stable open source software is produced by stable open source projects.

      Standardization is not an enemy of open source, but many in open source circles seem to like standardization in how code is produced, but reject it as an organizational principle for open source overall. They sound like a bunch of artist, complaining that organizing open source organizations would be the same thing as cramping innovation. Sorry, not the same thing.

      If you can give companies clear indications of what is stable open source project, and what is not, I bet we solve 90% of the problems of producing drivers and hardware for Linux. Right now, even the most committed hardware vendors almost have to stand on a stand on a street corner and take a poll to find out if it is even worth building driver.

    144. Re:Obligatory XKCD by marcansoft · · Score: 1

      That's some intel-specific issue affecting full-screen modes. Flash video playing sucks across the board if you're scaling the video to any decent resolution: as you zoom into the web page, the picture starts getting jerkier and at full-screen it's unwatchable.

      We're confusing two things here: some very specific issue in the Intel driver and the very crappy performance of Flash video no matter what card you use. Even with that patch, I highly doubt Intel users are going to get smooth full-screen video if they have an average CPU and are running at 1920x1080 or some other large resolution.

    145. Re:Obligatory XKCD by cupantae · · Score: 1

      I am simply not experimenting with Linux because I care about flash working reasonably well, and apparently, it doesn't.

      It's less than perfect, but it's less than perfect everywhere. There are lots of decent reasons to not use Linux, but this isn't one of them. It works more than adequately well. I didn't notice that the performance is any worse than on windows until somebody mentioned to me that it is.

      --
      --
    146. Re:Obligatory XKCD by harmonise · · Score: 1

      The classic Open Source bug resolution: Works For Me, Fuck You Guys.

      If full screen Flash video isn't working for you, take it up with the software vendor (Adobe). The Flash plugin isn't open source so no one can fix it but the author.

      --
      Cory Doctorow talking about cloud computing makes as much sense as George W Bush talking about electrical engineering.
    147. Re:Obligatory XKCD by Sique · · Score: 1

      Hey, that was three years ago :) I said "used to have".

      --
      .sig: Sique *sigh*
    148. Re:Obligatory XKCD by Patch86 · · Score: 1

      Please do correct me if I'm wrong, but the 4000+ cores versus Flash playback was the punchline of an Xkcd, used to facetiously highlight and mock the subject at hand. 4000+ core support is not actually a feature of the new kernel release, let alone one that anyone dedicated lots of time to.

      The release does have lots of features which, to a desktop user, will seem useless and are aimed at servers and super-computers. But actual 4000+ core computers don't come into it.

    149. Re:Obligatory XKCD by akayani · · Score: 1

      That cartoon was done by the same dude who created 'Cosmic Sans'. And we all know who he works for.

    150. Re:Obligatory XKCD by maxume · · Score: 1

      Note the 'hypothetically here' parenthetical; my reasons for not experimenting with Linux are more about not having serious issues with XP and having a bunch of software that I would have to find equivalents for (and a bunch of software that is identically available, but I would have to go through the process of installing it all, which is tiresome, no matter the platform).

      --
      Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
    151. Re:Obligatory XKCD by Sir_Lewk · · Score: 1

      Valid enough points (this whole "best distro" thing is really subjective anyways) with some minor counterpoints:
      * `yum install apt-get` I find yum nicer anyways but for each their own. ;)
      * I never found ubuntu's support to be of much help personally, but then again my idea of good support is a well formatted manpage, not blogposts.
      * Honestly I never saw the point of either on a consumer setup, SELinux is one the the first things I disable when I install Fedora.
      * Fedora does ~6month release cycles too. sometimes they slip a bit but that's not unheard of for ubuntu either (6.06)
      * you are probably right there, though the last time I used Kubuntu a lot of that stuff was broken (whereas it seemed to work fine Ubuntu). automatic detection of hardware and such.

      --
      "linux is just DOS with a UNIX like syntax" -- Galactic Dominator (944134)
    152. Re:Obligatory XKCD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fine, I'll flame you because you used the wrong version of the word "your" in you're post. I'd like to know just what the hell was going through you're head when you made that post. You're English skills suck and you should pick up you're 4th grade English textbook.

    153. Re:Obligatory XKCD by ultranova · · Score: 1

      We nerds on slashdot know better of course, the problem is Adobe being mindless idiots who can't figure out how to properly use a scaled video surface.

      So that's the reason that a machine that can play 720p x264 vids chokes on Flash. I've been wondering about that.

      --

      Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.

    154. Re:Obligatory XKCD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your google-fu? That's about all you have to your credit, experience, and know how in computers it seems. You'd be helpless without google. I saw the posts in your history about the iram and you have to be a technical weakling to make a statement like you had since the iram works on windows but not on linux, or so you say. I seriously doubt you have any details to supply on any of this and like your usual bull, you fail to back up any of your statements with solid evidence.

    155. Re:Obligatory XKCD by the_womble · · Score: 1

      There is a Firefox plugin that downloads from Youtube perfectly well.

    156. Re:Obligatory XKCD by CarpetShark · · Score: 1

      the fact that this "basic thing that everyone else takes for granted" doesn't work is is Adobe's fault, not the Linux community's fault.

      I really wouldn't be so quick to say that. There are TONS of flaws in X11, and tons of projects underway to fix them. I link to Gallium3D because it's a big one and associated with more, not because it's the only one. Search phoronix for xorg as well, for instance, and start reading. X *is* ancient, after all. With work going on to fix basic things like that, saying it's "not our fault" that a major corporation hasn't managed to make their tried and tested tech work on your system is a bit arrogant.

    157. Re:Obligatory XKCD by Man+Eating+Duck · · Score: 1

      I'm a professional, and man, watch those demos in at least Firefox 3.5 (or something comparable)

      Neat demos, haven't seen those elements in action and actually working before now. Thanks!

      --
      Are you a grammar Nazi? I'm trying to improve my English; please correct my errors! :)
    158. Re:Obligatory XKCD by dmsuperman · · Score: 1

      Right, like flash. I'd love to take advantage of it, but since adobe gives me a gimped pile of shit instead of what they give the windows users this is what I'm forced to use. I don't really care anyway, flash is the scum of the web, contaminating it with its proprietary (and thus anti-web-friendly) format for delivering videos which could easily be done with the tag. Just sayin'.

      --
      :(){ :|:& };: Go!
    159. Re:Obligatory XKCD by badkarmadayaccount · · Score: 1

      Then why the hell does 2k7 bork itself on apt-get update && apt-get upgrade? The repos have gone to shit as well. Can install anything but FF 2.0 final, I'm forced to run PortableApps FF in WINE for security reasons, though my dad uses it most of the time.

      --
      I know tobacco is bad for you, so I smoke weed with crack.
    160. Re:Obligatory XKCD by badkarmadayaccount · · Score: 1

      ...hold Adobe at gunpoint...

      Yes.

      --
      I know tobacco is bad for you, so I smoke weed with crack.
    161. Re:Obligatory XKCD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That video demo has me at 100% cpu load when it's playing, and it's not even remotely full screen. I'd rather have flash.

    162. Re:Obligatory XKCD by centuren · · Score: 1

      Far from just a punchline, the comic's content is both relevant and accurate here, as this release 2.6.31 has some news about the desktop, while supporting 4,096 CPUs is absolutely a real feature in a slightly earlier release (2.9.29).

  2. Funny how Windows and Linux go opposites by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Interesting

    MS takes the drivers back to user mode after touting the kernel-mode as a performance plus.

    Based on my experience with 2008/Win 7 and ATI, I think the display drivers belong firmly in user mode.

    I've never had my OS punk out because of a graphics bluescreen. The desktop manger and explorer may have needed a restart, but no data ever stopped streaming or got corrupted.

    1. Re:Funny how Windows and Linux go opposites by Randle_Revar · · Score: 2, Informative

      The drivers *are* in userland (well there, is enough in the kernel to display basic images and text). KMS means the kernel can change video modes, which allows early boot splash screens with no "blink" transitions when X takes over and allows "bluescreens", that is, the kernel can print error messages to the screen even if X locks up.

    2. Re:Funny how Windows and Linux go opposites by QuoteMstr · · Score: 1

      Most of the driver is still in userspace. The modesetting is a relatively small part of modern graphics hardware. The reason for the switch, also, isn't performance, but consistency: with KMS, there's no flicker on boot as the X server proper starts.

      Besides: a userspace driver can screw up the machine almost as easily as a kernel-mode one. Remember that a userspace driver needs to run as root, and must be able to write directly to IO ports and the PCI configuration space. Both kinds of driver can easily crash a machine.

    3. Re:Funny how Windows and Linux go opposites by Enleth · · Score: 1

      They do belong in user mode, but with one little catch: the user mode part must not meddle with the low-level hardware state, and that's what KMS is for. I'm not familliar with how exactly Vista and Win7 implement their video driver framework, but it seems that they do something pretty much like KMS: low-level, generic control over the graphics card (and only that) is still held by the kernel so when the high-level, user mode driver craps out, the OS can regain control of the video card and put it back in a known, stable state.

      --
      This is Slashdot. Common sense is futile. You will be modded down.
    4. Re:Funny how Windows and Linux go opposites by joib · · Score: 1

      MS takes the drivers back to user mode after touting the kernel-mode as a performance plus. Based on my experience with 2008/Win 7 and ATI, I think the display drivers belong firmly in user mode.

      Actually, if anything, the graphics driver models of windows and Linux are converging. The Vista/win7 graphics driver model is AFAIK not a pure user space model, but there is a small kernel component doing stuff like mode-setting and GPU memory management. Precisely like the "new" Linux graphics drivers with KMS and GEM/TTM; the bulk of the driver still resides in user space.

    5. Re:Funny how Windows and Linux go opposites by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Frankly, I still don't get how graphics card drivers are so adept at hanging the whole machine. They could, you know, detect invalid conditions and fail gracefully by resetting the hardware.
      Win95 was *ahead* of Linux in that it had BSODs as opposed to just silent hangs.
      Now that Linux is getting KMS support, at least the kernel devs will be able to implement a user-friendly BSOD (that, for example, asks whether to try to sync data to disks and reboot, or ignore the error, reset the hardware and continue).

    6. Re:Funny how Windows and Linux go opposites by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In the NWO, driver is just partally in userspace.
      KMS is a part of kernel DRI (DRM) system, which fully controls the graphic hardware and exposes it's special API to the userspace.
      This driver will verify everything that it receives from userspace driver (component). Userspace component does a machine translation of OpenGL calls or some other drawing API, and is usually places the result in acommand buffer to be sent to the graphic card; so it essentially is a library of hardware-dependent calls, on top of which there is hardware-independent API (like OGL)- Ideally, a userspace driver portion shouldn't be able to do any harm (i.e. crash the kernel) if kernel does validation properly, which it tries to do. So, unless there is a bug or a undocumented quirk somewhere that's exposed, xorg is protected from userspace driver screwups. It is even going to Xorg move to a non-root mode completely.

    7. Re:Funny how Windows and Linux go opposites by badkarmadayaccount · · Score: 1

      Not if the driver is limited to only certain IO port and PCI address ranges. It would have to be compiled on load with verification, but it seems reasonable to me.

      --
      I know tobacco is bad for you, so I smoke weed with crack.
  3. Even minor releases? by DeHackEd · · Score: 1

    At this rate I'm starting to question if we'll ever have a 2.7 "alpha/beta" series since all the major new features above and beyond stand-alone device drivers seem to be going right into the current branch.

    1. Re:Even minor releases? by armanox · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I don't have the link handy, but, Linus has said before that a kernel 2.8 or 3.0 doesn't matter to him.

      --
      I'm starting to think GNU is the problem with "GNU/Linux" these days.
    2. Re:Even minor releases? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    3. Re:Even minor releases? by Archaemic · · Score: 5, Informative
  4. Hurry Debian ... Hurry by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Flip I sure hope debian, will jump on this, for the next release.

    1. Re:Hurry Debian ... Hurry by spud603 · · Score: 1

      Flip I sure hope debian, will jump on this, for the next release.

      Kirk? Is that you?

    2. Re:Hurry Debian ... Hurry by Randle_Revar · · Score: 1

      Squeeze will not freeze until Q1 2010 at the very earliest. There is plenty of time for 2.6.31, and likely even 2.6.32

    3. Re:Hurry Debian ... Hurry by moon3 · · Score: 1

      Debian's kernel release is coming, after a heavy cereal lunch..

  5. Catering to wide audience by ultrabot · · Score: 2, Insightful

    From TFA:

    The result is an improved desktop experience; benchmarks on memory tight desktops show clock time and major faults reduced by 50 per cent, and pswpin numbers (memory reads from disk) are reduced to about one-third. That means X desktop responsiveness is doubled under high memory pressure.

    Furthermore, memory flushing benchmarks in a file server shows the number of major faults going from 50 to 3 during 10 per cent cache hot reads.

    And on next paragraph...

    Linux foundner Linus Torvalds, first developed the operating system for his desktop and it rose to promince as a commodity Unix server.

    --
    Save your wrists today - switch to Dvorak
    1. Re:Catering to wide audience by Linker3000 · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      Doesn't this just mean that users will discover more quickly that OpenOffice b0rks at anything beyond basic Excel macros and that there's no extremely decent open source equivalent to Outlook?

      Nice as faster-this-and-that may be, how many have actually heard a potential Windows convert saying "it's all well and good, but the desktop seems a tad slow?"

      Don't get me wrong, but I put this in the category of: Nice to have, but not necessarily a deal-maker.

      --
      AT&ROFLMAO
    2. Re:Catering to wide audience by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      Did you reply to the wrong message?

    3. Re:Catering to wide audience by Linker3000 · · Score: 1

      Possibly - I am running Fedora 11 (Kernel 2.6.29.6) and I think by the time I'd opened up a reply window and typed my message the thread screen refresh finally finished and my comment got knocked off track.

      Damn these slow kernels.

      --
      AT&ROFLMAO
    4. Re:Catering to wide audience by Metabolife · · Score: 1

      For developers, Windows 7 includes a new networking API with support for building SOAP-based web services in native code (as opposed to .NET-based WCF web services),[44] new features to shorten application install times, reduced UAC prompts, simplified development of installation packages,[45] and improved globalization support through a new Extended Linguistic Services API.[46] At WinHEC 2008 Microsoft announced that color depths of 30-bit and 48-bit would be supported in Windows 7 along with the wide color gamut scRGB (which for HDMI 1.3 can be converted and output as xvYCC). The video modes supported in Windows 7 are 16-bit sRGB, 24-bit sRGB, 30-bit sRGB, 30-bit with extended color gamut sRGB, and 48-bit scRGB.[47][48] Microsoft is also implementing better support for Solid State Drives,[49] including the new TRIM command, and Windows 7 will be able to identify a Solid State Drive uniquely.

      Microsoft Windows is a series of software operating systems and graphical user interfaces produced by Microsoft.

  6. Been using .31, and I'm a fan. by sherl0k · · Score: 3, Informative

    I can honestly say that the system does feel a lot snappier, more responsive, and just overall a much more pleasant user experience. Everything's just a lot smoother. The kernel team is doing a pretty awesome job of speeding things up. Kudos.

    1. Re:Been using .31, and I'm a fan. by HangingChad · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The kernel team is doing a pretty awesome job of speeding things up. Kudos.

      Seconded. It also says good things about the state of the kernel and development team that they can focus on optimization and the user experience. It wasn't that long ago the focus was on getting wireless to work. We've come such a long way. Very impressive. Well done.

      --
      That's our life, the big wheel of shit. - The Fat Man, Blue Tango Salvage
    2. Re:Been using .31, and I'm a fan. by Rebar · · Score: 5, Funny

      The Break-In process of the new Linux kernel takes time. There is a significant change in Video Performance as the kernel break in. There is still a perception that Linux kernels have a short break in time or worse yet, don't require break in. Some hackers used a second computer to break in the Linux kernel, and transfer the image to their primary computer. This method will not appreciably reduce the break in time required for the kernel. Linux kernel Break-In must be done in the position where you plan to use it.

      The System Performance Stages of the kernel are as follows:

      * First Stage of Break-In = The system will feel very open, clear and with good detail resolution and dynamics. The greens and lower reds will have elevated intensity levels. The lower output of the blue and green information is due to reduced bandwidth performance at this Stage. In some systems, especially with aluminum or titanium heatsinks, the greens and blues may appear edgy or even fatiguing. The visual stage will appear OK with some lack of Focus. It will take from 5 to 15 hours of break-in for the kernel to reach the Second Stage of Break-In.

      * Second Stage of Break-In = The blues and greens will appear less elevated and up front as the monitor intensity level increases. This is followed by the reds starting fill in. The lack of Focus may become more noticeable and the visual stage will start to widen and have more depth. It will take an additional 15 to 35 hours to reach the Third Stage of Break-In.

      * Third Stage of Break-In = The system response time will completely flatten out. The presentation will become very clean and less up front. The lack of Focus is disappearing and the imaging will improve as will the low level detail resolution. The Green comes in and it is very tight and you will see lower Red frequencies than your other kernel provided. In effect the visual signature of the kernel will seem to disappear and the X-window presentation will be very real and non-fatiguing. It will take an additional 30 to 50 hours to reach the Final Stage of Kernel Performance.

      * Fourth and Final Stage of Kernel Performance = The Visual Stage will be wider than your monitor with excellent depth, height and precise localization of individual icons on the desktop. The hue of the icons will be very accurate over the entire desktop. Symbolic links have excellent referencing ability. The metallic sound of your hard drive is very lifelike. Rhythm, Pace and Dynamics are effortless. Many users find they are now viewing the X-window system at lower Light Levels due to the effortless presentation. You will start to see subtle visual cues like the programmer turning his head while he is programming. You will find you are viewing the Window Manager and forgetting about evaluating your system.

    3. Re:Been using .31, and I'm a fan. by centuren · · Score: 1

      I can honestly say that the system does feel a lot snappier, more responsive, and just overall a much more pleasant user experience. Everything's just a lot smoother. The kernel team is doing a pretty awesome job of speeding things up. Kudos.

      That's good to hear; I've been waiting for such news concerning the kernel to help inspire me to fire up my desktop again and finish the last install I started (I left it at a stock kernel and mouse buttons not configured for my MX1000). It's been all too easy to use my laptop for everything, but new kernel features that noticeably improve the user experience have always been exciting. I remember the difference preemptive multitasking made to the desktop experience when it was introduced. It made a huge difference on our systems, especially with the security course we were taking at the time (which had all our CPU time completely occupied for about a week).

    4. Re:Been using .31, and I'm a fan. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      dude, r u on crack? Just sayin'.

    5. Re:Been using .31, and I'm a fan. by dpilot · · Score: 1

      You neglected to mention the improvements in near-ultraviolet and near-infrared with the new kernel that kick in about 5 or 6 hours after the thrird boot. Nor did you say anything about the clear bass extension that happens right away on the first boot.

      --
      The living have better things to do than to continue hating the dead.
    6. Re:Been using .31, and I'm a fan. by Rebar · · Score: 1

      I'm glad somebody got it. What is it with kids these days?

    7. Re:Been using .31, and I'm a fan. by Rebar · · Score: 1

      Too obtuse for Slashdot? OK I'll spell it out for you. "the system does feel a lot snappier, more responsive, and just overall a much more pleasant user experience." This is user perception, and while valid, doesn't provide any measurable details. It reminded me of "audiophile" equipment reviews where the entire test is wrapped in unmeasurable, subjective, and arguably useless terms like "wider soundstage" and "more lifelike". So I pulled some text directly from an audio cable site and made it fit Linux. I thought it would be funny that kernels would require a break-in period, just as I think it is absurd that a *wire* requires a break-in period after which it provides unmeasurable but perceptually improved performance.

      I am sorry that nobody else found it funny. I'll go away again now.

    8. Re:Been using .31, and I'm a fan. by dpilot · · Score: 1

      You got grey hairs, too?
      Any grandkids, yet?
      My kids are still in college, so I've got a few years.

      Oops, the is Slashdot. I can't possibly have a life, wife, kids, or grey hairs.

      --
      The living have better things to do than to continue hating the dead.
    9. Re:Been using .31, and I'm a fan. by hitmark · · Score: 1

      could simply be that we dont waste our time reading new age religious texts...

      --
      comment first, facts later. http://chem.tufts.edu/AnswersInScience/RelativityofWrong.htm
    10. Re:Been using .31, and I'm a fan. by greg1104 · · Score: 1

      You forgot to mention that you can speed up the break-in if you play the Sheffield XLO Burn In CD in your DVD drive. Make sure to outline the edge with a green marker first.

    11. Re:Been using .31, and I'm a fan. by julesh · · Score: 1

      I am sorry that nobody else found it funny. I'll go away again now.

      Don't worry. I thought it was frickin' hilarious.

    12. Re:Been using .31, and I'm a fan. by kigrwik · · Score: 1

      Yep, too obtuse for me. But with your (+1 informative) comment and link, it's a lot clearer.

      And funny.

      Thanks.

      --
      -- don't discount flying pigs until you have good air defense
    13. Re:Been using .31, and I'm a fan. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Are you the guy who writes all those total BS reviews on high end audio?

      Like the guy who says that the gold plated power cord helps the sound in subtle ways, and eschews actual measurements as they'd not show this -- his ears are of course better than any technology in measuring the technology, right? No point dragging sense or science into things, right?

      And as if there was any source material that could really help, unless you record it yourself, as I have for quite awhile.

      RIAA's big mistake -- providing such crummy fidelity that there's now a whole generation that can't tell MP3 sucks -- because when fed stuff that was crap in the first place, it doesn't get too much crappier.

  7. Benchmarks by pm_rat_poison · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Phoronix has published benchmarks of an ubuntu system with kernel 2.6.31-rc5

  8. We just need an alternative to X by bogaboga · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Just like folks at Apple realized with their OS X, we in the Linux world, need an alternative to X. I heard that Google Chrome OS will get rid of it entirely. I would like to hear from anyone who disagrees.

    1. Re:We just need an alternative to X by eyepeepackets · · Score: 2, Interesting

      X works really good for what it's designed for and I'd hate to have to live without it. That said, what I also would like is a custom version for gaming which turns down or off features not needed for gaming. Wouldn't it be nice if users could build a custom X as easy as custom kernels?

      --
      Everything in the Universe sucks: It's the law!
    2. Re:We just need an alternative to X by the+linux+geek · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I would love to see somebody tell me what's wrong with X without referencing the UNIX Haters Handbook or anything else more than ten years old. I've been using it for a LONG time, in various proprietary and open-source incarnations, and it's come a long way. Xorg generally even works without an xorg.conf these days, and no other windowing system comes close to X's networking/remote-access features.

    3. Re:We just need an alternative to X by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I disagree. Happy?

      Anyway, if you think Linux should get rid of X, wouldn't it be a good idea to, you know, actually state why you think so? You know, provide some arguments?

    4. Re:We just need an alternative to X by impaledsunset · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I disagree. Do you have any reason why you want to get rid of X?

      X's code base is ugly at places, and writing pure-X11 applications isn't the most fun thing in the world, but I can't think of (m)any shortcomings that lead to any trouble in real world usage that can't be fixed. Also, X has to offer a lot of things that any new thing wouldn't have. You might not use many of the features you get for free with X, but some of us do. X's architecture can be seen as a shortcoming, but it's also an advantage in many situation. Remote X for example is a great thing.

      The biggest problem is all the applications that are currently written for X. You can't rewrite everything, and it is not even worth it. Really. X is working fine, and it's getting better. The same goes for the drivers, and everything that's already in.

      And if Google Chrome OS's windowing system doesn't support the X protocol, I can assure you I won't be using it.

    5. Re:We just need an alternative to X by ultrabot · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Just like folks at Apple realized with their OS X, we in the Linux world, need an alternative to X. I heard that Google Chrome OS will get rid of it entirely. I would like to hear from anyone who disagrees.

      Nouveau guys seem to disagree:

      http://icps.u-strasbg.fr/~marchesin/nvdri/fosdem1.pdf

      --
      Save your wrists today - switch to Dvorak
    6. Re:We just need an alternative to X by characterZer0 · · Score: 1

      Most complains about X nowadays a really complains about poor support from video card manufacturers.

      --
      Go green: turn off your refrigerator.
    7. Re:We just need an alternative to X by Randle_Revar · · Score: 1

      xinput 2 is here. xkb2 is coming. evdev is here. exa and uxa are here. kms is here for some drivers already. the basics of gallium3d are here, the rest, including drivers, is coming. xcb is here, it just needs to be used more. input and output hotplug and autoconfiguration are here. With all this there is no need to replace X. The basic design is ok and the details have come a long way since xfree86.

    8. Re:We just need an alternative to X by Randle_Revar · · Score: 1

      >a custom version for gaming which turns down or off features not needed for gaming ...gaming needs as many or more "features" as anything non-gaming...

      if you want better game performance, look for driver improvements and mesa improvements (including gallium3d).

    9. Re:We just need an alternative to X by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You mean the protocol or its implementation?

    10. Re:We just need an alternative to X by Tweenk · · Score: 1

      X is not a problem. X is actually one of the best parts of the Linux graphics stack, and it allows very nice things like running graphical applications remotely. Moreover, DRI allows applications to bypass the X server entirely. The actual problems are the drivers, and a lack of standardized APIs for things like video acceleration that work regardless of the card manufacturer. However, this area is slowly improving, for example take a good look at Gallium3D. When this matures, the amount of effort required to implement a video card driver will be greatly reduced; OpenGL, OpenVG and all other graphics APIs will be implemented in the Gallium3D stack, and the Gallium3D driver will be comparatively simple.

      --
      Those who would give up liberty to obtain working drivers, deserve neither liberty nor working drivers.
    11. Re:We just need an alternative to X by msclrhd · · Score: 1

      And people think that by moving to a completely different graphics server is going to fix this?

    12. Re:We just need an alternative to X by QuoteMstr · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I would like to hear from anyone who disagrees.

      Troll. But I'll bite.

      X11 is a whipping boy for anyone who's ever had a complaint about a Unix GUI. No matter whether it's a badly-designed application, an unstable driver, or poor kernel scheduling, or a deranged toolkit drag-and-drop model, people always fault X11. And no matter what the root cause of the problem, the solution is always to throw out the X protocol and design something else. People like you fail to account for the possibility that there's actually very little wrong with X, and that it can certainly be the basis for a modern, functional GUI.

      There was a very interesting comment on Slashdot a few years ago by Mike Paquette (who wrote Apple's Quartz) explaining why Apple didn't use X11 for OS X. The funny thing, in retrospect, is that every single feature mentioned in Paquette's post has now been implemented for X11, and that's with volunteer work. If Apple had invested resources into making this happen for X instead of reinventing the wheel, everyone would have been better off. Yet despite these additional features, we still retain full network transparency along with full compatibility stretching back to the 80s.

      Don't confuse "newer" and "better". X11's architecture is quite good, and is among one of the better designs for a windowing system ever created. It's clean, extensible, fast, and network-transparent. It defines mechanism, not policy, and does its job extremely well. That it's been extended to support all kinds of modern features is a testament to the strength of its original design.

      If it weren't for the soul-crushing stupidity, it'd be hilarious that people claim X is slow. X ran quickly on computers with 1/000 the performance of even a modest desktop system today, but it's slow on these modern computers? That makes no sense. People claim that X's network transparency puts it at a performance disadvantage, but neglect that Unix Sockets, used for local communication, are among the faster IPC mechanisms in existence. Criticism of X as a platform is baseless.

    13. Re:We just need an alternative to X by QuoteMstr · · Score: 1
      You can compile x.org yourself, you know. Actually, since you don't need to reboot to run a new X, it's easier than compiling a new kernel. That said, what exactly would you turn off? I'm reminded of the famous "simply too many notes" scene from Amadeus.

      Emperor Joseph II:My dear young man, don't take it too hard. Your work is ingenious. It's quality work. And there are simply too many notes, that's all. Just cut a few and it will be perfect.
      Mozart: Which few did you have in mind, Majesty?

    14. Re:We just need an alternative to X by gbjbaanb · · Score: 1

      Don't confuse "newer" and "better"

      Insightful.

      X ran quickly on computers with 1/000 the performance of even a modest desktop system today, but it's slow on these modern computers?

      You, sir, know what you're talking about. If only more were like you.

    15. Re:We just need an alternative to X by jmorris42 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      > I would like to hear from anyone who disagrees.

      No, you are just a fool speaking of things he knows nothing of. You should go into politics.

      I'll give 10-1 odds what you are actually wanting to replace is GNOME, KDE, Qt or Gtk and you haven't a fracking clue what part X actually plays in your desktop experience. You ain't the first newbie blathering on about replacing X and you won't be the last. Some have actually attempted to do it... I didn't follow closely but they never made it past talking and designing... In the end, once you actually study things and start planning you realize that whatever you wanted to do can be done on X and you get the device support for free instead of spending man decades reinventing a whole hell of a lot of wheels.

      > Just like folks at Apple realized with their OS X, we in the Linux world, need an alternative to X.

      See? Total lack of clue. What happened with OS X is with Steve's return Apple got NextStep as their long sought replacement for OS 9. OS X 10.0 is pretty much NextStep with an OS 9 emulator app tossed in. NextStep has always been Display Postscript based so no suprise there... and no rejection of X. Then they tossed in an rootless X server so it could run traditional *NIX apps.

      > I heard that Google Chrome OS will get rid of it entirely.

      Only is Google is a bunch of mindless idiots. Hint: Google isn't a bunch of mindless idiots, they understand what X provides. Remember, X provides mechanism, not policy. That means you can implement pretty much any UI atop it. Witness WINE implementing Win32 and in many cases having it run faster atop X than GDI.

      --
      Democrat delenda est
    16. Re:We just need an alternative to X by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And I can assure you that 99% of the future users of Google Chrome OS couldn't care less whether or not the X protocol is supported.

    17. Re:We just need an alternative to X by ppc_digger · · Score: 1

      What about widgets not being part of the server?

      --
      Of all major operating systems, UNIX is the only one originally meant for gaming.
    18. Re:We just need an alternative to X by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      One problem with X is that it gobbles up huge amounts of memory and doesn't give it back. Watch your X server's virtual and resident sizes with top over the course of a day. Leave it up for a week. What possible excuse does it have to get this big?

      On a typical desktop this might not matter much. Once you've got enough RAM to handle Vista, you've got more than enough for a Linux desktop with X. Most of the virtual size will be out to swap, so who cares.

      But on smaller systems like OLPC's XO-1, where there isn't a *huge* RAM and there's no swap, it's a performance factor.

    19. Re:We just need an alternative to X by colinrichardday · · Score: 1

      X ran quickly on computers with 1/000 the performance of even a modest desktop system today, but it's slow on these modern computers?

      I don't mind X, but what applications did people run on those computers?

    20. Re:We just need an alternative to X by centuren · · Score: 2, Interesting

      X works really good for what it's designed for and I'd hate to have to live without it. That said, what I also would like is a custom version for gaming which turns down or off features not needed for gaming. Wouldn't it be nice if users could build a custom X as easy as custom kernels?

      I agree that X works well for it's designed purpose, and that said I agree that we have further need as we move beyond what it was designed to do (and into the issues we run into with a modern desktop, such as gaming).

      I find I struggle a bit with X on each new install (I like to switch around and use different Linux distros as the mood to tinker comes and goes). After working in an OSX-based development shop with Logitech MX1000s at each desk, I became spoiled on the 12 buttons (10 if you don't count the wheel's scroll up and scroll down), especially combined with Expose. The same features are available in an X desktop environment using Compiz Fusion, and as is usually the case, the Linux equivalent of Expose can be configured to do a whole lot more.

      The first issue with X is getting my mouse configured. I can get all mouse buttons to work, but I usually find myself searching and coming to the xbindkeys method after making minor changes to X's config file. I never remember just what I did to get it working the last time, and have to play around for a while to first figure out what the buttons are, and have to resort to assigning key bindings to them (which I also do for some of them in OSX, as something like ctrl-alt-right and ctrl-alt-left get the job done for switching desktops since I already have that shortcut in place).

      There are desktop-environment specific issues (Compiz refusing to take a click to toggle all windows, for example, instead required the button be held down), but the main annoyance was the bindings not being captured by video games (WoW was the game at the time). WoW ran great on my Linux system, but to use my mouse properly (which was important for in-game macros), I had to exit X, swap the .xinitrc files, and start up my "WoW-configured" X, which launched the game and allowed me to use my mouse bindings without anything else competing for them. I didn't get around to including ventrillo into that setup.

      Now these are two different things:

      1) It's been a major pain to set up my fancy-pants mouse to be fully recognised in X.

      2) Once set up, there are conflicts between the non-X desktop environments that use the bindings and any applications launched.

      The first could be made easier, but as the mouse is supported by evidence of me getting it working, repeating the process each time is no one's fault but my own. If it's a serious enough complaint I should even write a tool to do the configuration. I suspect that it would be useful to some, but not all, due to the main issue seen in #2.

      There seems to be structural functionality lacking in X that applications can use to share resources, such as input devices. I don't expect X to have been designed expecting a KDE / Compiz Fusion environment to compete with WoW running from Wine, and the last thing I'd like to see is X development push entirely in that direction, since obviously we still need it's server/network features without bloating it with features that won't be used in most cases where those are needed. Still, I'd like the option for universal recognition of mouse buttons beyond the 3+scroll model in all applications that use X, with rules about which applications one wants to take the input. Perhaps that's a window manager issue, but with so many window managers out there, it seems like there should be a solid framework written into X that provides a standard way for the different desktop environments to handle such things.

    21. Re:We just need an alternative to X by centuren · · Score: 1

      I disagree. Do you have any reason why you want to get rid of X?

      As you say, X is getting better. It would take an incredibly strong argument to make the point that X should be rewritten from scratch, since, as you point out, it has so many applications. There are shortcomings that I associate with X, but they tend get lost in the overall effort to configure a new system install to work just how I want with my specific hardware. These fall into the general Linux-system shortcomings bucket where extra work is required for final touches, and as the various programs at fault get better, they become fewer.

      Of course, OSX provides an X11 environment, and I've never known anyone to use it for applications. It's been my experience that Linux users who move into the OSX world either use an OSX alternative application, an OSX port of the original application, or just do without on that computer. That has always told me something about the Linux GUI world and the OSX GUI world. Perhaps only that OSX developers can put a lot of effort into really polishing their apps, knowing that Apple users will pay for a polished program (Transmit, and FTP program by Panic, is an example off the top of my head; it seems to sell quite well, without really having any feature advantage over free alternatives). Obviously a market with good chance for profit will lead to more people trying to improve and shine-up simple programs such as FTP clients with the hopes that money will be made. The Linux user community is much more likely to choose a free application over a polished and well-integrated application. Codeweavers is the only company that springs to mind that sells improved versions of existing, free products.

      Whether or not there's any merit to that line of thought, I (not having done any development for X) wonder what sort of SDKs are out there and how they compare to developing for OSX and Windows. Are there development shortcomings when it comes to X?

    22. Re:We just need an alternative to X by siride · · Score: 1

      No other system does this and it offers almost no benefit, so why should this be implemented?

    23. Re:We just need an alternative to X by tmmagee · · Score: 2, Funny

      I for one am still waiting patiently for Berlin (now called Fresco) to replace X. It should be amazing when it is finally finished!

    24. Re:We just need an alternative to X by dpilot · · Score: 1

      > I don't mind X, but what applications did people run on those computers?

      Well for one thing, I personally ran CAD tools to create chips that go into computers, from way back then to today. (Still doing it, too.) For that matter, before running CAD tools on X Windows I ran CAD tools on mainframes with dedicated graphics terminals.

      --
      The living have better things to do than to continue hating the dead.
    25. Re:We just need an alternative to X by mysidia · · Score: 1

      Remote X is a perfect example of just the bloat X contains. By the way, I always use remote VNC, and not Remote X. It has advantages like being usable over a WAN (not like X protocol), and you can disconnect and re-connect sessions later without killing apps (much like screen).

      A rewrite of X from the ground up would not include bloat and features hardly everyone uses.

      The only way to run "Remote X" would be to be utilizing add-on software on TOP of X.

      Much like VNC in Windows is installed on TOP of the windowing stack as an additional piece of software, not underneath it, as overhead, all apps have to put up with, even for users who don't use the remoting protocol.

    26. Re:We just need an alternative to X by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The foundation set for driver writers is very important. Until Tungsten Graphics came along with Gallium3D/DRI2/KMS, the X server / Linux stack wasn't very well equipped in that regard.

      The only drivers that used to actually work well, nvidia's, have their own whole infrastructure between GLX and kernel drivers all the way down. I suspect the underdevelopment of the whole graphics stack was the reason other drivers were known for serious stability issues.

      Now we'll still have to wait a year or two until the new graphics infrastructure and rewritten drivers based on it stabilize... but hopefully it can all finally work well and invite driver developers instead of giving them headaches.

    27. Re:We just need an alternative to X by MostAwesomeDude · · Score: 1

      Write some code, then get back to us on that. 'k, thanks, bye.

      --
      ~ C.
    28. Re:We just need an alternative to X by cavehobbit · · Score: 1

      Mouse set up is just a symptom of many issues with Linux on the desktop.

      For Linux to become a true alternative to Win*, the various distributions and the Linux community as a whole, need to pay attention to this kind of fairly mundane user interface issues.

      While I am not an OS or Linux guru, I am fairly tech-savvy. I work in I.T. supporting VLDB on the technical end. (Multi-terabyte RDBMS in UDB and Oracle, on both Unix and Z/OS).

      Yet Linux, even Ubuntu or pre-loaded SLED on a Lenovo laptop are too much work for me. While I like fiddling around with settings and getting things to work to my liking, I do not want to make a second job of it. When I am off work, I do not want a second job getting my home laptop and PCs to work.

      When asking why things do not work and how to get them to work, you rarely get a straight answer from the community. Yes, I know humans are very unreliable when seeking answers, and there are 20 ways, at least, to do everything in Linux, but still...
      When a user wants to get a 5 button mouse to work, they do not want to be asked why would they want to do that, or told that 3 buttons should be all you need, or be handed twenty links, each of which has a different half-answer they need to piece together.

      Yes, I have installed Windows from scratch, both on a laptop I bought with Linux installed, (Lenovo), and desktops I built myself, using copies of Windows bought commercially and installed out of the box. I even put the holographic sticker on after installation Which means they were not pre-built images fit to a certain hardware profile or to a specific PC. I have installed Ubuntu, SLED, OpenSuse and Fedora on laptops and desktops. So I know how easy it is to find, install and configure drivers for hardware components, both in Windows and Linux. Windows is far easier, and not just because all vendors support it. The actual interface with the OS and process itself is far, far easier in Windows.

      Sure, this is largely a driver issue due to vendors not wanting to support Linux, or, as in the case of Broadcom, refusing to do so even though they have Linux drivers in the lab. Not every company is an Atheros or HP. But it is also an interface design issue that needs to be addressed. It is at least as important, if not more important, than support for the fanciest, newest video cards.

      The folks that want to push desktop distros, like Canonical, SuSe, etc, need to pay far more attention to this.

      I will keep an eye on the various Distros, and try them every year or so, maybe whenever Ubuntu releases an LTS version, but until the basic user interface is as easy to set up as Windows, I will stick with Windows.

    29. Re:We just need an alternative to X by QuoteMstr · · Score: 1

      The problem is that OS X's X11 environment doesn't integrate well into the rest of the desktop. Apple could have done better: there's no particular reason all X applications need to be grouped under one icon in the Dock, or that the z-order needs to be royally screwed up. The window manager could differentiate based on X11 window class, for example. Apple's purpose was being able to claim X11 support, but in reality force anyone who wants a usable application to use AquaDrawingVectorCoreThingKit instead of cross-platform APIs.

      Despite these shortcomings, X11 under OS X gets used all the time. Consider wireshark, for example.

    30. Re:We just need an alternative to X by QuoteMstr · · Score: 1

      Remote X is a perfect example of just the bloat X contains.

      Your "bloat" is a feature I use every day.

      By the way, I always use remote VNC, and not Remote X. It has advantages like being usable over a WAN (not like X protocol)

      I've yet to see a raster remote desktop protocol that's tolerable over anything slower than 10 megabit ethernet. Sure, in a pinch, I could use VNC , but it's painful. On the other hand, NX works just fine.

    31. Re:We just need an alternative to X by colinrichardday · · Score: 1

      What frame rate does CAD require? Is X fast enough for full-scale video and fast FPSs?

    32. Re:We just need an alternative to X by Minozake · · Score: 1

      > One problem with X is that it gobbles up huge amounts of memory and
      > doesn't give it back. Watch your X server's virtual and resident
      > sizes with top over the course of a day. Leave it up for a week.
      > What possible excuse does it have to get this big?

      This is wrong, plain and simple. I've never had a problem with X
      taking up large amounts of memory. 20 MB, maximum. Other
      applications that use X take up so much more memory.

      --
      http://sourcemage.org/ - Have fun :)
    33. Re:We just need an alternative to X by QuoteMstr · · Score: 1

      X maps your video card's memory into its own address space, and that's reflected in its virtual size. If your video card has half a gigabyte of video memory, X's VSS will be at least half a gigabyte!

      Also, leaks in other applications can make X appear to be bloated. For example, applications create pixmaps and send them to the X server for later use. The X server holds onto them on behalf of the client application. If the client forgets about one of these pixmaps, it will be X, not the application, which appears to have a leak. When the leaky client application terminates (or more precisely, when it disconnects from the X server), that memory will be reclaimed.

    34. Re:We just need an alternative to X by ppc_digger · · Score: 1

      Every other modern system does it (Quartz, GDI+), and X's early competitors did it (NeWS comes to mind).
      Putting widgets in the client (or even in a client library, such as QT or GTK) is unnecessary overhead, and results in inconsistent environments (think QT apps in GNOME).

      --
      Of all major operating systems, UNIX is the only one originally meant for gaming.
    35. Re:We just need an alternative to X by QuoteMstr · · Score: 1

      Oh, not this bullshit argument again. You lost it in 1990, you lost it in 1994, you lost it in 2003, and you're losing it again now.

      First of all, GDI+ and Quartz have nothing to do with having "widgets in the server". They're drawing toolkits, comparable to Cairo or the QT vector stuff. In the GTK+ case, there isn't a separate "server" in which to run widgets. The OP is correct in stating that no current system does what you propose.

      Second, you're confusing the benefits of having a common toolkit with those of having "widgets in the server". The advantage of the latter is a very slight latency decrease across a network connection. That's it. The complexity doesn't warrant the benefit, and X works just fine over a network connection without having the X server execute arbitrary bits of code.

      Also, OS X has two major toolkits: Carbon and Cocoa. They're separate implementations. Argue if you'd like that GTK+ and Qt should look more visually alike, but that argument has nothing to do with X11.

    36. Re:We just need an alternative to X by FooBarWidget · · Score: 1

      I'm using X to play H.264 videos all the time and it works fine. I'm talking about proper video players like mplayer and VLC mind you; not Flash, which is slow and has trouble playing Youtube "HD" videos in full screen. I've played OpenGL games in X with a frame rate of 60. I don't know whether it can go faster, I didn't configure it to do so, but everything felt smooth.

    37. Re:We just need an alternative to X by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'd argue that X doesn't do enough as a remote application framework.
      It doesn't support a complete server-side 2D vector rendering interface, so that rasterizing didn't have to happen on clients and be sent over the wire.
      It doesn't support forwarding audio or devices. When it's handled by separate apps, like pulseaudio, it requires setting up separate connections.
      It doesn't integrate dbus, so if you wanted remote apps to connect to a local bus, you need to setup a separate connection.

    38. Re:We just need an alternative to X by bjourne · · Score: 1

      I can't seem to google it up right now, but James Gosling wrote a very interesting article in 2002 about what is wrong with X11 and how he would have designed it from scratch if he could. As he was one of the guys involved in the X11 project one would assume he knows what he is talking about.

      Granted, the composite extension has solved many of X11's problems such as the damn stupid expose event system, but has also introduced many new ones. For example every time you resize a window xorg has to call on both the client application and the wm to render an image of the window being resized. Which is why Compiz cheats and uses wireframe resizing by default. Or just compare a modern Linux desktop to Vista. Sadly, after just a few minutes use it becomes undeniable that Vista's graphics are smoother, shinier and more flicker free than xorg.

    39. Re:We just need an alternative to X by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Having run X and probably any flavor of window manager you can think of (including KDE and GNOME) on a computer sporting a super awesome require heavy-duty processing or video power worked much smoother than anything on Windows ever did on that computer.

    40. Re:We just need an alternative to X by Blakey+Rat · · Score: 1

      Ok. I have a desktop with two, different sized, monitors. (One a wide-screen 20", one a full-screen 19".) I couldn't figure out how to get X to use the correct native resolution for both monitors at the same time. It's *possible* that this isn't a problem with X, but was in fact a problem with the control panel in Ubuntu, but either way it's a problem that doesn't exist in other OSes.

    41. Re:We just need an alternative to X by dbIII · · Score: 2, Interesting

      You just don't know what X can do. As an example, I have a router that can only be configured from the office (as it should). This morning one of the links was down. I logged into my work machine from home, opened a web browser there which appeared on my home computer screen, went to the page for the router configuration and fixed it with a few clicks. Now while VNC or remote desktop could do that it is slower and harder to use than just having the application you want appear on the screen you want as if it was running on the local machine. That's just the window you want and not an entire desktop full of what is really irrelevant crap to what you want now. That is what X gives you above everything else - and yes, I do use X on to of MS Windows as well on occasion.
      Now if you look at the aspects of it to just put pixels on the screen from things running locally it performs just as well as other display methods (eg. nvidia drivers on X vs nvidia drivers on XP - same performance). If you can think of real examples instead of dredging up the stuff from the people that were complaining about how they didn't need this slow GUI thing when text was fast from twenty years ago then please share. If the stuff running on top (eg. gnome) is slow then you ditch that for something that isn't.

    42. Re:We just need an alternative to X by dpilot · · Score: 1

      The CAD that I do is 2D, not 3D, though putting a million vertices on the screen can stress things, mainly because nobody has optimized those paths.

      However at home I play some OpenGL games and play video.
      Yes, the framerates are adequate, even on my non-leading-edge hardware. (Except for Flash fullscreen)

      --
      The living have better things to do than to continue hating the dead.
    43. Re:We just need an alternative to X by Trepidity · · Score: 1

      I can't seem to google it up right now, but James Gosling wrote a very interesting article in 2002 about what is wrong with X11 and how he would have designed it from scratch if he could.

      Is this the one?

    44. Re:We just need an alternative to X by qieurowfhbvdklsj · · Score: 1

      I would love to see somebody tell me what's wrong with X without referencing the UNIX Haters Handbook or anything else more than ten years old.

      Well, how about my experience as of a few weeks ago.

      After playing Warcraft II via DOSBOX for with the kids for many months, I thought it'd sure be nice if there were a similar game I could find, something that would run in a resolution greater than 640x480 and which had a map editor that would run in Linux. (Warcraft II's editor fails to work correctly in Wine.)

      So I had a look around Gentoo's Portage directories, to see what games were available. The first few I tried were masked, and so I didn't try them, since it's been my experience that if there isn't an unmasked version, then it's totally disfunctional. Eventually I had to write a Perl script to look through all of the ebuilds and list the ones which weren't masked, since they were so few and far between.

      The first game I tried worked for a little while, until it crashed X11, requiring me to reboot my computer.

      The second game I tried worked for a little while, until it crashed X11, requiring me to reboot my computer.

      The third game I tried worked for a little while, until it crashed X11, requiting me to reboot my computer.

      At that point, I decided to just stick with DOSBOX. It's crazy that Linux's best graphics API is DOSBOX.

      ...but really, that almost isn't X11's fault. If I'm allowed to reference something from years and years ago, I'll reference myself trying to explain to the people of the Open Graphics Project exactly why they're wasting their time: http://www.mail-archive.com/open-graphics@duskglow.com/msg05679.html

      Thankfully Linux is moving in the right direction, as some of the problems I point out in that post are slowly being eliminated, for example, video mode setting is being moved into the kernel, allowing X11 to avoid direct hardware access.

      However, there's a lot in there that I'd be surprised to see in less than ten years, for example, a stable and well documented kernel ABI for video drivers. I can hear people now saying "but our constant insistace that everything be open source resulted in so-and-so open-sourcing their video drivers recently!" Yes, but just how many fucking years did we have to wait for that to happen, and just how many more are we willing to fuck ourselves over waiting for all of the other video manufacturers to play our game? Wouldn't it be nice to just make shit work for once? ...but I guess the Linux slogan is "One of these days it'll be awesome!"

    45. Re:We just need an alternative to X by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Linux kernel needs make menuconfig, make modules, make modules_install, make bzImage and maybe make install, if you wish.
      compiling Xorg needs a lot of INDIVIDUAL packages, needs a individual make to all of then into a exact order, needs a lot of dependences and in 80% of cases... just do not work.
      sorry, epic fail.

    46. Re:We just need an alternative to X by moosesocks · · Score: 1

      Don't forget that the primary implementation of X11 back in the early days of OS X was XFree86, which had some pretty significant internal/political issues. Apple would have needed to completely fork the project in order to get anything useful done.

      Eventually, the problems got so bad that the entire system was forked, which was a pretty big undertaking at the time. The fork was only successful because the entire open source community was almost unanimously clawing to move away from XFree. Unfortunately, by then it was already too late.

      To this day, this makes me sad -- if XFree had cleaned up its act a few years earlier, Apple might have adopted X11 for its windowing system. The lack of proper X11 support means that OS X doesn't play nicely with the Unix ecosystem. The built-in X server is a nice, but really isn't suited for day-to-day use. Similarly, OS X is the only major operating system that doesn't have network transparency built into its windowing system. Remote access is slow, even on a fast connection (compared to NX, which performs impressively over dialup).

      --
      -- If you try to fail and succeed, which have you done? - Uli's moose
    47. Re:We just need an alternative to X by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hi,

      I generally agree with you here, and I think X largely gets the bashing it does because people misunderstand what it actually is.

      For example, when you say 'X is a GUI' that is, in my opinion (and by my terms of reference), wrong: X is a 'window manager'. It does windows and drawing to windows, and that's it.

      But a GUI does much more: it does buttons, listviews, treeviews etc, and for these you need to step outside of X.

      For someone attempting to port to Linux, this is mightily confusing - 'what the hell do I use? X? GTK? KDE? QT? FTLK?'

      Linux badly needs a 'consistent' GUI/desktop manager - I don't really care what it is, but god dammit, I DON'T WANT TO EVEN THINK ABOUT X! It should be an implementation detail! And frankly, this is something I'm hoping Chrome will come along and fix up.

      I also disagree that apple should have just modified X instead of going their own way.

      X, and Linux in general, have big problems with hardware acceleration and 'closed' drivers.

      I don't think it would have been possible for Apple to achieve what they have - which I consider very significant - while dealing with the politics of the GPL etc.

      Sad, but there you go...

      Bye!
      Mark

    48. Re:We just need an alternative to X by QuoteMstr · · Score: 1

      First of all, a "GUI" refers to what the user sees, not how that's implemented. There is no piece of software anywhere that provides a "GUI". What you're talking about is a toolkit. Toolkits have converged already in terms of functionality and appearance.

      If you want to port to "Linux" (or really, Unix-like systems in general), you use GTK or QT these days. Period. You can argue about which toolkit is better, but the difference is arbitrary, and both are available under the permissive LGPL license.

      Also, the X server is not licensed under the GPL, but under the X11 license, which permits practically anything, much like the BSD license. There are no "politics" involved with the X11 license. If your ignorance is so profound that you've never heard of the X11 license, one of the major Free Software licenses, you have no basis for commenting on the windowing system.

      Apple, had it decided to extend X, would not have started using the Linux kernel, or any of the existing toolkits, but instead created an Aqua that simply talked to the X server the same way GTK and QT do today.

    49. Re:We just need an alternative to X by QuoteMstr · · Score: 1

      All that article shows is that Gosling's career had crested by 2002. His "new" design is spectacularly bad: it's essentially a lightly-moderated raw-framebuffer-access model of the kind that preceded X11. In Gosling's new model, for example, applications are supported to draw their own window borders.

      What happens when an application freezes? Do you need to resort to a Windows-style dummy-window hack to retain control of the rest of the system? What about UI consistency? What about stacking policy? In Gosling's model, each toolkit needs to incorporate the functionality that is today handed by the window manager. It's terrible.

      Yes, in principle, you could use a shared library and some PAM-like facility to control window policy, but that only works on the local machine. Remote applications would become even more inconsistent.

    50. Re:We just need an alternative to X by QuoteMstr · · Score: 1

      Unfortunately, most GUI configuration tools are absolutely horrid. I won't argue that.

      For unequal-sized monitors, you can configure the outputs using xrandr, or for older systems, Xinerama.

    51. Re:We just need an alternative to X by QuoteMstr · · Score: 1

      It doesn't support a complete server-side 2D vector rendering interface, so that rasterizing didn't have to happen on clients and be sent over the wire.

      XRender

      It doesn't support forwarding audio or devices. When it's handled by separate apps, like pulseaudio, it requires setting up separate connections. It doesn't integrate dbus, so if you wanted remote apps to connect to a local bus, you need to setup a separate connection.

      That's a legitimate criticism of the system as a whole, but it's not the job of X11 to handle audio. In other words, how is this an argument for throwing out X? If anything, it's an argument for An X11 extension for audio, which, IMHO, is a good idea in principle.

    52. Re:We just need an alternative to X by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Merda bovis!
      X11 was glacial when it was able to run on consumer hardware for the first time in the early nineties. And consumer hardware means consumer hardware + $20k worth of RAM.
      If you run X11 without acceleration it is still glacial and still slower than Windows.
      Anyways, the real problem is not its speed or lack thereof, nowadays it is acceptable, but the inherent design flaw in Xorg specifically that makes it a laggy and buggy experience. Each time a command is sent from the server, confirmation and confirmation of the confirmation must be waited for. This is of course still true for local use. This is not only slow, but also generates bugs. Each time a GUI does something unexpected, you can bet that you just experienced an X11 race condition.

    53. Re:We just need an alternative to X by QuoteMstr · · Score: 1

      No, it is your post that is full of bullshit. The facts are that X performed well on the hardware for which it was designed, which had a miniscule fraction of what's available today. That it crawled on something even slower than what it was designed for makes no difference.

      As for unaccelerated rendering, the reason that's slow is that unaccelerated graphics work is inherently slow. You can only draw a box so quickly with a given hardware interface. X11 does the best job with what it has in that case. How can you complain, then, that X is slow when it's really the hardware that's slow?

      As for X's "inherent design flaw" --- asynchronous operation (of which you have a muddle understanding) is not inherently bad. Far from having to wait for confirmation, the client sends a string of commands, and then, at some later time, might be notified that one of these commands failed. Since command failure is exceedingly rare, it doesn't matter. An application could wait for each command to complete successfully before sending the next, and that's what some applications and toolkits do when the user asks for synchronous operation. That's only useful for debugging, however: in practice, X11's asynchronous model is good for performance.

      Each time a GUI does something unexpected, you can bet that you just experienced an X11 race condition.

      That is an outright lie.

    54. Re:We just need an alternative to X by QuoteMstr · · Score: 1

      If you want one command to rebuild your whole system, install Gentoo or a BSD. Or, just maybe, you can fucking think about what exactly it is that you want to change and recompile only the module you need to implement that change. On the other hand, that's not going to happen. Like most people who use "epic fail", you're an idiot.

    55. Re:We just need an alternative to X by Chirs · · Score: 1

      I have no problems using VNC halfway across North America on an ADSL connection.

    56. Re:We just need an alternative to X by mpol · · Score: 1

      I would like a working TV Out.
      I have a laptop with an Nvidia chipset and a tvout. The Mandriva config tool didn set up the tvout, nor did vnidia-settings. I had to hack a xorg.conf to get it recognize the tvout composite output. But there was no way I could get it to recognize the tv, or get anything on the tvscreen. With Twinview it would just give errors, and without twinview it would simply give no error, and still no output.
      In the past I tried the same with a Raeon tvout, and couldn't get it to work either. And just for info, I've been using Linux for 10 years now, and have developed on a distro in the past, so it's not my skills that are lacking.

      --

      Well, don't worry about that. We can get you back before you leave. (Dr. Who)
    57. Re:We just need an alternative to X by centuren · · Score: 1

      Yet Linux, even Ubuntu or pre-loaded SLED on a Lenovo laptop are too much work for me. While I like fiddling around with settings and getting things to work to my liking, I do not want to make a second job of it. When I am off work, I do not want a second job getting my home laptop and PCs to work.

      As a note, I don't want my primary job to be fiddling in such a manner. Playing with Linux is a hobby, encouraged by the things I can accomplish that I can't with less configurable operating systems. I have computers that are stable and always ready for use, and I elect to have a computer where I can mess around with the newest technologies in Linux.

      Purely as constructive criticism, I think you may have presented a few misconceived concepts beyond the idea that a hobby equates to a second job (as I tell any Windows users who ask about other options, if you don't feel urgency to try something else, be content).

      When asking why things do not work and how to get them to work, you rarely get a straight answer from the community. Yes, I know humans are very unreliable when seeking answers, and there are 20 ways, at least, to do everything in Linux, but still...

      This may be 100% valid critique, but I have never actually asked anyone for help in that manner. I certainly don't struggle with no guide, but google searches and distro wikis provide answers to age-old questions like 5 button mouse support. This is definitely the route to take over asking people in #linux somewhere, even if it takes a few intelligent searches to find it. If someone has solved a problem like that, it's likely to have become a write up.

      If you ask the question at people, you can only hope someone has the same concern you do. I don't consider my 12 button mouse something that other Linux users should share their time with helping me, since it's a 12 button mouse (a little ridiculous, even if I have come to rely on it). Of course, if someone has solved the issue of a 5 or 8 button mouse, the solution will likely be the same for a 12 button mouse. Of course, the MX1000 was a major brand leader during it's day, so a Google search easily turns up an approach for basic configuration that works for an any button mouse.

      When a user wants to get a 5 button mouse to work, they do not want to be asked why would they want to do that, or told that 3 buttons should be all you need, or be handed twenty links, each of which has a different half-answer they need to piece together.

      There's a quote on bash.org:

      [glyph] For example - if you came in here asking "how do I use a jackhammer" we might ask "why do you need to use a jackhammer"
      [glyph] If the answer to the latter question is "to knock my grandmother's head off to let out the evil spirits that gave her cancer", then maybe the problem is actually unrelated to jackhammers

      Asking why is often the most important question when dealing with someone who doesn't know how to seek out information independently. Also, receiving many half-answers is to be expected if you're asking random people in a forum or chat room, rather than looking for the solution directly. Complete solutions are put into write ups in wikis and tutorials. People in chat rooms or forums can only help as much as their knowledge permits.

      Yes, I have installed Windows from scratch, both on a laptop I bought with Linux installed, (Lenovo), and desktops I built myself, using copies of Windows bought commercially and installed out of the box.

      I suspect you have a lot to learn about installing operating systems. I certainly do. I would say I installed Gentoo Linux "from scratch" because it had no installer and I had to handle everything, from paritioning, to placing core files and creating the proper mounts and "activate system blocks" from a cd-rom's command line (which is the normal way of installing it). Then I compiled everyt

    58. Re:We just need an alternative to X by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      XRender is a bitmap compositing interface, and a poorly accelerated one.

      how is this an argument for throwing out X?

      Naturally, you can build it all on top of X as extensions, but does it make sense? It has been shown that X performs poorly remotely, so rather than bolting more features onto it, I'd prefer to see a modern alternative that is better at what X does and considers the other things from the beginning.

    59. Re:We just need an alternative to X by Carewolf · · Score: 1

      Only is Google is a bunch of mindless idiots. Hint: Google isn't a bunch of mindless idiots, they understand what X provides. Remember, X provides mechanism, not policy. That means you can implement pretty much any UI atop it. Witness WINE implementing Win32 and in many cases having it run faster atop X than GDI.

      I think Google is going to remove X, but not because of performance, but to make sure no non-google rich-applications are "streamed" to the device (from a remote X-client/application-server for instance). They want the user locked to the Google cloud, and a system like X would ruin the tie-in.

    60. Re:We just need an alternative to X by nomadic · · Score: 1

      You're honestly claiming that X couldn't be replaced by something significantly smaller, faster, and less-bloated? That the server-client paradigm makes sense for a software package where 99.9% of the users are running the client and the server on the same computer? That there hasn't been a meaningful advance in fundamental graphical interface programming in the TWENTY TWO YEARS since the X11 protocol was instituted? That a system that allows (no, REQUIRES) multiple layers to add functionality is automatically superior (because of its "freedom") than one that handles some higher level stuff itself at the cost of mild restrictions on developers? Then why was BeOS so much faster and responsive than the X at the time?

      When I first started using X in '94 I was impressed by its speed and power, especially as compared to the Windows of the time (3.1). Fifteen years later it doesn't seem that much faster, even though I now run it on a computer exponentially faster and with greater memory.

      Yes, you can blame KDE or Gnome or Adobe or even linux, but the fact remains that after tens of thousands of people developing for it, and millions of dollars invested in it, X is still a hell of a lot slower, harder to use, and buggy than it should be. If NOBODY can create an efficient, responsive GUI based on X, then maybe it's something wrong with X and not necessarily the tens of thousands of people who have been working on the desktop environments and apps and drivers? It doesn't matter how pure, beautiful and efficient the underlying code is, if nobody can figure out how to extend it then who cares?

    61. Re:We just need an alternative to X by Blakey+Rat · · Score: 0, Redundant

      Unfortunately, most GUI configuration tools are absolutely horrid. I won't argue that.

      If the tool to configure X doesn't work, then X doesn't work. The UI *is* the application.

      The sooner the open source community learns that, the sooner they'll be creating usable software instead of diving around in obscure config files.

    62. Re:We just need an alternative to X by QuoteMstr · · Score: 1

      XRender is a bitmap compositing interface

      Lies. Did you read the linked specification?
      Triangles

              op: PICTOP
              src: PICTURE
              src-x, src-y: INT16
              dst: PICTURE
              mask-format: PICTFORMAT or None
              triangles: LISTofTRIANGLE

              This request rasterizes the list of triangles in the order they
              occur in the list.

      and a poorly accelerated one.

      There you go again, confusing implementation with core concepts. And in fact, render is accelerated well today, especially with modern drivers that use the EXA acceleration hooks.

      It has been shown that X performs poorly remotely,

      The passive voice is the universal voice of people who want to misdirect. X performs well remotely, and has for decades. What would you change, exactly, what would make it better? It's easy to claim that a technology is deficient, but much harder to show that it can be better.

    63. Re:We just need an alternative to X by QuoteMstr · · Score: 1

      If the tool to configure X doesn't work, then X doesn't work. The UI *is* the application.

      This statement is ridiculous. The argument I'm countering is "X11 sucks as a protocol and as a system, so let's throw it out and start over". That a particular GUI tool is deficient is no argument that X11 itself is broken. It's like saying a compiler is broken because of a problem with an IDE dialog box: why would you rewrite the compiler?

    64. Re:We just need an alternative to X by Blakey+Rat · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      It's like saying a compiler is broken because of a problem with an IDE dialog box: why would you rewrite the compiler?

      You wouldn't, don't be purposefully dense. There's no way you're that stupid.

      But if the compiler was poor because the UI tools that interface with it are poor, then you certainly re-write those UI tools. Duh.

      What I'm saying is that software should be considered holistically. If the UI to X is broken, then X is broken. Period.

    65. Re:We just need an alternative to X by QuoteMstr · · Score: 1

      You're honestly claiming that X couldn't be replaced by something significantly smaller, faster, and less-bloated?

      Not significantly so, not with the same feature-set.

      That the server-client paradigm makes sense for a software package where 99.9% of the users are running the client and the server on the same computer?

      Separation of responsibilities is good software design practice. In reality, no matter what architecture you choose, you're going to need to separate out display and window management from application code. OS X, for example, has a WindowServer; Windows has various bits. The fact is that the network-transparent aspects of X11 simply don't add any overhead where it counts.

      That there hasn't been a meaningful advance in fundamental graphical interface programming in the TWENTY TWO YEARS since the X11 protocol was instituted?

      We're not using Xt and Motif anymore. Of course there's been advancement. But there is no need to discard what works: like I said, newer isn't automatically better.

      That a system that allows (no, REQUIRES) multiple layers to add functionality is automatically superior (because of its "freedom") than one that handles some higher level stuff itself at the cost of mild restrictions on developers? Then why was BeOS so much faster and responsive than the X at the time?

      That's funny. When we allow (no, REQUIRE) applications to go through "multiple layers" to reach fixed storage, we praise various filesystems and the VFS mechanism. By your logic, the operating system should do as little as possible to carve out sections of raw disk for applications to use and get out of the way. That's ridiculous.

      BeOS was faster because it was a good all-around implementation.

      Yes, you can blame KDE or Gnome or Adobe or even linux, but the fact remains that after tens of thousands of people developing for it, and millions of dollars invested in it, X is still a hell of a lot slower, harder to use, and buggy than it should be.

      Err, maybe it is the fault of the entire desktop stack? Nice way to casually dismiss a good point. X11 itself is not the reason behind the bug you're complaining about in your favorite desktop environment. X11 has nothing to do with how "easy to use" an application is, for example.

      Just like I said, you're using X11 as a whipping boy when your real problem lies with some other piece of software.

    66. Re:We just need an alternative to X by fritsd · · Score: 1

      Visualisation of the 3-D structure of medium-sized molecules, for example. See picture on this advertisement. That was 20 years ago, on an SGI Iris. The workstation was slow but fast enough to watch your basepairs of DNA in 3-D with OpenGL. I can't recall the specs of the Iris. Later we also used a faster SGI Indy which (I just looked up on wikipedia) had something like 32 Mb memory and ran on a MIPS R4400 CPU at (guessing wildly here) 200 MHz.

      --
      To be, or not to be: isn't that quite logical, Slashdot Beta?
    67. Re:We just need an alternative to X by TecKnow · · Score: 1

      I'm not saying there isn't an answer to this, but I don't know what it is. When I'm using Windows Remote Desktop and I lose my connection to the remote machine, or just log off, I can log in again, even from somewhere else, and pick up right where I left off. XTunneling doesn't give me this option, as far as I know. I have dabbled with VNC a little bit, but it seems not to be well integrated with linux in general (separate passwords? individually creating VNC displays?) and even then resuming sessions seems to be 'theoretically' possible, but elusive in reality.

      For me, this is an important feature, X will always be less appealing until it works. Right now I RDP into a windows machine inside the firwall, then Xtunnel from there to get at least some of this functionality.

    68. Re:We just need an alternative to X by nomadic · · Score: 1

      That's funny. When we allow (no, REQUIRE) applications to go through "multiple layers" to reach fixed storage, we praise various filesystems and the VFS mechanism. By your logic, the operating system should do as little as possible to carve out sections of raw disk for applications to use and get out of the way. That's ridiculous.

      Apples and oranges. Visual presentation and storage access are completely different things, with different requirements. And your analogy doesn't make sense, it should apply to you, not me; you're saying it's GOOD that X does as little as possible then gets out of the way.

      Err, maybe it is the fault of the entire desktop stack? Nice way to casually dismiss a good point. X11 itself is not the reason behind the bug you're complaining about in your favorite desktop environment.

      So everybody but the core X11/X.org developers is incompetent? Occam's razor, my friend; it is far more likely that something is fundamentally wrong on the X side.

      X11 has nothing to do with how "easy to use" an application is, for example.

      Sure it does, if X11 created a limited set of of ways on how to present information, the individual applications would be easier to use because you'd be able to carry knowledge over to new programs.

    69. Re:We just need an alternative to X by josath · · Score: 1

      I'm gonna be a jerk here and say It Works For Me(TM). I had Linux running just fine on a 1280x1024 as the main monitor and 1368x768 as the second monitor. Of course I had a NVidia card, which I believe works the best out of the brands under Linux. There's a little NVidia config gui that you can use to setup multiple monitors etc. This was three years ago, so it's possible things have gone downhill, but unlikely.

      --
      sig? uhh, umm, ok
    70. Re:We just need an alternative to X by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Have you looked at FreeNX? I think it can do what you want.

    71. Re:We just need an alternative to X by badkarmadayaccount · · Score: 1

      Just replace MicroXwin's kernel module with a Apache licensed one, and you're ready. That specific license is both GPL and BSD compatible, and, considering the code's nature, it'll be resistant to commercial hijacking.

      --
      I know tobacco is bad for you, so I smoke weed with crack.
    72. Re:We just need an alternative to X by badkarmadayaccount · · Score: 1

      20 MB for a graphics system is fraking HUGE. WTF? People run Full OSes with a complete GUI, i.e. with a window and login manager of a floppy, X11 can't do anything without a gob of RAM? I don't give shit how cheap it is, that's plain too much. Heck, a Linux kernel with everything + the kitchen sink doesn't hit 15MB, IIRC. I value X11 as a system, and it's heritage, but it needs to go on a diet ASAP.

      --
      I know tobacco is bad for you, so I smoke weed with crack.
    73. Re:We just need an alternative to X by badkarmadayaccount · · Score: 1

      Mod parent up +infinity. They may be SUS2k3 certified, but have made it a royal pain to run true *nix apps on it. /etc/fstab not working? WTF? Some vendors are worse (HP-[S]UX and A[in't UN]IX, looking at you), but that doesn't excuse them.

      --
      I know tobacco is bad for you, so I smoke weed with crack.
    74. Re:We just need an alternative to X by badkarmadayaccount · · Score: 1

      ...carve out sections of the hard disk...

      What do you think databases are trying to do these days? If a basic, general purpose data structure is desired, a filesystem equivalent - then put it in the system library. But the OS's job is resource arbitration - not forcing data models on applications.

      --
      I know tobacco is bad for you, so I smoke weed with crack.
    75. Re:We just need an alternative to X by Minozake · · Score: 1

      I don't give a shit. Given that I have 1 GiB of RAM, 20 MB isn't going to impact my system. It's the 500 fucking MiB that Firefox keeps taking up because the Mozilla devs can't be bothered to optimize their code and cut their bloat, or make their config options actually do something. I need Firefox because of crappy web developers who can't understand that there's more than just the mainstream Firefox, IE, and Safari (and now coming up, Chrome).

      If I compiled my Xorg to be tiny, then I might have less usage. But compiling with -O3 and -ggdb (among other options), I have a larger footprint. But, again, I don't care because of the system I have. If I had only 64 MiB of RAM, then I would be more wary about my memory.

      --
      http://sourcemage.org/ - Have fun :)
    76. Re:We just need an alternative to X by badkarmadayaccount · · Score: 1

      And that's why we need hardware managed code, ala Unisys B5000 or IBM AS/400. With some ideas from the PDP-8 and TTA CPUs.
      *wonders*

      --
      I know tobacco is bad for you, so I smoke weed with crack.
    77. Re:We just need an alternative to X by bjourne · · Score: 1

      Read up on the composite extension, XAA, DRI and all the new stuff being implemented in Xorg. The raw framebuffer model, where the server only cares about stacking and mediating pixel access is exactly where Xorg is going. More and more of X's features are becoming legacy that modern apps just don't need.

      Also check out the EWMH spec to understand what kind of mess is involved in supporting a window manager model instead of letting clients draw their own borders. There is a reason why neither Aqua nor Windows have the concept of window manager.

    78. Re:We just need an alternative to X by hvengel · · Score: 1

      Although I agree that many of the things that Mike Paquette wrote about have now been implemented in X11 there is one glaring exception. "4) Add ColorSync support for drawing and imaging operations, display calibration" X11 now has the _ICC_PROFILE atom and this is a small step in this direction but it is missing many of the features needed to create a ColorSync like environment. There are some third party utilities that implement some of the ColorSync functionality like the LUT loader in ArgyllCMS and the Oyranos utilities (Oyranos is intended to implement a complete ColorSync like system). At this point Oyranos is immature at best and since ColorSync works not only with displays but with other devices like cameras, scanners and printers this is a much broader issue than just X11. But even in the X11 area color management is still the red headed step child and much work remains to be done before any claims of parity with ColorSync can be made.

  9. *Another* FireWire stack? by TJamieson · · Score: 1

    I honestly don't know, why is it needed? Isn't this the third one in about 5 years now?

    --
    For the last time, PIN Number and ATM Machine are redundancies!
    1. Re:*Another* FireWire stack? by TJamieson · · Score: 2, Informative

      Replying to myself... whee!

      It is not a new FireWire stack, rather the "second" stack that has been experimental for a few years is no longer marked experimental. However, the maintainer still says to use the old stack for many applications.

      --
      For the last time, PIN Number and ATM Machine are redundancies!
  10. Yeah by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    RAM is cheap and I have plenty of it. What about improving desktop performance when memory is not a limiting resource?
    Honestly, there's something very wrong with a current state of Linux desktop when Windows 7 GUI runs faster that KDE 4.

    1. Re:Yeah by characterZer0 · · Score: 1

      Fewer memory reads means less time waiting for memory reads, regardless of how much of it you have.

      --
      Go green: turn off your refrigerator.
    2. Re:Yeah by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      it already works well with high memory with its ablity to use more then 4gb of ram with ether 32bit or 64bit enviroments

  11. Minor release? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Even minor Linux releases have heaps of new features these days!

    Linux has been on the 2.6 line for what? 6 years?

    1. Re:Minor release? by mysidia · · Score: 1

      Some years ago, the kernel development model version numbering had changed, and at some point Linus basically said there would probably not be an unstable 2.7.x series, ever, except that they might want to number the version after 2.6.99 2.7.0 instead of 2.7.100, just to keep the numbers short.

      In all likelihood, 5 years from today, the kernel will still be 2.6.x.

    2. Re:Minor release? by QuoteMstr · · Score: 1

      Really, Linux should pull an Emacs and just use the last component of the version number as the version number. That way, we'll have Linux 30, Linux 31, and so on. (Four-component version numbers, as in 2.6.29.2 are ridiculous, especially when the first two components never change.)

    3. Re:Minor release? by Ant+P. · · Score: 1

      they might want to number the version after 2.6.99 2.7.0 instead of 2.7.100, just to keep the numbers short.

      In all likelihood, 5 years from today, the kernel will still be 2.6.x.

      But only because at a rate of 1 release every 2 months, it'll be 2.6.91 by then.

  12. ATI mode setting, well, sort of... by eddy · · Score: 4, Informative

    From the kernelnewbies article:

    This version adds Kernel Mode Setting (KMS) support for ATI Radeon. Hardware supported is R1XX,R2XX,R3XX,R4XX,R5XX (radeon up to X1950). Works is underway to provide support for R6XX, R7XX and newer hardware (radeon from HD2XXX to HD4XXX).

    With the HD5850 and HD5870 weeks away (don't buy a new card till they're out, you'll hate yourself!), this means you have to be three GENERATIONS behind the curve for this yet unreleased kernel feature to be of use.

    --
    Belief is the currency of delusion.
    1. Re:ATI mode setting, well, sort of... by QuoteMstr · · Score: 3, Insightful

      If you need a bleeding-edge card, you're gaming, and to be frank, Linux is not the best environment for gaming. If, on the other hand, you're interested in solid 2D work with decent acceleration, a solid older card is just the thing. I just picked up a dirt-cheap R400-based card myself. (I'd have stuck with my trusty Matrox G450, but the driver will probably never support modern multihead with xrandr 1.3.)

    2. Re:ATI mode setting, well, sort of... by Randle_Revar · · Score: 1

      So? The basics are there, that makes adding newer stuff easier, especially since AFAIK the 5xxx series isn't radically different from 4xxx.

    3. Re:ATI mode setting, well, sort of... by eddy · · Score: 1

      >So?

      So no kernel mode setting for me and my old 4870. Just pointing out that this isn't some ATI model wide feature, like it came across from the blurb, which to recap, says:

      Another improvement coming with 2.6.31 is kernel mode-setting support for ATI Radeon graphics cards, enabling faster user switching and a more seamless startup experience.

      It could have said:

      Another improvement coming with 2.6.31 is kernel mode-setting support for legacy[0] ATI Radeon graphics cards, enabling faster user switching and a more seamless startup experience.

      [0] AMD's own term for things older than the ATI Radeon X2100 Series.

      --
      Belief is the currency of delusion.
    4. Re:ATI mode setting, well, sort of... by Randle_Revar · · Score: 1

      Oh, I see. Yes, your phrasing would have been better.

    5. Re:ATI mode setting, well, sort of... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or you're a gamer who dual-boots, like me.

    6. Re:ATI mode setting, well, sort of... by sznupi · · Score: 1

      I wouldn't necessarily agree...low-end card from current generation with solid performance would have much lower energy consumption.

      --
      One that hath name thou can not otter
    7. Re:ATI mode setting, well, sort of... by Solra+Bizna · · Score: 1

      I have a Rage 128. I'm still hoping, but somehow doubting, that KMS will get ported to my card...

      -:sigma.SB

      --
      WARN
      THERE IS ANOTHER SYSTEM
    8. Re:ATI mode setting, well, sort of... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm using radeonfb, you insensitive clod!

    9. Re:ATI mode setting, well, sort of... by agnosticnixie · · Score: 1

      Maybe movie work might be a justification - adobe, avid and apple may have a heavy chunk of the market, but cinelerra and blender are linux native and marketed at professional studios too.

    10. Re:ATI mode setting, well, sort of... by Ant+P. · · Score: 1

      If you only need 2D then why bother with an old card at all? I just got a cheap, fanless HD4350 and it'll run just about anything I throw at it now. The best part is it'll get faster and more useful the longer I keep it.

    11. Re:ATI mode setting, well, sort of... by hitmark · · Score: 1

      iirc, most of the radeon driver was reverse engineered before amd bought ati and started releasing required info. The more recent radeonHD driver however got going specifically based on said info, to amd took its sweet time releasing the 3D part.

      time will tell if the newer cards will have their info released with the hardware, so that the work can be folded into radeonHD straight away.

      btw, how long have radeonHD been under development now, i cant really keep track of everything that happens these days...

      --
      comment first, facts later. http://chem.tufts.edu/AnswersInScience/RelativityofWrong.htm
    12. Re:ATI mode setting, well, sort of... by tick-tock-atona · · Score: 1

      Yes, but KMS for HD2XXX to HD5XXX is scheduled to be merged in 2.6.32, plus by that stage there should be serviceable open source 3D support on all the ATI cards.

    13. Re:ATI mode setting, well, sort of... by PitaBred · · Score: 1

      ATI is also just barely releasing documentation for the latest generation GPUs. And that's a hell of a lot more than Nvidia has ever done. Be patient... major changes take time. If you don't mind compiling, you can get DRI and KMS right now with the current generation of cards.

  13. Who cares? by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 0, Troll

    Why does this matter, really? Linux is a server OS, why are they spending any time on useless trivia? Compare the number of working linux boxes used for servers versus desktops, and ask the same question again.

    --
    Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
    1. Re:Who cares? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Linux is a terrible desktop and an even WORSE server. In my company we use Windows for server duties (far more stable and fast than linux) and OS X for desktops. We've tried various open source operating systems in the past (freebsd, openbsd, linux) but they all suck for one reason or another, failing to support even the most basic hardware and applications. Windows and OS X JUST WORK, no hassle, no fuss. So stick that in your open source pipes and smoke it..

    2. Re:Who cares? by OriginalSolver · · Score: 1, Insightful

      No where is Linux defined as a server OS. Linux may be used primarily on servers but it is also used on desktops,imbedded systems and phones. Linux is many things to many people.

    3. Re:Who cares? by characterZer0 · · Score: 1

      Sure, we will stick your vague assertions and hints at the existence of anecdotal evidence completely unaccompanied by any actual information into our pipes.

      --
      Go green: turn off your refrigerator.
    4. Re:Who cares? by Randle_Revar · · Score: 1

      Today isn't Tuesday

    5. Re:Who cares? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ditto

    6. Re:Who cares? by Locklin · · Score: 1

      I wouldn't be so sure, I'm not sure how ~1% of desktop computers compares to ~12% server market in real numbers. There are may be many more desktops/laptops in the world then servers. In real numbers, they might not be so different.

      --
      "Knowledge is the only instrument of production that is not subject to diminishing returns" -Journal of Political Econom
    7. Re:Who cares? by NotBornYesterday · · Score: 1

      If it weren't for the OS X reference, I'd say that sounded like Steve Ballmer off his meds and trolling AC.

      --
      I prefer rogues to imbeciles because they sometimes take a rest.
    8. Re:Who cares? by Enleth · · Score: 1

      Oh my, another weirdo who thinks that programmers are like construction workers or the like and can be reassigned from one construction place to the other just like that.

      First, there's no "they". The fact that someone is doing desktop-related work has absolutely, totally NO EFFECT on any server-related work in Linux kernel or userspace, because it's done by different people and mostly in different areas of the code (otherwise they just let you decide what code to use when configuring the kernel, like with schedulers).

      Second, there's no "they", again. Different people work on different things and it'd better stay like that. Just imagine what would happen if you somehow, forcibly reassigned (an absurd idea, but let it stand for the sake of an example) the desktop programmers to write server features. Got it? I, for one, do not want a TCP/IP stack written by a guy with 15 years of graphics driver programming experience.

      --
      This is Slashdot. Common sense is futile. You will be modded down.
    9. Re:Who cares? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He already stuck it in our tubes.

      Won't someone think of the tubes!?

    10. Re:Who cares? by colinrichardday · · Score: 1

      Except that Linus Torvalds wanted a desktop OS.

    11. Re:Who cares? by centuren · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Why does this matter, really? Linux is a server OS, why are they spending any time on useless trivia? Compare the number of working linux boxes used for servers versus desktops, and ask the same question again.

      I get the same question each time I ask the question: it matters because I don't manage servers anymore, and the news about improvements to the "Linux Desktop" is much more relevant to me. Not only because I like to play around with Linux and any related innovations, but also because I believe that 1) Windows won't always be as easy to acquire without cost as it has been for as long as I can remember, 2) I (or a friend/family member) won't always have money to spend on a Mac, and 3) with those conditions on the table, there will be many situations where suddenly a Linux desktop system is the best option. That is, having to spend $100 on an OS places value on a Linux desktop regardless of how much they are outnumbered by Linux servers, especially when money is tight.

      Of course, I'm intentionally thinking ahead in reaction to your question. My initial response is the most accurate. Improvements on the Linux desktop are just vastly more relevant and interesting to me than server issues. That might shift if I move back into a position where I'm managing servers, but probably not very much (I think there's more of a status quo).

      "A lot" is two words. You wouldn't say "alittle", would you?

      I applaud the effort to stamp out the incorrect use of "alot" in place of "a lot", but I'll add my unsolicited advice that it would read better as: "A lot is two words. You wouldn't say "agoup", would you?. Agroup, aton, abunch all match it up with "lot" as a noun, rather than just the modern adopted usage as a synonym to "many".

    12. Re:Who cares? by hierofalcon · · Score: 1

      All of my Linux servers are also actively used as Linux desktops. I'm not a server CLI purist and there's nothing mission critical on them. Worse, I run a Linux distro that I get to upgrade every 6 months or so. Fortunately, a live upgrade has worked fine for several releases now.

      I know the servers would be faster if my kids weren't playing CPU intensive games on them, but the delay for web users isn't that much even when running Extreme Tux Racer. Everyone complains about CPU utilization rates - do something about it! Still, zippier X will be appreciated (once everything gets stable again).

  14. Benchmarks on memory-tight systems? by dvh.tosomja · · Score: 1

    I'm runing linux desktop on box with shitload gigabytes of free RAM and GTK still render spin edit slow like hell.

    Try putting 100 (or so) GTK spin edits on one window an run it. 45s to be fully displayed (Intel Atom, 1GB ram). The same in win32 on windows XP and on the same machine - 2s. But still, >500 MB of free RAM on both systems.

    1. Re:Benchmarks on memory-tight systems? by armanox · · Score: 1

      Perhaps you need to use something other then GTK then? Does not sound like a RAM issue to me. (Try TCL/TK instead =)

      --
      I'm starting to think GNU is the problem with "GNU/Linux" these days.
    2. Re:Benchmarks on memory-tight systems? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Since when was shitload gigabytes 1?

  15. Even better - devmapper supports barriers! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9554#c12

    Comment #12 From Alasdair G Kergon 2009-07-01 10:47:44 -------

    As of 2.6.31-rc1, write barriers are supported by most device-mapper targets.

    (Just dm-raid1 and dm-mpath still need finishing.)

  16. Linux patches again? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How is it that they ship a product to market and have to constantly patch it? I thought real software never got patched.

  17. About time by unifyingtheory · · Score: 1

    May I be the first to say it's about time the kernel devs paid some attention to desktop users. Servers aren't the only ones out there running Linux!

  18. Lets do to X what ALSA did for sound. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    OSS wasn't free nor sophisticated enough, so the more complicated ALSA was created to replace it. However ALSA was too much of a pain of a butt to code apps for, so several competing, yet incompatible sound daemons were developed. The sound daemons have their own bugs, and when combined with the bugs in ALSA result in even more buggy behavior. So, in most cases the most reliable option is to use OSS emulation and direct applications to use OSS which ALSA was supposed to replace to begin with.

    1. Re:Lets do to X what ALSA did for sound. by DarkOx · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Totally wrong, you must be new here.

      OSS existed both in free and non-free forms. The non-free implementation was missing some featured and supported few cards. OSS was very limited where mixing of multiple audio sources was concerned.

      So if you wanted sound effects while you listening to music OSS probably was not enough for you. These is where the sound daemons came into play. They acted as a single OSS client and did all the mixing operations for other software to connect with.

      ALSA - provided an architecture to handle modern multi channel boards and do mixing. It also improved the abstraction of particular drivers; so it was easier to add support for new cards. The libraries make it much easier to write clients for as well.

      OSS emulation is popular because there is still a great deal of OSS client software around and hey you get most of the ALSA benifents of multi-client support and functional drivers for just about every card under the sun even while using OSS emulation so there is no good reason no to use.

      Sound is a solved problem if you are still having problem with sound on your linux desktop then you must:

      1.You have some very exotic hardware or needs. There are still some gaps in the super low latency realm for people trying to do sound engineering and such.

      3.You are using really and I mean really cheap hardware that is missing important features and was doing way to much in software on that other platform. Drop $20 and get a new audio card, or get a motherboard with a chip set form a company whose name you can at least pronounce, if you want to use onboard audio.

      3.You are using a really old distribution

      4.You are using a really poor distribution

      5.You failed to read the documentation and have badly mis-configured your system.
       

      --
      Repeal the 17th Amendment TODAY! Also Please Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
    2. Re:Lets do to X what ALSA did for sound. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sound actually worked properly on my HP hdx9300 laptop with kernel 2.6.27 and older. Any newer kernel than that stops playing sound via the speakers(still plays via the external jacks). The joys of an hda chipset.

      I initially assumed, as you appear to, I was being a hammerhead and mis-configuring the kernel. Now since I've verified this with 4 different distros in addition to my preferred poison (Gentoo), I know that it's a kernel problem. Strangely enough, the alsa and kernel developers seem to be thinking the same thing as they are working on the issue.

      You may want to stop and think before proclaiming everything rosy. And before you ask the distros I tried were Ubuntu, SuSE, Fedora and Mandriva. I realize that they're small distro's with no real developer support, but they were convenient. All of them worked fine with the older kernel/version, all of them failed with anything newer.

      But what would a noob like me know about anything. I've only been using Linux on my desktop since 97/98.

      God I hate pretentious gits.

    3. Re:Lets do to X what ALSA did for sound. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Misconfiguration is almost too common still with sound in the Linux desktop. Many distros still come with rather basic setups which make it hard to do serious audio work without a lot of extra effort in configuring the system to avoid latency issues. ALSA also assumes sound only goes out or in. Many cases exist for routing audio between applications. Jack seems to provide some of this additional benefit, but again, its not automatic and can still take a huge amount of time to get all your programs compiled with the right combination of settings.

      At least it can be done these days, so that is a big win.

    4. Re:Lets do to X what ALSA did for sound. by Joey+Vegetables · · Score: 1

      For my needs, which are nontrivial, Linux makes an outstanding audio workstation platform.

      I have an old Allen digital organ from the early 1970s which sounds like crap on its own as it was meant to be played in a church or a hall, not my basement. So I route the sound through JACK, Jack Rack, a few LADSPA plugins for chorus and reverb, an Athlon XP system with 512k RAM, and a $20 Creative Sound Blaster from the 1990s. Today's smartphones have much beefier hardware than this, yet somehow my setup "just works." It would not fool a professional organist, but few others can hear the difference.

      I won't claim it's an ideal setup - there are occasional drops (after a few hours of running; probably a memory leak somewhere) and ideally much faster and newer hardware would be preferred. Nonetheless, the setup works very acceptably for my purposes - it's a practice organ so I don't need it to work perfectly, but as long as I stop and restart the JACK daemon every few hours, it pretty much does.

      On occasion I will even supplement this setup by plugging a MIDI keyboard through a MIDI->USB adapter, loading some pipe organ soundfonts onto the card, then "capturing" the synth output and routing it through basically the same pipeline as above (LADSPA plugins via JACK and JACK Rack).

      Could I have done the same thing on a Mac or Windows PC? Sure, but only with significantly more expensive hardware and software. The Allen organ cost around $800 used; "pro" audio software tends to cost vastly more. All I needed to spend to implement the Linux-based solution was a few dozens of bucks for cables and adapters and maybe $100 for a powered subwoofer.

  19. It's not all doom and gloom for the penguin by wonkavader · · Score: 4, Funny
    From the article:

    The advent of Windows 7 in October may drive Linux's desktop market share down even futher.
    It's not all doom and gloom for the penguin, however...

    Thank goodness. I was so worried and depressed.

  20. I work on my Linux desktop by mindbrane · · Score: 1

    Aren't arguments about Linux being broken on the desktop red herrings? (linux, tux, herrings, red herrings?... ba boom tsh, I'll be here all week) The argument should be whether Linux, in my case Ubuntu, allows a Luser to work on h/is/er desktop. Positing one hypothetical, or specific case, after another and then proclaiming Linux is broken on the desktop is silly, as you pointed out. Linux now, compared to the early edition of Mandrake I first installed, is a working desktop OS.

    Any OS intended for the desktop is trying to perform as a calibrated solution to an arbitrarily established target while trying to incorporate new features reflecting the advances of hardware manufactures. Moore's Law can be made to suggest the moving target any desktop OS has to aim at while not wasting limited resources developing features that the market might relegate to the margins. Linux has done, and continues to do, a great job of staying on target but will never meet the demands of all users, including those who want a, more or less, marginal feature made mainstream. Stating the bleeding obvious the strength of Linux and Open Source is anyone who wants a feature develop that feature given it's feasibility and a willingness to spend the necessary resources.

    All large corporations, especially widely held corporations, are bound and driven by the profit motive. Limited resources and profit expectations don't always allow the best of all possible worlds.

    --
    ideopath @ play
  21. N900 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Does that have anything to do with the forthcoming release of the N900?

    A "memory-tight desktops" is a distant concept nowadays. On the other hand, this is strangely suited for a small device running X.

  22. Damn right I have a reason! by Chemisor · · Score: 1

    The X API is totally unsuitable for writing flicker-free applications. The main problem is the draw-as-you-go approach foisted on you. There are no frame breaks and no way to tell the server when it's ok to flush the graphics to the card. Sure, you can write ugly workarounds. OpenGL implements its own drawlists and it's possible to get it to dump them in sync with vretrace. But that does not help someone working with the X protocol. And outside OpenGL it isn't even possible at all, because current X still does not provide any way to detect a retrace; all that code is hidden in the binary GL blob drivers. XSync extension was intended exactly for this, it has been around for over 20 years and is STILL not working!

    Yes, I'd dearly love to rewrite X. Use drawlists, like OpenGL does, the better to integrate with acceleration pipes. Double-buffer, or at least make sure no drawing is done between retraces. But everybody is so stuck on preserving X, that this is very very hard. Yes, kernel support for R600 is coming, but that isn't going to be an actual driver; it's just a forwarding interface to the card's IO ports with locking. I'd still have to figure out the formats it wants and write a 3D driver for every card. And heaven forbid you mention that 3D drivers should be in the kernel; you get all kinds of people saying that it would make them hard to port. Well, gee people; the current state of affairs makes those ugly undocumented drivers in X damn hard to port too!

    Yeah, I'm worked up. The state of graphics support on Linux just makes me tear my hear out.

    1. Re:Damn right I have a reason! by QuoteMstr · · Score: 1

      It works fine these days. Plus, composite helps a lot.

    2. Re:Damn right I have a reason! by TheSunborn · · Score: 1

      But can other operation systems do that when running in "NON fullscrenn" mode? (This is, when using normal programs?).

      Can windows XP for example do a "swap buffer on frame breaks" in a normal program window, while other software is also displaying?

      And while we are talking about it does it matter anymore, now that anyone is using lcd screens.

      I might have missed something importent about lcd, but i always thought that lcd screens were without any frame break(vblank) so that the time to change any pixel would be the same, no matter the display state and no matter what have just changed. (With the exception, that it take longer time when changing a pixel, that have just changed).

      Or is it the case that the lcd hardware can do it, but that the graphics card still send the image to the screen, one line at a time. (That would give the worst of both worlds).

      I am currently on a Windows XP(Radeon X600 graphics card should be fast enough) computer home with my parents, and both browsers I have tested in(IE, and FireFox) don't take frame breaks into account at all when scrolling. (At least as far as I can see)

      Don't the application(Or atleast the gfx subsystem) need to know the screen response time in order to swap buffer when all pixels have changed color. Hmmm so many questions, I guess I need to read up on how lcd screens handle pixel change.

    3. Re:Damn right I have a reason! by Chemisor · · Score: 1

      > But can other operation systems do that when running in "NON fullscrenn" mode?

      That I don't know. Win32 protocol is in principle no different. However, "other OS's don't do it" is not an excuse. Retrace check is not hard to implement; when working with a framebuffer driver on the Linux console, you almost always have it. It's the X server that's hard to hack, and that alone is a good reason to replace it.

      > And while we are talking about it does it matter anymore, now that anyone is using lcd screens.

      Flicker occurs no matter what kind of screen you are using. The problem is that if you draw half a frame during one retrace, and the other half during the next one, you'll be able to see the first half alone for a while. Yes, LCDs don't have an actual "ray", but the video card has to send pixels at some predetermined intervals, which for a DVI connection is fixed at 60Hz. This makes the application window constantly flicker whenever something changes. There are some people who can't see 60Hz flicker and are comfortable with a 60Hz CRT picture with a white background; for me, that setup causes instant physical pain. On an LCD it's merely very annoying.

      > Don't the application(Or atleast the gfx subsystem) need to know the screen response time in order to swap buffer when all pixels have changed color.

      Yes, and all the video cards provide this information. Heck, thirty years ago, in DOS, you could get this from most cards. There was this game, Jazz Jackrabbit, that had scrolling synched to the retrace and man, it was smooth! It's really something you have to see to appreciate; the effect is hard to describe, but it's awesome.

    4. Re:Damn right I have a reason! by Blakey+Rat · · Score: 1

      I am currently on a Windows XP(Radeon X600 graphics card should be fast enough) computer home with my parents, and both browsers I have tested in(IE, and FireFox) don't take frame breaks into account at all when scrolling. (At least as far as I can see)

      XP isn't the current Windows version; Vista (which is 2.5 years old at this point) handles this just fine with zero flicker.

  23. Do something about PHC for undevolting by mister_playboy · · Score: 1

    I undervolt my laptop. Up until the most recent kernel releases, this could be done by simply loading a small module into the kernel. A group of people on Ubuntu Forums would work together... one person would compile a module and put it up for others to download.

    Currently, the way phc is handled was changed, and it requires a recompile of the whole kernel... please either include this module in the kernel or let it be loaded seperately again! If I wanted to compile my own kernels, it'd be running Gentoo.

    --
    Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law ::: Love is the law, love under will
    1. Re:Do something about PHC for undevolting by greg1104 · · Score: 1

      The kernel developers enjoy breaking modules that aren't part of the kernel tree just to punish developers who write them; that fact is so obvious that regular contributor Alan Cox dubbed it the war on binary modules and Theodore Tso commented on how they even target open-source solutions with that tactic. I lose a virtualization software package or two quite regularly when trying to upgrade kernels, even when said packages are open-source like Virtualbox (example). The only solution that will work is to push the kernel developers to accept the modules everyone is working on.

  24. Seconded by ArchieBunker · · Score: 1

    Earlier today I checked to see if ATI has X1650 drivers for Windows 7. They consider my card legacy and they do have a driver but I have a feeling there won't be many new releases.

    --
    Only the State obtains its revenue by coercion. - Murray Rothbard
  25. "improvement coming with 2.6.31" mirror copy. by antdude · · Score: 1
    --
    Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
  26. That really seems to be the philosophy around here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The "New isn't automatically better just because" has pretty much turned into "New is worse than old" and "If I can't come up with a reason to use new stuff, there is none"

    But well. The Daily Show, Southpark, etc... Pretty much all the major titles from Comedy Central can be found legally online, I want to use fullscreen flash for those.

    I also want to use it for fullscreen Youtube (there are occasional good, long videos. Google tech talks, for example.). In addition, all the major tv channels here in Finland have some sort of online service where you can watch their shows for free. I don't recall what technologies each of them uses (and can't be bothered to check right now), but I think they use flash.

    That said... Fullscreen flash works very well for me. I have Adobe's own flash plugin on firefox on 64 bit Ubuntu and have no problem at all with watching fullscreen flash videos smoothly. I have pretty decent computer (4 gigs of ram, quadcore) and haven't ever bothered to check how much of it's processing power fullscreen flash requires. But it works.

    The major problem actually is that I sometimes can't leave fullscreen flash. Nothing works. (esc, alt+tab, all worthless) I have to ctrl+alt+f2, login, killall firefox and then return to ctrl+alt+f7. It's pretty annoying.

  27. Linux fullscreen flash works fine for me? by keean · · Score: 1

    Okay, why do I not have a problem with this? I watch BBC iPlayer fullscreen flash on my 46" 1080p TV from Linux, and apart from the low resolution of the flash stream (even in high quality mode), it is perfect.

    1. Re:Linux fullscreen flash works fine for me? by jcaplan · · Score: 1

      It is an issue with the Intel drivers. Ubuntu 9.04 (Jaunty Jackalope) shipped with kernel 2.6.28, in which the Intel made some major changes in the graphics system. The Intel drivers suffered a performance regression with this kernel due to some miscommunication with xorg, most visible when viewing Flash, is also seen with other video playback, such as DVD. Intel has addressed the issue by releasing a fix to its drivers and to xorg. This issue should be fixed as of kernel 2.6.30.

      Here is a description the issue and some workarounds:
      http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=1130582

      Here is the Ubuntu Launchpad bug report:
      https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/xserver-xorg-video-intel/+bug/314928

    2. Re:Linux fullscreen flash works fine for me? by keean · · Score: 1

      Ah, so its just a driver issue, in one particular release... I don't think Windows users can feel too smug about this, I have had many driver issues with Windows. My sound card does not work with Windows7. Should I make a joke about how Windows includes amazing technology for making record companies rich, but cant even get the basics like playing sound right?

  28. In other words by Brian+Gordon · · Score: 1

    Devs make sweeping changes to critical kernel code so that a particular user space application performs better.

    Hurd please save us

  29. Use BrainFuck Scheduler by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Stop adding more and more useless heuristics. Just switch to use BrainFuck Scheduler and give your X a higher priority. Keep the kernel dumb, it can't out-smart you.

    http://ck.kolivas.org/patches/bfs/

  30. Re:That really seems to be the philosophy around h by JWSmythe · · Score: 2, Informative

        On any decent machine (2Ghz+ with 1Gb+ RAM), I haven't had any problem with full screen flash. I did a while back, when it was buggier. Most of my machines have been 64 bit (Slamd64). For a while I ran the 32 bit Firefox just to have the Flash player work, but that's been resolved for a while with no complaints.

    --
    Serious? Seriousness is well above my pay grade.
  31. I use remote X every day and hate it. by Burz · · Score: 1

    And that's over a LAN connection. OTOH the NX stuff doesn't work just fine, as it dictates that you run the ssh server a very specific way. Plus its proprietary and relatively difficult to setup.

    By comparison the remote Windows and Mac protocols are a dream. They allow things like multi-user sharing of a single app instance... without resorting to 1980s raster technology like VNC. About 5 years ago I hoped NX would get the ability to share sessions without using VNC, but I've since given up and the NX authors say that the limitation is X11's fault.

    To sort of summarize here: You have to be a very sheltered Unix user if you think remote X compares well with the standard bearers on the desktop.

    1. Re:I use remote X every day and hate it. by 10Ghz · · Score: 1

      Plus its proprietary and relatively difficult to setup.

      Um, NX is GPL-licensed....

      --
      Lesbian Nazi Hookers Abducted by UFOs and Forced Into Weight Loss Programs - -all next week on Town Talk.
  32. "Criticism of X as a platform is baseless." by Burz · · Score: 1

    Oh, dear.

    Well when X applications become usable over a LAN link let me know, mmkay?

    When X permits efficient sharing of a window or desktop between multiple users in a teleconference, do let me know!
    (Even the NX people say that X prevents this feature.)

    Because I won't be holding my breath for it and you shouldn't either.

    1. Re:"Criticism of X as a platform is baseless." by QuoteMstr · · Score: 1

      First of all, even raw X11 performance is perfectly adequate over a 10mbit LAN. That's the environment it was designed for, after all. If anyone doubts that it works, why not try it? With NX, X11 screams over even a dialup connection.

      Second, NX does support application sharing. I don't know where you're getting your information.

  33. For Linux on Macintel by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It should also be noted that this release will (finally) fix a problem with Linux rebooting on MacBook (Pro) 5,1 and up.

  34. So the kernel makes Linux faster by Kevin108 · · Score: 1

    But distro bloat makes it slower. Bizarre idea of progress.

    --

    It's a perfect time for being wasted.
    A perfect time to watch the stars.
    - Burden Brothers, "Beautiful Night"
  35. Beowulf by nikolajsheller · · Score: 1

    clusters.

  36. but eventually by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    hypothetically with lsb ver5 we might be able to have closed software vendors publish a single binary package which would install and run everywhere.

    while linux is in the single percentages the need to support multiple distributions multiples the work for closed source vendors. making it that much less profitable and that much less unlikely they will release.

  37. not quite 30years by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    jazz jackrabbit was released in 1994.. try zone66, you had to boot into it cause it ran in protected mode without a dos extender. and it was seriously fast and smooth with fullscreen scrolling and many many sprites on a 16mhz 386...

  38. cbs.com and twinview by gd2shoe · · Score: 1

    cbs.com video's in full screen are horrifically broken with Twinview (Nvidia proprietary driver implementing dual head). It full-screens a single screen (properly), but then centers the video between the monitors, so you can only watch one half of the video. Other video sites get it right (Youtube, Hulu), why can't CBS?

    I blame both CBS and Adobe, but particularly Adobe.(CBS shouldn't be able to mess up like that.)

    (Running fullscreen flash video in Debian on a regular basis. It's a real processor hog, though.)

    --
    I won't join Slashcott. OTOH, If Beta goes live, I just won't be back until it's fixed. Sorry Dice.
  39. Re:That really seems to be the philosophy around h by RivieraKid · · Score: 1

    Top Tip: Ctrl-Shift-Esc (IIRC) will run xkill. The cursor changes to a skull and crossbones - just click on the misbehaving window and it'll be killed for you. It'll probably take firefox with it, but it's still easier...

    --
    "Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves