Mir Won't Ship Even In Ubuntu 14.04

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Mir Won't Ship Even In Ubuntu 14.04

Posted by Unknown on Wednesday November 20, 2013 @03:05AM from the long-live-x11 dept.

jones_supa writes "As can be recalled, Mir didn't make it to the Ubuntu 13.10 release to replace X.org as the display server. Back then it suffered of problems in multi-monitor support, along with other issues. Now it turns out that Canonical's product will not make it even into the next LTS version (14.04) of the Ubuntu desktop. Mir itself would be ready for showtime in the schedule, but there are problems with XMir, which is the X11 compatibility layer that ensures Mir can work with applications built for X. The comments came at the Ubuntu Developer Summit: in an online event Mark Shuttleworth stressed that the 14.04 desktop has to be rock-solid for customers with large-scale deployments, such as educational institutions. In the meantime, you can already try out Mir in your Ubuntu system."

111 comments

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

Interesting by ifiwereasculptor · 2013-11-20 03:08 · Score: 5, Funny

I think Mir might eventually replace X. It's already been replacing Hurd for quite some time.
1. Re:Interesting by kthreadd · 2013-11-20 03:10 · Score: 1
  
  Maybe on Ubuntu, but I don't know of any other distribution that is looking into replacing X with it. Most of them seam to be interested in Wayland instead.
2. Re:Interesting by Anonymous Coward · 2013-11-20 03:12 · Score: 0
  
  Can't tell if serious...
3. Re:Interesting by gl4ss · 2013-11-20 03:13 · Score: 1
  
  well the question is will it replace either in time before their replacements.
  
  --
  world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
4. Re:Interesting by ledow · 2013-11-20 03:14 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  I honestly don't care what they use.
  The fact is, if I can program against the X libraries, and load up that have been programmed against the X libraries, and distribute programs that have been programmed against the X libraries, it needs to all "just work". And it needs to work as good as, or better than, X itself.
  When you have that, it pretty much doesn't matter what faddy crap is underneath.
  It's like if they replace ext2 with ext3, or ext3 with ext4. I don't care so long as I have tools to read the data, it works as a filesystem, and it has no downsides compared to the previous version. What my filesystem actually *is* is irrelevant so long as it works. What my display manager actually is is irrelevant so long as it works. And in the case of an X-compatible display manager, it has to work like X in all cases without me needing to make changes to my software.
5. Re:Interesting by Anonymous Coward · 2013-11-20 03:31 · Score: 0
  
  Well, if we're comparing against filesystems, Mir is like a version of ext that you can't create NFS exports on.
  So I do care what is used, because I do use X11 networking.
6. Re:Interesting by Anonymous Coward · 2013-11-20 03:34 · Score: 0
  
  Except that eventually you'll want to run stuff that does not go through the X protocol. That's the whole point of Mir/wayland. Gnome, KDE, and the underlying toolkits are working to run directly through wayland to that end. So it's really baffling to me why Cannonical is reinventing the wheel here. They can't possible hope to port all wayland applications based on GTK+ or QT over to Mir. They'll have to run in fallback X mode and wont get any of the benefits that Fedora et.al. will get from bypassing X...
7. Re:Interesting by HaZardman27 · 2013-11-20 03:47 · Score: 1, Interesting
  
  I'm actually beginning to wonder if Canonical isn't noticing a trend of users switching from Unity to other desktops, and if this is a way of combating that. If Unity is the only major desktop using Mir as opposed to X or Wayland, than it's probably going to be more of a pain to switch desktops, and that software written for Ubuntu might not be as portable across different Linux desktop environments.
  
  --
  Apparently wizard is not a legitimate career path, so I chose programmer instead.
8. Re:Interesting by Microlith · 2013-11-20 04:21 · Score: 1
  
  They'd have to find a way to lock the toolkits to Mir, which is unlikely. Both GTK and Qt already have Wayland backends, which mean that anything using them should be able to function on Wayland or Mir seamlessly- assuming Mir doesn't require application-level awareness to operate. Hell anything using X11 as its graphical backend should still function.
9. Re:Interesting by bluefoxlucid · 2013-11-20 04:43 · Score: 1
  
  The point is really more that they're so NIH that they want to provide their own solution, wasting time instead of contributing to Wayland or X.org. Programmer time is a limited resource, and the two things open source projects generally lack the most is project management and programmer time. They're so starved for programmer time that even highly mismanaged projects that waste their time would benefit more from 30 or 40 additional 10-20 hour per week programmers than from fixing their planning issues. Then you have projects like Mozilla and Apache that actually do have good planning and management practices, and are still resource-starved.
  
  --
  Support my political activism on Patreon.
10. Re:Interesting by bluefoxlucid · 2013-11-20 04:44 · Score: 1
  
  GTK won't accept a Mir back-end.
  
  --
  Support my political activism on Patreon.
11. Re:Interesting by Kjella · 2013-11-20 04:46 · Score: 1
  
  Ah, the eternal war:
  User A: The old works for me and I don't care about your "faddy crap"
  User B: The new works much better for me and I don't care about your "legacy crap"
  Heck, I'm probably both A and B depending on whose side I want to be on. Kill IE6 with fire so we don't have to support that old shit, I don't care about your legacy enterprise intraweb crapware. Noooo don't take away my menus and replace it with a ribbon, I want it just the way it was. It really comes down to if you think the change is for better or worse and if the change itself is worth the effort. Change for change's sake is just annoying, you need some compelling benefits to want change not just that you can roughly get back to where you were.
  
  --
  Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
12. Re:Interesting by Mitchell314 · 2013-11-20 04:55 · Score: 2
  
  I'm just waiting for when Canonical announces their own kernel.
  
  --
  I read TFA and all I got was this lousy cookie
13. Re:Interesting by wed128 · 2013-11-20 05:01 · Score: 1
  
  Unless they add support of Mir as a backend to GTK+ or QT; Not saying this is a good idea, it's just a possible solution.
14. Re:Interesting by Microlith · 2013-11-20 05:04 · Score: 1
  
  Right, and I suspect that Qt won't either. Thus the increased burden on Canonical to keep all of it going, and why I don't believe it's likely that Mir could be used as a point for lock-in.
15. Re:Interesting by DrXym · 2013-11-20 05:09 · Score: 3, Interesting
  
  So it's really baffling to me why Cannonical is reinventing the wheel here
  I think the main reason is by owning the display tech they can shut their competition out of the mobile / tablet space. Mir is dual licenced - proprietary or GPLv3. They can do what they like under their proprietary licence while hamstringing their competition with the onerous requirements of the GPLv3 (e.g. not being able to link proprietary drivers, limits on DRM). It's probably why Intel walked away from the project.
  The Ubuntu wiki is tries to provide technical reasons but it's all pretty vague - it alludes to issues like lack of support for 3d input devices and a few other problems with the protocol but these don't sound very convincing arguments to write everything from scratch.
16. Re:Interesting by Mashdar · 2013-11-20 05:10 · Score: 1
  
  Off topic, but that journaling feature sure helps a file system "just work" sometimes :)
  That said, I'm not sure I could figure out how to open a notepad in Ubuntu, let alone a whole journal! (Finding your tools without learning some crazy interface is not "just working" by most definitiions. Learning a novel interface takes way longer than googling a driver issue. And they will probably "innovate" some more soon.)
17. Re:Interesting by ledow · 2013-11-20 05:17 · Score: 1
  
  "Eventually" I can do what I like. But if I can't run my old apps then it becomes a switch, not an upgade. And I could switch at any point I liked onto whatever else I wanted.
  Support the old stuff WHILE showing how cool your new desktop is. And that it can do the old stuff just-as-well (if not better) and that, if you target it specifically, it can do even better.
  ext3 would not exist if it hadn't been a viable upgrade / compatibility path from ext2. Same for FAT32. You have to support the old in order to get people to move to the new. Or otherwise, they will hang on for dear life until they are forced to switch, and then probably WON'T switch to your implementation because you forced them to.
  Prove to me that I don't have to lose anything. Then you can show me your shiny new stuff.
18. Re:Interesting by i+kan+reed · 2013-11-20 05:21 · Score: 1
  
  Those two problems are quite distinct. Menu->Ribbon is a transition from power user focus to broader usability. If you're a power user who likes quick access to known items, a menu is faster and more powerful. If you're baffled by what everything means on this big, complicated piece of software, a ribbon lets you look around for the icon that "looks right"(but it takes up more screen real estate, frequently requires digging or modification for highly situational tools, and is visually cluttered).
  Not all usability improvements apply to all users, and being annoyed that a developer focuses some other class of users besides yourself is ok.
19. Re:Interesting by bluefoxlucid · 2013-11-20 05:54 · Score: 1
  
  Unless they take up porting Linux features as Minix 3 services, I'll have the same answer: what the fuck is the point? We have FreeBSD, OpenBSD, Darwin, and Hurd; Minix 3 is the most ambitious and disruptive direction to go, providing a lot of potential. Porting kernel events for udev and systemd and such onto it, as well as the Linux file systems (ext2/3/4, btrfs, xfs, jfs) and disk layouts (GPT, MBR extended partitions) and some drivers onto it would be interesting.
  But yeah, it'll probably be "we wrote our own monolithic kernel just like Linux, but better!" Waste of time, there's 15 of those out in the wild you could use OR YOU COULD JUST IMPROVE LINUX.
  
  --
  Support my political activism on Patreon.
20. Re:Interesting by bluefoxlucid · 2013-11-20 05:55 · Score: 1
  
  Upstream won't accept it for GTK+, not sure if Qt will reject it.
  
  --
  Support my political activism on Patreon.
21. Re:Interesting by Desler · 2013-11-20 06:02 · Score: 1
  
  That they are developing it doesn't mean it will be accepted by the Qt Project.
22. Re:Interesting by Microlith · 2013-11-20 06:12 · Score: 2
  
  I didn't say that Qt wouldn't have a Mir backend, I said they likely wouldn't accept it upstream. Fucking learn to read, drinkypoo. They're developing all of the Mir backends and will likely be stuck doing out-of-tree maintenance or all of it.
23. Re:Interesting by kthreadd · 2013-11-20 06:15 · Score: 1
  
  Inconvenient but not a problem in general as long as the version provided in Ubuntu's archive has support for it.
24. Re:Interesting by jones_supa · 2013-11-20 06:22 · Score: 1
  
  I'm just waiting for when Canonical announces their own kernel.
  They probably would not have enough resources to maintain an own kernel. Even currently Linux in Ubuntu is very close to mainline.
  IMO they would need to hire more devs and QA people just to make the current OS nice. Bugs are piling into Launchpad with many of them just receiving a snarky reply of "Have you tried if this problem has been fixed in the latest development version of Ubuntu?"
25. Re:Interesting by unrtst · 2013-11-20 06:33 · Score: 2
  
  While I agree in spirit to much of what you're saying, I don't believe the requirements are as tight as you state, and the filesystem analogy is weak.
  While most linux distros (maybe all) default to using an ext variant, they also work with many other filesystems. Tools have been updated to support multiple filesystems, and others remain filesystem-specific. The same could happen for Mir/X/Wayland.
  Consider Mac OSX for a minute. It can run any X application after some re-compiling, but its native window manager doesn't do it. It's X support is not as good as a native X server, but it's good enough. Most popular apps have been patched or forked to support the native gui stuff. If QT and GTK gained Mir and Wayland compatibility, most apps could be recompiled to render directly to Mir/Wayland. For the edge cases, using a X compatibility layer that isn't quite as good would probably be just fine... at the very least, most users won't care or even notice.
  The network transparency part has been discussed in depth. In the end, there needs to be a way to export a display from a remote machine to the local machine, which the compatibility layer will likely handle without a problem (any advanced features like 3d are unlikely to work well in those situations anyway). And there needs to be a way to export a local app to a remote machine - this will probably require using a different tool/protocol on the receiving end (ex vnc), but that's going to be sufficient for most of those edge cases that needed that as well.
  Mir and Wayland will need a way to support X applications, but if they get proper support from the toolsets, then it doesn't need to be better, or even on par. As long as it works well enough and is stable, that'd be enough to start migration. I don't think either is there yet though.
  Personally, I'd like to see someone implement the opposite - get Wayland running on top of X. It'd be pointless in the long run, but it would let the user choose which gets first class support on their system (ie. they could still run a mix of apps using both, and app developers don't have to worry about how few people are on Mir/Wayland). I'd be surprised if someone out there hasn't toyed with this yet, and maybe even demo'd it.
26. Re:Interesting by Bill,+Shooter+of+Bul · 2013-11-20 07:13 · Score: 1
  
  Can't be serious. You can't replace Hurd, you can only get Hurd to switch microkernels. Which apparently, is pretty easy. I think its swapped out four before lunch.
  
  --
  Well.. maybe. Or Maybe not. But Definitely not sort of.
27. Re:Interesting by Anonymous Coward · 2013-11-20 07:18 · Score: 0
  
  Actually, there were multiple attempts to switch the microkernel of Hurd. All of them failed miserably. The current Mach microkernel does not even earn the name - all device drivers are in kernel space! This is less microkernel than e.g. Fuse. Hurd is a failed project - time to move on / restart.
28. Re:Interesting by Anonymous Coward · 2013-11-20 09:23 · Score: 0
  
  "is developing" == vaporware
  Let us know when it gets to "has developed"
29. Re:Interesting by Hognoxious · 2013-11-20 10:26 · Score: 1
  
  Not all usability improvements apply to all users, and being annoyed that a developer focuses some other class of users besides yourself is ok.
  
  If only there was some way that you could choose which style of interface you want, or even flip between them. That'd just be dreamy!
  
  --
  Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
30. Re:Interesting by bluefoxlucid · 2013-11-21 02:28 · Score: 1
  
  It means they need to continuously patch things, which is more effort and allows more human error since the patches will always be less tested than the newest version being put up. Stuff that was tested in development won't be tested with Ubuntu's Mir code, unless it's tested by Ubuntu developers--doubling the labor applied, rather than applying the extra labor to other efforts.
  
  --
  Support my political activism on Patreon.
31. Re:Interesting by DuckDodgers · 2013-11-21 02:42 · Score: 1
  
  An article on the differences between Mir and Wayland: http://blog.cooperteam.net/2013/03/server-allocated-buffers-in-mir.html
  
  I don't have a problem with Canonical choosing to use something other than Wayland. I also don't have a problem with GPLv3. What I dislike is that Canonical requires copyright assignment so that, exactly as you said, they can re-license the product under proprietary terms with any additional changes they like and no one else will have legal access to the changes unless they negotiate that with Canonical.
  
  The whole point of the GPLv3 is to prevent software from being incorporated into proprietary products, so this strikes me as perversion of entire purpose the GPL. Instead of using it to make the software free in perpetuity, which is what the GPL is designed to do, Canonical is using it to force any third party contributors to the project to give Canonical a competitive advantage with Canonical's own proprietary fork.
  
  I think if Canonical dropped the copyright assignment, there would still be less interest in Mir than Wayland because Wayland has a lot more momentum in the open source community as a whole. But at least Canonical would lose the ill will it's accumulating over this.
32. Re:Interesting by DuckDodgers · 2013-11-21 02:44 · Score: 1
  
  I believe the reason for Wayland and Mir is efficiency, so that you can run a very fast display manager or games on modest hardware (like an ARM tablet or mobile phone).
  
  So I don't care if they break compatibility with X. I'll continue using X on my quad-core x86_64 desktops with dedicated video cards and oodles of RAM, and I'll use Wayland or Mir on my Linux tablet, if I ever have one.
Makes sense by Anonymous Coward · 2013-11-20 03:12 · Score: 2, Interesting

Taken on its own, it does make sense. LTS needs to be usable (technically, inb4 "unity") on the widest practical range of hardware and be supported for 3 years. If Mir needs to be delayed so X applications can run on 14.04, so be it.
1. Re:Makes sense by rotaryexpress · 2013-11-20 03:18 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  Supported for 5 years, not 3. But your point is valid. Mir can be rolled out in 14.10 (the next non-LTS release) and have a year and half of testing before the next LTS.
2. Re:Makes sense by Anonymous Coward · 2013-11-20 03:23 · Score: 0
  
  Desktop for 3 years, server for 5, unless something has changed in the past 12 months.
3. Re:Makes sense by kick6 · 2013-11-20 03:38 · Score: 2
  
  Taken on its own, it does make sense. LTS needs to be usable (technically, inb4 "unity") on the widest practical range of hardware and be supported for 3 years. If Mir needs to be delayed so X applications can run on 14.04, so be it.
  I see it this way too. It's not, necessarily, an indictment of Mir. It might just be that, unlike some major OS vendors, canonical is taking a more measured approach than to push features that don't work into software they're going to have to support long term.
4. Re:Makes sense by occasional_dabbler · 2013-11-20 03:38 · Score: 2
  
  Ubuntu LTS releases are now supported for five years even on the desktop since 12.04
  
  --
  "Our opponent is an alien starship packed with atomic bombs," I said. "we have a protractor"
5. Re:Makes sense by Blaskowicz · 2013-11-20 03:38 · Score: 1
  
  Ubuntu 12.04 (and Mint 13) are 5 years, already.
6. Re:Makes sense by king+neckbeard · 2013-11-20 03:44 · Score: 1
  
  It has changed. 5 years is not standard for both desktop and server LTS releases.
  
  --
  This is my signature. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
7. Re:Makes sense by Anonymous Coward · 2013-11-20 04:18 · Score: 0
  
  Ubuntu 12.04 LTS Desktop is 5 years!
  Ubuntu 12.04 LTS Server is 5 years!
8. Re:Makes sense by dbraden · 2013-11-20 08:24 · Score: 1
  
  Yep, it's changed. LTS (server & desktop) supported for 5 years, with a new LTS release every two years. Non-LTS supported for 9 months (or longer).
... when it's done, Mir will run on Perl 6 by Anonymous Coward · 2013-11-20 03:16 · Score: 0

... and run Duke Nukem Forever II.
1. Re:... when it's done, Mir will run on Perl 6 by Anonymous Coward · 2013-11-20 03:23 · Score: 0
  
  But does it support Hurd?
2. Re:... when it's done, Mir will run on Perl 6 by Barsteward · 2013-11-20 05:45 · Score: 1
  
  not that i've heard
  
  --
  "The hands that help are better far than lips that pray." - Robert Ingersoll (1833-1899)
3. Re:... when it's done, Mir will run on Perl 6 by unixisc · 2013-11-20 10:21 · Score: 1
  
  Given that it's also (dual) licensed under GPLv3, it could. Contrast that to both X11 & Wayland, both of which are licensed just under the X11 license. So if either Canonical does HURD or HURD does Mir, it would be a match made in....
No kidding? by m2 · 2013-11-20 03:35 · Score: 4, Insightful

You have the hubris to say that you are going to fix everything that is wrong with X11 / X.org AND also provide a compatibility layer on top of your new shiny solution to support running the programs that still use the thing you are claiming to fix ... and now you are surprised because getting said compatibility layer right turned out to be thornier than you had expected?
Several years ago I wrote a transport mechanism on top of VNC that allowed you to access high end graphics services (read OpenGL) from devices without any hardware acceleration to speak of (back then it was an ipaq). I did the initial implementation in one evening, which worked for 80% of the use cases. Together with another developer, it took us probably a month to get it to 90%. A third party worked for half a year to get it to 95%. Several years later it was up to 98%... maybe.
Whenever you try to pull this kind of stunt off, you are going to run into the same situation. Most of the stuff that you are interested in is easy. Then there's the stuff that makes "creative" uses of existing APIs. And then there's the stuff that works because of, not despite of, existing implementation bugs. And then you run into the really weird...
1. Re:No kidding? by malloc · 2013-11-20 03:51 · Score: 1
  
  Several years ago I wrote a transport mechanism on top of VNC that allowed you to access high end graphics services (read OpenGL) from devices without any hardware acceleration to speak of
  
  What was this project called? The functionality sounds very similar to VirtualGL, but the history sounds like a different project.
  
  --
  ___________________ I want to be free()!
2. Re:No kidding? by timeOday · 2013-11-20 04:30 · Score: 1
  
  This is exactly how and why Microsoft makes billions of dollars every year - providing some measure of progress combined with decade-long stability requires, literally, an army of thousands of people to pull off.
  But I don't understand your attitude about it. What they're trying to do is difficult, could potentially benefit everybody, and they are paying for it. If that is "hubris" then hubris is not always bad.
3. Re:No kidding? by drinkypoo · 2013-11-20 05:43 · Score: 1
  
  Thing is, 98% of users don't need 98% of X (made these numbers up obviously). All the Qt and GTK apps that don't use X toolkits directly, for example, could be made to work by making Qt or GTK work. That's the bulk of the software that users are actually using. Canonical is already working on doing this for Qt. Much of what X does is no longer even used. You don't have to do everything it does to satisfy most users.
  What I'll never get is how Windows is the only place I can get an X server completely separate from the underlying windowing system which actually works.
  
  --
  "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
4. Re:No kidding? by Barsteward · 2013-11-20 05:47 · Score: 1
  
  "Canonical is already working on doing this for Qt." -are you sure about this? i thought they ditched anything to do with QT
  
  --
  "The hands that help are better far than lips that pray." - Robert Ingersoll (1833-1899)
5. Re:No kidding? by Desler · 2013-11-20 06:04 · Score: 1
  
  Mir only benefits Canonical.
6. Re:No kidding? by Desler · 2013-11-20 06:05 · Score: 1
  
  Qt is what they are using for mobile and "Unity Next".
7. Re:No kidding? by timeOday · 2013-11-20 06:07 · Score: 1
  
  How do you figure? It's open source.
8. Re:No kidding? by jones_supa · 2013-11-20 06:25 · Score: 1
  
  "Canonical is already working on doing this for Qt." -are you sure about this? i thought they ditched anything to do with QT
  Unity is planned to be completely Qt-based in future.
9. Re:No kidding? by Anonymous Coward · 2013-11-20 07:26 · Score: 0
  
  But the 2% remaining problems will be a major pain for years and I seriously hope that X will never be replaced with mir or wayland. It already a major pain that a lot or programs from just a few years ago don't work any more which have been implemented using already deprecated freedesktop APIs. In constrast, other programs which have been written years/decades ago which just use just POSIX, X, or for example gtk 2.0 still work perfectly. And yes, for me those 2% is what makes the difference between a crappy and a good OS (think special appliations which let me do my job).
  Also, I think it is an astoundingly stupid to give up network transparency just at the time when we have fast network everywhere. X might not work well if you are behind a high-latency connection (this could be fixed at toolkit level), but I use it everyday and it works perfectly for me. Those people who say that network transparency is not working well, just have a very limited view on this, e.g. flashy GUIs for touch devices with lots of animations work not well or something. It is also completely untrue that X has lot of code is which is not used anymore. Yes ist has some code, which is not used by modern applications (the rendering API) but this is not a large code base by any modern standards, and exactly the code which is needed to maintain backwards compatibility. Finally, there is nothing fundamentally wrong with the X model which would require changing everything. It was a very forward-looking protocol which can easily be extended (and has been) to implement better ways to do things. This is admitted on the Wayland FAQ: "It's entirely possible to incorporate the buffer exchange and update models that Wayland is built on into X." So they want to break backward compatibility and network transparency for NO GOOD REASON.
10. Re:No kidding? by dbIII · 2013-11-20 13:06 · Score: 1
  
  Much of what X does is no longer even used
  It's very much a perception problem. Much of what the Wayland people insist is no longer even used in X because it is too fucking hard for them to do themselves is the entire reason other people are using X.
  For example running applications remotely - that's just about the only reason you see linux or other *nix desktops in corporate offices. VNC being 1 to 1 instead of many to one is almost entirely useless in that situation as you see people running applications on several different hosts and looking at it all on the screens in front of them. Wayland does not intend to touch this situation (and many others, but that's the big one), just writing it off as beneath their notice.
11. Re:No kidding? by Anonymous Coward · 2013-11-20 19:30 · Score: 0
  
  You have the hubris to say that you are going to fix everything that is wrong with X11 / X.org AND also provide a compatibility layer on top of your new shiny solution to support running the programs that still use the thing you are claiming to fix ... and now you are surprised because getting said compatibility layer right turned out to be thornier than you had expected?
  Huh. A colon is missing there, somewhere.
  Anyway, you're wrong indeed. Mir, like Wayland, does not offer a "compatibility layer" on top- What they offer is pure X11 (yes, X.org) running as a client. This is not conceptually different from running an X11 server on Windows or OS X. The difficult part is having X11 running on Mir/Wayland _as fast as bare-metal_ with the man-power those projects have. It's doable, but takes time.
12. Re:No kidding? by drinkypoo · 2013-11-20 22:51 · Score: 1
  
  Thing is, again, vnc covers most use cases. Also, there's no reason you couldn't have a single-window vnc-like tool. And the thing about X is that cruft maintenance has a cost. You're just pushing that maintenance cost off on the rest of us as an externality, sort of like burning fossil fuels — the legacy will be with us for years because cruft begets cruft.
  
  --
  "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
13. Re:No kidding? by dbIII · 2013-11-21 01:24 · Score: 1
  
  I'm sick of people that do not read before they reply (I addressed exactly why vnc doesn't cover any of those use cases) and then add stupid analogies on top. Please refer to my reply to another of your posts Drinkypoo on applied science about operating beyond your depth, although the waters are somewhat shallower here so you may be able to manage a dog paddle if you actually try to read other people's posts.
14. Re:No kidding? by Anonymous Coward · 2013-11-21 05:44 · Score: 0
  
  You know, you come on here and you wonder from topic to topic acting like you're an expert on everything but it's nothing but talk... shouting down others, belittling others. You're a troll and a bully. I hope you start getting modded as such and maybe we'd hear less of you. We've had enough of you and your factless talking.
15. Re:No kidding? by drinkypoo · 2013-11-22 10:27 · Score: 2
  
  No, no you didn't address why vnc doesn't cover those use cases. You made some excuses, but it works fine in most of them, or is almost adequate. I've been running X remotely since before vnc existed. You have no idea whatsoever what I've done, and I have plenty of perspective on the way X remoting is used. Further, I read your shitty comment, and I thought it was stupid but I chose to ignore the parts I thought were stupid and simply write a simpler comment that explained precisely what the problem was. But since you're being such a whiny little baby about this, let's go ahead and go back and see what you said, and why it is stupid. And in fact, it will also reveal why this comment of yours is stupid, and hopefully establish a pattern of stupidity so that when I call you an idiot I am modded insightful instead of troll or flamebait.
  Let's begin.
  
  VNC being 1 to 1 instead of many to one is almost entirely useless in that situation as you see people running applications on several different hosts and looking at it all on the screens in front of them.
  This sentence is not only tortured, but ignorant. It's ignorant for a number of reasons, but only one is important: you can run multiple VNC client sessions on a single machine and, if your window management system permits it, tile them so that you can see them all at once.
  Also, what the actual fuck? Are they supposed to be looking at it all, or perhaps part of it, on screens which are behind them? I suppose they could install a mirror above their primary display for this purpose.
  Now, on to the reason why this comment that I am replying to is stupid: I did in fact address your comment in my comment, proving beyond any doubt to anyone with more than two neurons to spark against one another that I did read your blather. I said, and I quote, "Also, there's no reason you couldn't have a single-window vnc-like tool." You went on to complain that I apparently didn't read your comment after I addressed it. If your reading comprehension skills had progressed beyond Hop on Pop then perhaps you would have recognized this fact, and saved me the trouble of chastising you again.
  In summary, take your meds, fucko.
  
  --
  "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
16. Re:No kidding? by dbIII · 2013-11-22 13:44 · Score: 1
  
  You ignored my example as if you did not read it. Thank you for addressing it now but I do not see your solution as viable, however I am glad that you have had the decency to at least consider it at this time. It's a very "clunky" idea that you are putting forward instead of the current application centred one, just the sort of "clunky" thing that X is being criticised for due to it's modular not monolithic structure.
  
  Anyway, my point is that there are things like the above which are the entire reason some people are using X and not something else (like a clunky VNC solution that could have been patched together any time in the last decade and a half). I was doing something like you suggested with multiple MS Windows machines and multiple VNC windows around 2000 and it sucked, and current implementations suck in exactly the same way on a local network because the idea of it sucks. Unless Wayland or whatever comes up with a better solution instead of ignoring it (and a few other things in X) as beneath their notice then it's not going to replace X in places such as the corporate offices, engineering firms, geophysics etc that are currently using X just so they can get a lot of stuff on their screens at once and not have a server under every desk.
  
  As for the "fossil fuels" shit, if you really want to get people stirred up then continue with the irrelevant and insulting analogies. I'll continue to use X to attempt to find the fossil fuels that people like you depend on burning for their lifestyle until something better than X comes around, and dismissing it as replaceable with utter shit that couldn't do the job in 2000 and still operates in the same way now is not an answer. It's just showing a lack of understanding and a willingness to "lecture" someone who was trying to point out that lack of understanding.
Why now? by Anonymous Coward · 2013-11-20 03:40 · Score: 0, Funny

Why now? It hasn't stopped them from pushing architecture that wasn't ready for prime time in the past, is this where they draw a line in the sand?
Re:Linux Mint by Anonymous Coward · 2013-11-20 03:50 · Score: 1

I left Ubuntu after they went to Unity.
You can still use Ubuntu with any window manager of your choosing, and it works just fine. I hate Unity too, but it's much easier to install GNOME or KDE to Ubuntu (apt-get install ...) than to switch distros. The problem with Mint seems to be that they have some security issues that are not a problem with Ubuntu (assuming you kill the phone-home features, like this.)
Lost a good opportunity for a haiku, mate by ifiwereasculptor · 2013-11-20 03:52 · Score: 3, Insightful

Ubuntu reigns king
Forces Unity on users
Its own crown of thorns
1. Re:Lost a good opportunity for a haiku, mate by mythix · 2013-11-20 04:03 · Score: 1
  
  Van Rompuy, is that you?
2. Re:Lost a good opportunity for a haiku, mate by Anonymous Coward · 2013-11-20 04:07 · Score: 0
  
  s/Forces/Force
3. Re:Lost a good opportunity for a haiku, mate by ifiwereasculptor · 2013-11-20 08:36 · Score: 1
  
  Thank you for reminding me of this.
4. Re:Lost a good opportunity for a haiku, mate by Anonymous Coward · 2013-11-20 19:33 · Score: 0
  
  Burma Shave?
Re:Linux Mint by Teun · 2013-11-20 04:04 · Score: 0

Hahaha, Mint = Ubuntu with a different colour and a few tweaks.

--
"The likes of Facebook and WhatsApp are free to those whose privacy is of zero value."
Russian space station by Anonymous Coward · 2013-11-20 04:33 · Score: 0

When I saw the word Mir I thought of the Russian space station. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mir
I'm showing my age. lol :p
1. Re:Russian space station by Anonymous Coward · 2013-11-20 13:35 · Score: 0
  
  I'm showing my age. lol :p
  What, 12?
Re:Linux Mint by oodaloop · 2013-11-20 04:44 · Score: 0

Newsflash, you're still using Ubuntu!

--
Tic-Tac-Toe, Global Thermonuclear War, and relationships all have the same winning move.
Unity is no reason to not use Ubuntu by Anonymous Coward · 2013-11-20 04:53 · Score: 1

I get why some people might hate Unity (I'm one of them). I get why some people might hate Ubuntu (I'm not one of those), or might not want to use it on their hotrod machine (e.g. one of my boxes runs Gentoo instead, and yes, I do all the "ricer" stereotype stuff on that one, even).
What I don't get, is why someone who otherwise doesn't hate Ubuntu, but does hate Unity, would let it alter their decision to use Ubuntu. There's nothing about Ubuntu that means you have to use Unity, or that it's even "hard" to not use Unity.
Xubuntu FTW. You get Ubuntu's "mainstreaminess" so that whatever software you want, has already been ported and already has a relatively recent (!) (take that, Debian) binary just waiting for you to effortlessly install. And you get XFCE's non-suckiness. (Or Gnome or KDE or whatever you prefer; everything is available.) What's not to like?
1. Re:Unity is no reason to not use Ubuntu by 0123456 · 2013-11-20 05:29 · Score: 0
  
  What I don't get, is why someone who otherwise doesn't hate Ubuntu, but does hate Unity, would let it alter their decision to use Ubuntu. There's nothing about Ubuntu that means you have to use Unity, or that it's even "hard" to not use Unity.
  Yeah, you can run the bloated pig that is KDE, the bastardised tablet interface of Gnome 3, or the minimalist and buggy XFCE.
  Or you can dump Ubuntu, install Mint and continue running Gnome 2 (aka MATE). That's what most of us did.
2. Re:Unity is no reason to not use Ubuntu by Anonymous Coward · 2013-11-20 06:21 · Score: 0
  
  It wasn't Unity itself that pissed me off so much as having it just show up replacing Gnome after a distribution upgrade. Just ran update, rebooted, and "hey, we took out your old desktop environment and gave you this new completely one! You weren't using that old thing anyway, right?" I mean, the fact that Unity's first release was a buggy mess didn't help, but even if it was bug-free, the way they handled the upgrade still would have pissed me off.So I switched back to Debian.
3. Re: Unity is no reason to not use Ubuntu by Anonymous Coward · 2013-11-21 19:05 · Score: 0
  
  How about the fact that I have to unfuck the OS after an install? http://fixubuntu.com
4. Re: Unity is no reason to not use Ubuntu by Anonymous Coward · 2013-11-21 19:22 · Score: 0
  
  Oops, wrong parent. Disregard.
problems with multi-monitor support? by Laxori666 · 2013-11-20 05:04 · Score: 3, Interesting

Why are people still struggling with this? I mean, why is it so technically challenging? It's a simple concept and it's been around for years...
1. Re:problems with multi-monitor support? by Anonymous Coward · 2013-11-20 09:16 · Score: 0
  
  You just said "windows /just works/"? Is there something wrong with you? My experience has been the complete opposite. Multi-monitor support is complete crap in Windows. I've used Linux for 4 years now and every single day I'm thankful that I don't have to face that dick MS shit OS.
  They pay you well to say things like this?
2. Re:problems with multi-monitor support? by bananaquackmoo · 2013-11-20 09:46 · Score: 1
  
  I've been using multiple monitors since Windows 98 and never had a single problem. Then again I've been using multiple monitors on Linux for a while and never had a problem either. I have no idea what you two are talking about.
3. Re:problems with multi-monitor support? by FalleStar · 2013-11-20 10:49 · Score: 1
  
  Don't know why I'm bothering to respond to an AC but what the hell, I'll bite.
  When was the last time you actually used a good install of Windows, that is one that isn't full of malware/crapware that comes pre-installed from OEMs? Windows has been pretty rock-solid since XP SP 2 (skipping Vista of course). I'm currently running my gaming desktop dual-boot with Windows 8.1 (with Classic Shell of course) & Linux Mint no problem.
  I admit that Windows lacks a lot of the things that make Linux great for power users, but at the same time I virtually never have issues with Windows. I've never once had issues with multi-monitor support and I run a dual, sometimes triple monitor configuration.
  But go ahead and spread your FUD AC, what do I know?
Delay LTS to avoid the risk Mir to become marginal by ceztko · 2013-11-20 05:10 · Score: 2

I don't have an opinion about Mir and I don't want to express my opinions about last Canonical moves here. What I want to say is that it would be Canonical interest to delay LTS to not risk Mir to become marginal in the years to follow. There would be nothing bad about this move: people that like to stay cut-edge will enjoy a regular 14.04 release. People that need stability will just keep 12.04 another six months.
Re:Linux Mint by Anonymous Coward · 2013-11-20 05:23 · Score: 0

Mint shills in every Ubuntu related thread of course.
Re:Linux Mint by Barsteward · 2013-11-20 05:49 · Score: 1

"that they have some security issues" ---aahh you are that canonical developer making the news this week with that ascertion....

--
"The hands that help are better far than lips that pray." - Robert Ingersoll (1833-1899)
Re:Linux Mint by Anonymous Coward · 2013-11-20 06:28 · Score: 0

It's only funny how Linux Mint users always want to tell that they switched to Mint.
The interesting question by jones_supa · 2013-11-20 06:33 · Score: 1

Well, guys. As Mir can now be relatively easily installed, I'd like to hear comments about your experience with it.
1. Re:The interesting question by sensei+moreh · 2013-11-20 08:44 · Score: 1
  
  I installed it, ran the server (which gave me only 1024x768 on my 1680x1050 monitor) and the demos. My monitor doesn't return a valid EDID - no problem with X, I just create xorg.conf with an appropriate modeline, and I'm good to go. The demos, such as they are, appear to run properly without crashing, but I want to write my graphical apps in Python, rather than C++. Bottom line - I won't be switching to Mir in the immediate future.
  
  --
  Geology - it's not rocket science; it's rock science
2. Re:The interesting question by occasional_dabbler · 2013-11-20 12:29 · Score: 1
  
  It runs flawlessly on my pure i7 Quad Ubuntu 13.10 box (Intel grapics - all FOSS) single monitor. It runs flawlessly on my shitty Atom netbook (intel graphics) on the built-in screen, but I had to switch back to X to get it working properly with an external monitor.
  
  --
  "Our opponent is an alien starship packed with atomic bombs," I said. "we have a protractor"
Re:Linux Mint by LoRdTAW · 2013-11-20 06:43 · Score: 1

I simply switched desktops. I now run Mate on Ubuntu 12.04.
Re:Linux Mint by morgauxo · 2013-11-20 07:12 · Score: 1

Would that be the Ubuntu or Debian edition of Mint?
Mir RIP? by Alomex · 2013-11-20 08:31 · Score: 2

This might pretty much kill Mir. By the time is released Wayland will likely have taken over and even if Mir is better it will be a case of "too little, too late".
HURD microkernels by unixisc · 2013-11-20 10:10 · Score: 1

The one thing HURD hasn't tried so far is the Minix 3.x microkernel. Seriously, they should fork it to GPL3, then use that as their microkernel, and build the HURD daemons over it. Other than that, they tried all fringe microkernels, but none of the real ones, like Minix, Chorus, or any other
woohoo by Anonymous Coward · 2013-11-20 10:18 · Score: 0

sign me up for 14.04 then
Interesting for a different reason by dbIII · 2013-11-20 12:24 · Score: 0

NIH ... wasting time instead of contributing to Wayland
Hang on - you are complaining about "not invented here" and are saying they should be onboard with Wayland? Would Wayland even let them in? NIH is the entire point behind Wayland - instead of improving X they wanted their own thing (which is starting to get as bulky as the X they wanted to replace because it was bulky).
1. Re:Interesting for a different reason by Merk42 · 2013-11-21 02:03 · Score: 1
  
  Considering a lot of the people working on Wayland are those that worked on X, I don't think NIH applies.
2. Re:Interesting for a different reason by bluefoxlucid · 2013-11-21 02:49 · Score: 1
  
  Wayland is "X is deficient, it's not good enough, and efforts to improve it have been clunky hacks. To actually improve, much of it must be rewritten. Let's just write a new one."
  Mir is "Oh, shit, they're writing a new X? Uh, it's ... not ours. We're going to do it too! We'll make OUR OWN NEW X, that we can ship with OUR system, and it'll be OURS because WE WROTE IT because WE DON'T WANT YOUR JUNK!"
  Wayland doesn't have a distribution. They're not RedHat or SuSE. The people writing it are just trying to build a better X. Mir came about when Canonical saw a better X being built and decided to head it off by building their own better X, instead of contributing to help the better X come about faster and with more features relevant to their distribution.
  
  --
  Support my political activism on Patreon.
3. Re:Interesting for a different reason by dbIII · 2013-11-21 11:12 · Score: 1
  
  Interesting myth but still a myth. Track it back and you'll find it has no substance other than Kieth Packard wishing them good luck and one guy that worked briefly on one module starting Wayland.
4. Re:Interesting for a different reason by dbIII · 2013-11-21 21:59 · Score: 1
  
  After reading a bit of stuff from the Wayland guys I'd say the viewpoint isn't quite this:
  
  X is deficient, it's not good enough, and efforts to improve it have been clunky hacks
  But instead more like "X is made of lots of clunky little bits - let's make something monolithic instead". As the Wayland project has progressed it's become more functional but to do that it's become less monolithic and to actually work it has had to take on the characteristics that the loudest fanboys have dismissed as being flaws of X.
  I hope it succeeds but I'm sick of the clamour of "X sux" clueless fanboys drowning out any information of substance.
The "I'm OK Jack" answer? by dbIII · 2013-11-20 13:24 · Score: 1

I've been using multiple monitors since Windows 98 and never had a single problem
Which unfortunately just tells all of us that have actually done a lot with multiple screens on MS Windows. Those who have done it dozens of times have seen quite a few problems and had to use many workarounds and seen how it behaves differently depending on which third party tool is used. My most recent hassle was four screens, a cloned two screen desktop - initially using two different video cards. Easy in X but an utter time wasting pain in the neck with having to use a third bit of hardware, the onboard video, in Win7 simply because the options were greyed out in the GUI and inaccessible. That setup was unstable - it required to be configured all over again if somebody didn't turn all the screens on before starting up. That's an unforgivable flaw in 2013. While the X answer was a minute of config options, that stayed put and did not vanish, the MS Windows answer was ultimately to get different hardware so the setup was simpler. It still fucks up on occasion if screens are not turned on before MS Windows starts up.
What problem does it solves? by manu0601 · 2013-11-20 14:59 · Score: 1

What problem is solved by Mir, after all? I understand X11 is a bloated API, but it works, doesn't it?
Hybryde Linux - make Ubuntu fun again by Anonymous Coward · 2013-11-20 15:31 · Score: 0

take a note from Hybryde Linux:
"Hybryde Linux is an Ubuntu-based distribution for the desktop. Its most unusual feature is an option to switch rapidly between multiple desktop environments and window manager without logging out - the list includes Enlightenment 17, GNOME 3 (GNOME Shell and GNOME 3 "Fallback" mode), KDE, LXDE, Openbox, Unity, Xfce and FVWM. This is achieved via a highly customisable Hy-menu, which also allows launching applications and configuring the system. All open applications are carried to any of the available desktops. The system offers an interesting way to work fluidly in a multi-desktop environment."
http://www.hybryde.org/
Re:Linux Mint by Ash+Vince · 2013-11-21 01:03 · Score: 1

I simply switched desktops. I now run Mate on Ubuntu 12.04.
How well does that work?
Do you still get the ease of doing dist-update under Ubuntu?

--
I dont read /. to RTFA, I read /. to offend people in ignorance.
"We've had enough" from an AC? by dbIII · 2013-11-21 14:34 · Score: 1

If you hadn't ticked "Post Anonymously" I would take you more seriously. "Mr D" is it? Do you really think I'd believe somebody who doesn't care enough about this place to get a login would care enough to take me to task for being increasingly blunt to the poster above?
As for the downmodding - it's a waste of time for a single person to try to chew into someone's karma like that so I really don't know why you bothered - amusing that you are giving me the "warning" after you did it to those DMCA posts that shouldn't have got anyone upset. Keep at it if you are bored enough but it will take a long time and there are better things to do.
As for me, I'd prefer to discuss X or whatever the topic of the day is (and yes, I and many others on this site DO know a lot about many things and are experts on some of it - you can be too if you keep your eyes open long enough) instead of an attempted distraction into "cruft" or a fossil fuel analogy so I give no apology to Drinkypoo or anyone else for taking him to task for his deliberate evasion of the issue. With some people being polite is unfortunately taken as agreement.
Let's get back on topic by dbIII · 2013-11-22 14:03 · Score: 1

My point is that some stuff in X, most notably the remote stuff, is seen as utterly beneath Wayland's notice at this point with no plan to implement such features.
Your suggestions of workarounds, viable or not, doesn't change that.
Did I state that clearly enough this time without the complication of an example to argue over?