Slashdot Mirror
XFree86 joins X.Org as Honorary Member
Virtex writes "According to a press release at X.Org, the XFree86 group has been made an honorary member of X.Org, which is an organization of the Open Group. This will allow them a seat at hearings and the ability to vote on the executive board. "
Wow. So all those years spent developing XFree86 just to keep a free (as in Open Source free) X implementation was worthwhile. Which raises an interesting question... does this mean that it's worthwhile to insist on creating free clones of proprietary software, or should we concentrate on creating new, Open Source software (ie., not cloning existing software)? If it's worth the time and effort to clone something just for the sake of keeping it Open Source (ie. eventually we reap the benefits when the Open Source development model overtakes what was being cloned at first), then perhaps we should start cloning things like QT and a host of other things with licenses that people are complaining about...
I used to think that efforts like OpenSSH and XFree86 are doomed to play catch-up forever. But now I think I was wrong... it may not be such a bad thing to clone. Perhaps the Linux story generalizes to other things as well -- after all, Linus started by cloning UNIX to run on i386, and look at what Linux has become now.
mikre he sophia he tou Mikrosophou.
2 years ago the Open Group declared X would be licensed only for a fee and the XFree86 team would no longer be able to use the Open Group's code. Now not only did they reverse that decision but they're really trying to pick their balls off the floor with this XFree86 pledge.
I would have to respectfully disagree that XFree doesn't need X.org. Only because the vast majority of developers insist that the X standards be adheered to - including XFree developers. The catch-22 occurs because there has never been a feedback mechanism back into the SI from XFree, so anything that XFree code-forked would have to be re-implemented on new X releases. Not a big deal on the driver side.
What was bad about this situation, is that when people start to talk about innovations that require major changes to the SI, we must develop them using extensions for fear of breaking with the SI.(Some things just can't be done using extensions, though) When people start using extensions then traditional application developers are weary of using them because there's little reason for workstation vendors to support these extensions. Most developers always aim for the square middle if possible.
This all changed because X.org realized that the commercial ISV had virtually disappeared. Almost all the commercial work being done was for in-house development and narrowly focused niche markets. The other 99.9% of X developers were using linux and *bsd!!!
I think some innovations have been (until fairly recently) stiffled because of X.org's unwillingness to accept feedback. Features that are just now being implemented or discussed that could have happened 2-4 years ago. (Insert laundry list here)
Another factor is that most X developers really thought X was dead. Heck, even Jim Gettys told me at the last ALS that he was really supprised that X was still around (and pleased that it is!). Knowing how "well documented" the SI is (remember that X is larger than the Linux Kernel?) there was quite a loss of real expertise on X internals.
What you see here is very exciting. You see the ability of XFree to affect the SI. You see a standards organization accepting the true standard. You see a resurgence of expertise in developer resources on the XFree team. You see organizations supporting *very* good things like Precision Insight, SGI, Mesa, and MetroLink.
And you ain't seen nothing yet. This is just my opinion, ofcourse. I havn't been involved until recently (and in a very minor fashion) But I've been watching XFree since they were X386.
This isn't your mama's X server!!
Roger
I said no... but I missed and it came out yes.
X is probably the best reason to use Linux on the desktop. I store all my porn on one machine and then have it display running on my 486/33 in my room with a projector. Its fun. Seriously though, X makes rmeote administration practical. I advise anyone who hasn't use X across their LAn for displaying stuff to do so.
BTW:: What is the difference between X.org X and XFree86?
All that said, I know what you mean. Linux started out as a clone and is now becoming a respected member of the Unix community and one of the few with any real active developement (or so I've gathered).
Bill - aka taniwha
--
Leave others their otherness. -- Aratak
I actually meant to say something like this, but I forgot to. The reason Linux is Intel's worst nightmare is Intel is damned if they do and damned if they don't. With the rising mainstream popularity of Linux, Intel will rapidly loose sales to other chip makers as people realize Linux works well on non-Intel hw, especially if Intel Linux starts to lag. However, many improvements in Linux for Intel hw will, in general, also be benneficial to other platforms.
Bill - aka taniwha
--
Leave others their otherness. -- Aratak
I've been programming Motif for a couple of years, ever since Sun dropped OpenLook and my then employer switched to Solaris from SunOS.
Motif has an intersting history, as it was partially funded by none other than Microsoft. They saw it as a useful way of testing UI design prior to the big overhaul to Windows 3.1 that resulted in Windows 95.
As I've always been a little bit partisan about Motif (XView was far easier to program with), I've often wondered if Motif is best seen as an Windows 95 GUI prototype. Motif certainly needs an overhaul in places - the file dialogs for instance.
And as a sidenote, I recall a former Open Group programmer saying that they toyed with the idea of making Motif open source a few years back. Damn shame they didn't, as I'm sure both the Lesstif and Open Group teams could come up with something far leaner and meaner if they pooled their experience.
Chris Wareham
Berlin, BeOS, NanoGUI, and such, all may be interesting options, but until they exist on a wide range of platforms, provide the flexibility of X, and actually have substantial bodies of code that will run on 'em, they can't realistically be considered as more than wishful alternatives.
If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate.
Folks funding the X group!
- Compaq
- Hewlett-Packard
- Hummingbird Communications
- IBM
- Sun Microsystems
I'd like to state that I like this list! I think almost all of these companies have made other efforts to promote linux as well. It feels good to know that we've got such nice backing for our X server.And my other point, a quote from the About The X Window System section:
I like this, a group with some good backers (see above) publicly stating that their platform is expanding exponentially due to Linux.
I've never felt better about my OS.
-Denor
I would think that XFree86 has one of the largest installed base of X-Servers. Let's see... Of all Linux and BSD installs which include some kind of X-Server, XFree86 is probably installed on 99.9%.
Not to be a party-pooper, but maybe the article shouldn't have read "XFree86 joins X.Org," but instead, "XFree86 joins X.Org... FINALLY!"
Just my observations on the matter...
- I don't need to go outside, my CRT tan'll do me just fine.
At least people got the wake-up call. It just goes to show that establishments exist even within the Open Source community.
I was under the impression that network solutions disallowed single letter domain names. Is x.org grandfathered in as an older domain, or are there certian exceptions to the rule?
-Adam
Best ways to cut a meeting short, #3:
Your wife is on line 1, your girlfriend is on line 2. Should I just let them talk to each other while they wait for your meeting to finish?
-- TweetyBert
X.org was registered before that restriction came into being.
.com domains for, say, a million dollars apiece?
On a side note, I wonder how long it will be before one of the new registrars decides to go ahead and issue one-letter
From XFree's website:
Short delay in releases
[December 1999]
The XFree86 Project has missed a few promised release dates in fall 1999, but we are very optimistic to be back on track for 3.3.6 and 3.9.17 to be released before the end of the year. Similarly, we expect XFree86-4.0 to be delayed by about two months and are aiming for a release in mid-Q1/2000.
----
What changes to their current UNIX definition would be required for this?
"What changes to their current UNIX definition would be required for this?"
Here are some requirements for UNIX 95.In addition, several truckloads of cash are required.
I think the goal of the Single UNIX Specification was to make all systems that claim to be UNIX look sufficiently like one another that software, and users, don't get locked into particular versions.
If
then the case should perhaps be made to TOG that mandating CDE isn't worth the effort.
Given that CDE is their baby, I'm not sure they'll accept that case, but that's another matter. Perhaps the answer then is to have commercial distributors of Linux, etc. systems package up versions with CDE, etc. and get those certified as UNIX; those who care can buy those systems, and those who don't care don't have to get a system with CDE.
Open up the documentation for Motif, and who is listed amongst the sponsors? Yup, that's right Microsoft.
Chris Wareham
I should be noted that The Open Group's X.org needs the help of XFree, not the other way around.
Remember back in early 1998 when they changed the licensing on X? The idea was to generate more revenue to fund The Open Group's X development efforts. Well, The Open Group dumped X development that summer (along with most of their other development efforts), and was nice enough to change back the licensing.
So now the only organization doing public development of X is XFree. Hence, anything that goes into XFree becomes the defacto standard. By making XFree an honorary member, it makes it easier to keep the defacto standard and the paper standard in sync. Since The Open Group only exists for standards and branding anymore, they desperately need to retain control.
DISCLAIMER: I am a former employee of The Open Group, but was not involved with X.
Now, look at XFree86. They're doing modular systems, fbcon servers, and native OpenGL acceleration - things that actually involve changing core code and bringing the standards up to date. While I don't support XFree86 pulling away from X entirely, they have been taking their own direction a lot, and that's a really Good Thing.
Also, some small hype: The Berlin Project is an attempt to redesign a new windowing system from the ground up, using CORBA and OpenGL. While it's far from complete, if you've got any coding skills and dislike X, donate some time there.
Also, please do drop the 86. XFree is a great cross-platform X distribution, not just for the Intel line anymore.
Windows 2000: Designed for the Internet. The Internet: Designed for UNIX.
Berlin is trying to replace X with something more modern (using bits of OpenGL, Corba, ...). I'm not involved in the project at all, but I think it's worth a look if you're interested in alternatives to X. As a former Amiga user, I certainly agree about the 'big, slow, bloated, and old' comments. However, X has its good points (e.g. network-transparency).
It is entirely possible the people at Sun, IBM, HP, Compaq, (and possibly others) decided that as they're supporting Linux from other perspectives, that the needed to tell TOG that it needs to as well.
Convincing signs of a TOG "change of heart" would include things like:
Shameless Plug: People should help Sponsor XFree86. My local Linux Users Group, NTLUG, is in the process of soliciting that members help sponsor several free software project organizations, including XFree86.
If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate.
of the XFree representative sitting on that board and glaring down at the peon members of the other companies from her throne, then suddenly wielding her terrible power to punish the recalcitrant corporations for their slowness in appeasing the mighty beast that is Open Source . . .
It's rare that you're presented with a knob whose only two positions are Make History and Flee Your Glorious Destiny.
You might think, but Intel has shown interest in *helping* Linux, and I think there are a couple of motivations for this. First, although Microsoft software has pulled Intel to the top of the semiconductor heap, Microsoft has been the dominating force in Wintel. Second, reducing the cost of software makes for more machines being sold, which is good for Intel. Intel doesn't just want to sell PCs, they also want to move into the Personal organizer market. Make Linux a viable competitor with WinCE and PalmOS, and Intel has a point of entry. Notice how Linus has been talking about embedded OS machines recently? (The weirdness there is that Transmeta is an Intel micro-competitor -- I don't see them working together.)
Ooh, a sarcasm detector. Oh, that's a real useful invention.
The XFree86 Project, Inc. was a member of the X Consortium of old, too. At least in 1994 UUNET sponsored them and contributed the membership fee. So belonging to a standards body isn't anything new to them.
Actually, I'm kind of shady on the details of how they lost that membership. Could someone more knowledgeable tell what exactly happened when TOG took over X? I was under the impression that the new X.Org had more or less the same members as the X Consortium. Apparently not...
The problem is that Berlin utterly throws away compatibility with the huge bodies of works currently running using Motif, TK, GTK, Qt, Xt, and FLTK (to name the likely "top" GUI libraries used on X).
As a result of discarding compatibility, Berlin is pretty useless until ALL your favorite software is rewritten to use Berlin. Some emulation may be possible, but this is nontrivial, and it'll literally take years for this to be robust enough for production use.
If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate.
What are you smoking? What do you think X is? What do you think GNOME is?
There are more regulations and standards than anyone cares to read.
"Man, there's too many regulations and standards to this Internet thing. Nobody wants to read that."... Again, what are you smoking? Noone has to read a single regulation or standard to use X, or even GNOME :-), but those standards are what makes it possible for me to launch a Netscape on a Solaris box behind a firewall in NY and have it appears on MI/X on a WindowsNT box in Tennessee. That's a simple example of what the standardization allows.
We need a new windowing protocol that addresses the need of the modern PC user
You've got one. It's called Windows. What's that you say? Windows is a shameless rip-off of the significant UI advances over the past 20 years? Oh, Windows is poorly written bloatware? I'm sorry. Maybe we should use a standardized system that has been refined over a decade and which allows extensible network-transparent sessions over multiple architectures. Hey, why not make an OpenSource version that's also compatible with the system that runs on Crays SGI's, Unix Mainframes, and PC's?
The continued development of X seems pointless to me - I think we need something new altogether.
Your continued ignorance seems pointless to me. However, regardless, why don't you scurry along and work on that dream of bringing a real GUI to the masses. Go sign up for any of a number of projects (browse through freshmeat and sourceforge) in this area. Heck, if you're uber-1337 maybe you can even get PAID for your efforts by working for a company developing such projects.
Having used X over the past decade on everything from Heavy Iron visualization systems (with graphics hardware the likes of which YOU CAN'T GET for a PC), to mainframes, to Unix workstations, to Linux/*BSD boxen, to win16/32 machines, to wierd-ass closed network devices... I'd say you'd be hard pressed to find a viable alternative to X anytime in the next 5 years. The flexibility, scalability, portability, and customizability (X+GNOME+Enlightenment, for instance is slicker than eel snot) of X beats the pants of the competitors.
But, if someone develops an alternative that exists on a wide range of platforms, enables the productivity that X enables, and runs something as nice as Enlightenment (not to mention WindowMaker/FVWM/etc.), and something as minimal as twm, then you might find me using it as well.
So get your ass to work if you're so dissatisfied.
"Cause there's 40 different shades of black, so many fortresses and ways to attack, so why you complainin'?"