>> You have to remember that things pick up speed at an incredible rate in the OSS world. I believe that Xgl/Axgl/Compriz are just the right kind of seed to get people interested.
This usually happens when a corp (read IBM, SUN) throws a bunch of money on an opensoure project. I don't see that happening with desktop linux. Since you mentioned JBoss, i'll have to remind you that it was the laughing stock of the entire Java enterprise development community for a couple of years. Don't know if the acquisition by Redhat improved things...
>> When it reaches a watershed where all you need to really know is a little OpenGL to start improving the desktop/wm, I think you'll see an exponetial increase in the number of projects.
This is exactly the problem with linux. "A little opengl" to start improving the desktop/wm is not going to cut it unfortunately. If thats all you have, you'll end up in the same mess as before (incosistent applications that do whatever their "amateur" developers like, no serious usability studies, no professionalism, no COMMON VISION). So how is this going to help the situation ??
The thing you and ever linux fan and advocate needs to realise is that the ordinary user does not care about compiz,beryl,cube animations and so on. What he wants is _consistency_ and _user-friendly_ expected and predictable behavior. OSX delivers in spades whilst linux doesn't yet know the meaning of these terms.
I curse every time i have to run an X application under OSX and this is not because of deficiencies in Apple's X server but because i'm sure that the X application is going to be braindamaged, poorly written from a usability perspective and in a sense a mess compared to any other comparable cocoa OSX application. That is why i try to avoid this kind of torture.
If your main argument is that OSX is not an option because it doesn't run X applications perfectly (i havent by the way found an X application yet that didn't run under OSX Xserver but i obviously didn't try the mess thats called GNOME and similar braindamaged sw/libs) i suggest you give up OSX and go back to linux.
The reason a developer goes for OSX is the wealth of up to date documentation, kick ass development environments and rock solid cutting edge frameworks. Nothing of the sort exists in Linux and i don't expect them anytime soon. The linux world seems obsessed with putting out eye-candy solutions that are all glitz but no substance instead of actually doing the work as far as solid foundations are concerned...
The latest Xgl and compiz toys are a perfect example of this. Building a castle on sand is not a good pathway to success....
It is nice to view articles like that which
although not completely objective raises
a number of points which i think are valid.
The lack of vision for one. It is obvious that
a lot of things happen in "desktop linux" without
appropriate coordination and guidance. That is why
you have a lot of applications that are not well
integrated and don't work well with each other.
Comparisons with Vista and OSX are not that far
from the truth. The key word being "integration",
OSX blows anything that is currently in desktop
linux out of the water. Everything works as it should,
drag and drop from everything to everything, applications
work in the same way, well defined guidelines exist and
are followed (mostly). This is something that the development
model of desktop linux environments will find hard to achieve.
I also find the latest 3d accellerated X technologies to be
all candy with no substance or depth. In OSX you have the candy too,
but you also have robust frameworks (core image, core video, core animation in
leopard), cutting-edge development environment and applications (Xcode, quartz composer,
Interface Builder, opengl profiler, shader builder) and extensive documentation
for _everything_. This (in combination with cocoa and other osx frameworks) makes it
tremendously easy for someone to write an application that follows Apple's human
interface guidelines, be easy to use, integrate perfectly with existing OSX applications
and innovate in other areas.
All of the above are absent or poorly implemented in Linux. It is therefore not
surprising that the end result leaves much to be desired. In order for Linux to be
competitive with OSX and even Vista some of these factors are going to have to be
rectified.
Slashdot Mirror
>> You have to remember that things pick up speed at an incredible rate in the OSS world. I believe that Xgl/Axgl/Compriz are just the right kind of seed to get people interested.
This usually happens when a corp (read IBM, SUN) throws a bunch of money on an opensoure project.
I don't see that happening with desktop linux.
Since you mentioned JBoss, i'll have to remind you that it was the laughing stock of the entire Java enterprise development
community for a couple of years. Don't know if the acquisition by Redhat improved things...
>> When it reaches a watershed where all you need to really know is a little OpenGL to start improving the desktop/wm, I think you'll see an exponetial increase in the number of projects.
This is exactly the problem with linux. "A little opengl" to start improving the desktop/wm is not going to cut it unfortunately.
If thats all you have, you'll end up in the same mess as before (incosistent applications that do whatever their "amateur" developers
like, no serious usability studies, no professionalism, no COMMON VISION). So how is this going to help the situation ??
The thing you and ever linux fan and advocate needs to realise is that the ordinary user does not care about compiz,beryl,cube animations and so on.
What he wants is _consistency_ and _user-friendly_ expected and predictable behavior. OSX delivers in spades whilst linux doesn't yet know
the meaning of these terms.
You are very funny.
I curse every time i have to run an X application under OSX
and this is not because of deficiencies in Apple's X server
but because i'm sure that the X application is going to be
braindamaged, poorly written from a usability perspective
and in a sense a mess compared to any other comparable
cocoa OSX application. That is why i try to avoid this kind
of torture.
If your main argument is that OSX is not an option because it
doesn't run X applications perfectly (i havent by the way found
an X application yet that didn't run under OSX Xserver but i obviously
didn't try the mess thats called GNOME and similar braindamaged sw/libs)
i suggest you give up OSX and go back to linux.
The reason a developer goes for OSX is the wealth of up to date documentation,
kick ass development environments and rock solid cutting edge frameworks.
Nothing of the sort exists in Linux and i don't expect them anytime soon.
The linux world seems obsessed with putting out eye-candy solutions that are
all glitz but no substance instead of actually doing the work as far as
solid foundations are concerned...
The latest Xgl and compiz toys are a perfect example of this. Building a castle
on sand is not a good pathway to success....
I think that you greatly overstimate Xgl.
After all it was written by a single person, is buggy,
crashes all the time and not yet _finished_.
On the contrary, osx quartz has been out there for as long
as i can remember, is rock solid and can do everything possible in Xgl
_already_.
I don't think that a bunch of amateur developers doing Xgl work
are going to beat Apple in innovation any time soon...
It is nice to view articles like that which although not completely objective raises a number of points which i think are valid. The lack of vision for one. It is obvious that a lot of things happen in "desktop linux" without appropriate coordination and guidance. That is why you have a lot of applications that are not well integrated and don't work well with each other. Comparisons with Vista and OSX are not that far from the truth. The key word being "integration", OSX blows anything that is currently in desktop linux out of the water. Everything works as it should, drag and drop from everything to everything, applications work in the same way, well defined guidelines exist and are followed (mostly). This is something that the development model of desktop linux environments will find hard to achieve. I also find the latest 3d accellerated X technologies to be all candy with no substance or depth. In OSX you have the candy too, but you also have robust frameworks (core image, core video, core animation in leopard), cutting-edge development environment and applications (Xcode, quartz composer, Interface Builder, opengl profiler, shader builder) and extensive documentation for _everything_. This (in combination with cocoa and other osx frameworks) makes it tremendously easy for someone to write an application that follows Apple's human interface guidelines, be easy to use, integrate perfectly with existing OSX applications and innovate in other areas. All of the above are absent or poorly implemented in Linux. It is therefore not surprising that the end result leaves much to be desired. In order for Linux to be competitive with OSX and even Vista some of these factors are going to have to be rectified.