I know its cool to hate on D3, but it wasn't actually a *bad* game. I got about 50 hours out of it, which works out to be about $1.20 AU per hour. Cheap entertainment. Sure, nothing like as much as I spent on D2, but I don't have the free time these days either.
A "dream team" of 100 for a game is only going to mean design by committee, and you'll end up with something like the software equivalent of the MS Surface Pro. Something that tries to be too many things and is "meh" at all of them. And thus, crap.
For general GUI configuration stuff, RDP over 256kbit is not much different from local. Last time I ran X11 over 10 megabit ethernet (from my Linux box to a Solaris box), I saw flickering (as window content was updated), etc.
Fact is, I regularly do RDP over 512kbit satellite and whilst unpleasant it is fairly usable. I used to do it via 56k modem.
How will Moore's law ending result in developer time catching up? Humans aren't accelerating in ability to deal with programming issues; compared to processing capability in hardware, human ability is flat or (many would argue) on a downhill slope.
That's nice. I have remote machines on the end of shitty 512kbit satellite links in africa. We have enterprise licensing for Windows so the costs aren't that bad. We need some level of windows infrastructure in place in any case to handle Exchange (PHBs want it) and the various mining industry tools out company uses to get minerals out of the ground.
The point is thus: irrespective of what platform you run, X11 performance when compared even to offerings by Microsoft (RDP) is just blasted into the weeds.
That, my friends should be a fucking embarassment. X11 on 10 megabit ethernet performs worse than RDP over 256kbit frame relay. It's a fucking disaster.
IF i want to replace all my end user's desktops with dumb terminals, X11 simply isn't going to cut it.
Now, I'm not saying run windows everywhere. I'm simply saying that by any metric you care to use, X11's remote performance is simply horrible. IF wayland starts a push to phase it out in favour of something that is actually usable over something slower than an ethernet LAN, this is (long term) a GOOD thing.
I'll bet you X11 stalwarts are complaining about the need to convert to IPv6 as well? If not, why not?
Yup, this is one of the major reasons we canned it. We originally used it because there was no in built remote assistance tool in Windows 2000 or previous.
One of the first things I did when i returned to this company was start phasing out VNC in favour of remote assistance/remote desktop and as soon as I can get it up and running properly, SCCM's remote control.
I've actually put group policy in place to disable VNC on all domain machines (several years ago), but we're pretty much free of it now due to PC attrition/replacement.
Oh nice, call me a shill. It hurts man. I have multiple FreeBSD machines in production (primary NS, sendmail for a 2500 user company) have it running as a ZFS NAS, have run IPSEC endpoints with it. I've previously run Linux exclusively on the desktop for a number of years.
Anyone is free to go through my comment history, it goes back to 1997 or so and I've gone through various phases of fanboyism over the years (starting with Linux) and after exposure to a lot of different shit have become fairly agnostic.
I want to get shit done. If, for a given problem, Linux is best - I run Linux. If I feel FreeBSD is a better fit, I run FreeBSD. For my personal machine, I run OS X.
But I'm never going to convince you of that. You're just a zealot, and anyone who says anything bad about your platform of choice must be a shill. Me? I'll happily list faults with every operating system I use. OS X - the filesystem sucks. The lack of customization sucks. FreeBSD - the lack of virtualization sucks. The upgrade process sucks. Windows - the UI sucks. The third party driver support sucks. The lack of relevant logging sucks. The command line sucks. Linux - the GNU userland sucks, it is different to proper unix for no good reason. info sucks. give me proper man pages. BTRFS sucks. systemtap sucks.
There is stuff that sucks about every platform. You take the trade-offs and you make your choice.
What you DONT do is stick your head in the ground and accept crap as perfectly OK, because if you do, you'll just end up still having crap 10, 20 or 30 years later.
And as to the why behind my choice of home platform? OS X server is crap. Windows (i have an install for gaming) is pretty crap from a UI perspective. Power consumption is bad (I'm on a macbook pro) as well. I bought mac hardware because the trackpad works and being aluminium the chassis still looks and feels like new after 2 years rather than being discloured/worn shiny plastic. Guess what: PC laptop enclosures are crap.
You can piss and moan about my percieved bias against anything open source all you like, but it won't change the facts. There are many reasons why Linux on the desktop has not taken off, and X11 is one of them.
Having run multiple platforms other than Linux and used remote display capabilities on all of them - for all the puported X11 remote display "advantage" - in reality it just doesn't perform. EVERY other remote display technology I have encountered has been superior.
No audio, shitty bandwidth consumption, poor security unless paired with something like an SSH tunnel. Then there are the local deficiencies: a massive monolithic blob running as root in kernel space, the convoluted code-base and hacked rendering path (layering nightmare), the fact that it is attempting to do the job of the kernel by providing driver support, etc.
Now, if you want to stick your head in the sand and pretend X11 doesn't have serious problems, be my guest. I'm sure some die-hards will maintain the Xorg tree just for people like you. But don't try and convince me that X11 is perfect and doesnt have major problems because that is just demonstrably false.
100 gigabit ethernet is still slow compared to your GPU. You don't need to make it a "second class citizen" by removing the code and relocating to a user space daemon. The performance figures I mention are to demonstrate that network IO is drastically slower than the GPU, so much so that any miniscule performance hit from relocating said code to a daemon will be imperceptible - with maintainability, security and other benefits.
LOL. I have plenty of complaints with Microsoft. But if something is crap, I'll call it crap - i don't particularly care who is responsible for it. X11 is crap. VNC is crap too, but performs somewhat better than X.
If you think X11 was "recently broken", you're deluded. It's been a steaming turd for a very long time. And whilst you can't polish a turd, you can dump it in sparkly glitter and it will look a little better than before. But it's still a turd.
Network transparency, if relevant will be provded by an additional daemon, where it does not have to run as root and does not become part of the local rendering pipeline. Networks are slow, any minimal theoretical performance impact moving the networking outside will incur will not be noticed as it will be imperceptible vs. the latency on even 10 gigabit ethernet.
Can't say I have. Used to run TightVNC as a remote support tool for about 5 years (supporting 500+ windows boxes at the time) and never seen this issue?
Having used PCAnywhere, VNC, X11, ICA, RDP, and PCoIP - X11 rates last in terms of performance. It rates last in terms of features. And before someone says "oh but rootless mode!", RDP and ICA have been able to do that since 1996 or earlier. If X11 is gradually phased out something better will replace it. Like perhaps something developed in the last 15 years.
Yes, and the cleaner API is everything. If backwards compat can be maintained (it is) and the codebase can be a lot cleaner (it is) and perform better (it does) then why are people so anti-X replacement?
Open source is supposed to be a meritocracy, yet with all the weston hate around here you'd certainly not get that impression every time a weston thread pops up.
Just because something is "possible" it doesn't mean it is a good idea. The fact that as per TFA wayland got 20% better power consumption BEFORE they took out a lot of un-necessary data copying should be reason enough for Linux people to sit up and take notice.
Mobile devices are future and a 20% plus reduction in power consumption whilst improving performance is nothing to sneeze at.
If you've been using Linux since 1.0 (I have since 1.2) and have never seen any X11 failings, you're either talking out of your arse or are completely blinded by unrelenting fanboy-ism.
I've seen plenty of X11 failings over the years, ranging from inability to change screen resolution on the fly for about the first decade, poor security, crashes in the video driver taking down the OS, various hacks to get things like multi-monitor or 3d support to work, etc.
Yes, some of those things have been "fixed" via various bodges, in much the same way that the average wannabe Nissan Silvia drifter will "fix" crash damage with a drill and some cable-ties.
High latency, low bandwidth, high security risk stuff like network transparency does not belong in the same process as the rendering engine. It certainly doesn't want to be running as root. Especially when the majority of people simply do not use it, and it can easily be retained via a daemon like every other platform uses.
Slashdot Mirror
I know its cool to hate on D3, but it wasn't actually a *bad* game. I got about 50 hours out of it, which works out to be about $1.20 AU per hour. Cheap entertainment. Sure, nothing like as much as I spent on D2, but I don't have the free time these days either.
A "dream team" of 100 for a game is only going to mean design by committee, and you'll end up with something like the software equivalent of the MS Surface Pro. Something that tries to be too many things and is "meh" at all of them. And thus, crap.
You mean a stock install of FVWM?
"solved" it. lol. If you have a very, very generous definition of "solved", sure.
And the poster you replied to is....
For general GUI configuration stuff, RDP over 256kbit is not much different from local. Last time I ran X11 over 10 megabit ethernet (from my Linux box to a Solaris box), I saw flickering (as window content was updated), etc.
Fact is, I regularly do RDP over 512kbit satellite and whilst unpleasant it is fairly usable. I used to do it via 56k modem.
RDP isn't even the best tech out there.
How will Moore's law ending result in developer time catching up? Humans aren't accelerating in ability to deal with programming issues; compared to processing capability in hardware, human ability is flat or (many would argue) on a downhill slope.
That's nice. I have remote machines on the end of shitty 512kbit satellite links in africa. We have enterprise licensing for Windows so the costs aren't that bad. We need some level of windows infrastructure in place in any case to handle Exchange (PHBs want it) and the various mining industry tools out company uses to get minerals out of the ground.
The point is thus: irrespective of what platform you run, X11 performance when compared even to offerings by Microsoft (RDP) is just blasted into the weeds.
That, my friends should be a fucking embarassment. X11 on 10 megabit ethernet performs worse than RDP over 256kbit frame relay. It's a fucking disaster.
IF i want to replace all my end user's desktops with dumb terminals, X11 simply isn't going to cut it.
Now, I'm not saying run windows everywhere. I'm simply saying that by any metric you care to use, X11's remote performance is simply horrible. IF wayland starts a push to phase it out in favour of something that is actually usable over something slower than an ethernet LAN, this is (long term) a GOOD thing.
I'll bet you X11 stalwarts are complaining about the need to convert to IPv6 as well? If not, why not?
Yup, this is one of the major reasons we canned it. We originally used it because there was no in built remote assistance tool in Windows 2000 or previous.
One of the first things I did when i returned to this company was start phasing out VNC in favour of remote assistance/remote desktop and as soon as I can get it up and running properly, SCCM's remote control.
I've actually put group policy in place to disable VNC on all domain machines (several years ago), but we're pretty much free of it now due to PC attrition/replacement.
Oh nice, call me a shill. It hurts man. I have multiple FreeBSD machines in production (primary NS, sendmail for a 2500 user company) have it running as a ZFS NAS, have run IPSEC endpoints with it. I've previously run Linux exclusively on the desktop for a number of years.
Anyone is free to go through my comment history, it goes back to 1997 or so and I've gone through various phases of fanboyism over the years (starting with Linux) and after exposure to a lot of different shit have become fairly agnostic.
I want to get shit done. If, for a given problem, Linux is best - I run Linux. If I feel FreeBSD is a better fit, I run FreeBSD. For my personal machine, I run OS X.
But I'm never going to convince you of that. You're just a zealot, and anyone who says anything bad about your platform of choice must be a shill. Me? I'll happily list faults with every operating system I use. OS X - the filesystem sucks. The lack of customization sucks. FreeBSD - the lack of virtualization sucks. The upgrade process sucks. Windows - the UI sucks. The third party driver support sucks. The lack of relevant logging sucks. The command line sucks. Linux - the GNU userland sucks, it is different to proper unix for no good reason. info sucks. give me proper man pages. BTRFS sucks. systemtap sucks.
There is stuff that sucks about every platform. You take the trade-offs and you make your choice.
What you DONT do is stick your head in the ground and accept crap as perfectly OK, because if you do, you'll just end up still having crap 10, 20 or 30 years later.
And as to the why behind my choice of home platform? OS X server is crap. Windows (i have an install for gaming) is pretty crap from a UI perspective. Power consumption is bad (I'm on a macbook pro) as well. I bought mac hardware because the trackpad works and being aluminium the chassis still looks and feels like new after 2 years rather than being discloured/worn shiny plastic. Guess what: PC laptop enclosures are crap.
You can piss and moan about my percieved bias against anything open source all you like, but it won't change the facts. There are many reasons why Linux on the desktop has not taken off, and X11 is one of them.
Having run multiple platforms other than Linux and used remote display capabilities on all of them - for all the puported X11 remote display "advantage" - in reality it just doesn't perform. EVERY other remote display technology I have encountered has been superior.
No audio, shitty bandwidth consumption, poor security unless paired with something like an SSH tunnel. Then there are the local deficiencies: a massive monolithic blob running as root in kernel space, the convoluted code-base and hacked rendering path (layering nightmare), the fact that it is attempting to do the job of the kernel by providing driver support, etc.
Now, if you want to stick your head in the sand and pretend X11 doesn't have serious problems, be my guest. I'm sure some die-hards will maintain the Xorg tree just for people like you. But don't try and convince me that X11 is perfect and doesnt have major problems because that is just demonstrably false.
I'm not quite sure where you get the idea that I'm a windows fan. I am platform agnostic and use whatever fits the purpose.
I'm actually a FreeBSD + Mac user at home a mixed environment (FreeBSD/Linux/vSphere/Windows) at work to pay the bills.
None of my current platforms of choice can run Wayland, and currently on FreeBSD, X11 is the only option. It's still crap.
Nice try though.
100 gigabit ethernet is still slow compared to your GPU. You don't need to make it a "second class citizen" by removing the code and relocating to a user space daemon. The performance figures I mention are to demonstrate that network IO is drastically slower than the GPU, so much so that any miniscule performance hit from relocating said code to a daemon will be imperceptible - with maintainability, security and other benefits.
LOL. I have plenty of complaints with Microsoft. But if something is crap, I'll call it crap - i don't particularly care who is responsible for it. X11 is crap. VNC is crap too, but performs somewhat better than X.
If you think X11 was "recently broken", you're deluded. It's been a steaming turd for a very long time. And whilst you can't polish a turd, you can dump it in sparkly glitter and it will look a little better than before. But it's still a turd.
Network transparency, if relevant will be provded by an additional daemon, where it does not have to run as root and does not become part of the local rendering pipeline. Networks are slow, any minimal theoretical performance impact moving the networking outside will incur will not be noticed as it will be imperceptible vs. the latency on even 10 gigabit ethernet.
Can't say I have. Used to run TightVNC as a remote support tool for about 5 years (supporting 500+ windows boxes at the time) and never seen this issue?
You have no idea what I've done mate. I've also used X11 over 10 megabit ethernet and it's still crap.
Having used PCAnywhere, VNC, X11, ICA, RDP, and PCoIP - X11 rates last in terms of performance. It rates last in terms of features. And before someone says "oh but rootless mode!", RDP and ICA have been able to do that since 1996 or earlier. If X11 is gradually phased out something better will replace it. Like perhaps something developed in the last 15 years.
Yes, and the cleaner API is everything. If backwards compat can be maintained (it is) and the codebase can be a lot cleaner (it is) and perform better (it does) then why are people so anti-X replacement?
Open source is supposed to be a meritocracy, yet with all the weston hate around here you'd certainly not get that impression every time a weston thread pops up.
Hardware is a lot cheaper than developer time. This trend is only becoming more apparent.
Just because something is "possible" it doesn't mean it is a good idea. The fact that as per TFA wayland got 20% better power consumption BEFORE they took out a lot of un-necessary data copying should be reason enough for Linux people to sit up and take notice.
Mobile devices are future and a 20% plus reduction in power consumption whilst improving performance is nothing to sneeze at.
If you've been using Linux since 1.0 (I have since 1.2) and have never seen any X11 failings, you're either talking out of your arse or are completely blinded by unrelenting fanboy-ism.
I've seen plenty of X11 failings over the years, ranging from inability to change screen resolution on the fly for about the first decade, poor security, crashes in the video driver taking down the OS, various hacks to get things like multi-monitor or 3d support to work, etc.
Yes, some of those things have been "fixed" via various bodges, in much the same way that the average wannabe Nissan Silvia drifter will "fix" crash damage with a drill and some cable-ties.
High latency, low bandwidth, high security risk stuff like network transparency does not belong in the same process as the rendering engine. It certainly doesn't want to be running as root. Especially when the majority of people simply do not use it, and it can easily be retained via a daemon like every other platform uses.
Why doesn't any device that actually requires decent GPU throughput use it, including the Mac, the PS2/3/4, etc?
Why did those developers see fit to NOT use the freely available BSD-style code out there and spend their time writing their own rendering pipelines?
For fun?
LOL. Pretty much the typical ignorant crap you get whenever anything wayland is posted. Top work summarizing the expected content of this thread :-)