It isn't coming from fraud. The life expectancy on smartphones (insured or not) is 11.5 months. Between, loss, defect and accidental damage they just don't tend to survive. Houses on the other hand do quite a bit better.
I understand that, I said that. Right now QT offers support for Wayland the way it does for any foreign interface. That's very different than QT/KDE making use of Wayland only or Wayland primary features that either don't work or don't work well under X11. We'll know whether that happens around 2017 or so.
NX does seem to offer some improvement. That there is room for more, for example HP's SSH is much faster than Sun's (the open source one commonly used), which could help a lot as well. NX definitely seems like an interesting approach for getting 2-10x as much effective bandwidth. It also claims to reduce some of the latency problems. It doesn't appear to be faster than VNC yet, but it would be nice if NX created a fast network transparent system.
I mentioned 3 cases:
a) Running an application on a machine sharing ram with the video card. b) Running applications on a machine close enough to the video card that the latency between them is lowish and the bandwidth is plentiful and performance is irrelevant. c) Running applications on a machine where either the latency is high or the bandwidth is limited
If because of NX (c) became acceptable then we are really down to a much deeper choice as to whether building for (a) as the primary use case more sense than building for (b) & (c). The big issue with X11 right now is that it doesn't handle (c) well. NX seems to already make (c) better but not good enough.
I don't think they'll have a choice. But say 2025 yes I expect all the BSDs to be getting their X11 on Wayland and not having it run native on the video card.
I suspect that QT or KDE will move quickly to Wayland.
You can do things when the video system and the application buffer share RAM (i.e. very high bandwidth, 0 or near 0 latency connection) that you can't when they don't. KDE and Gnome are going to want to do those things. It is entirely possible that QT will offer those features and than offer a way to simulate a unified buffer with 2 buffers communicating but in practice such a system could be very flaky.
Ultimately the Unix GUIs will have to choose what scenario to optimize for. With X11 being so dominant they had no choice but to go with X11's choice: LAN style bandwidth and latency. What happens on a LAN is much much slower than what happens inside your computer's RAM.
The why is making video as smooth as text leads you to use video like you use text. Prior to the early 2000s I never cut and paste video or images, today I do very casually. I do that because of tremendous work to make it seamless enough. Those animations on my desktop allow my desktop to expand or contract things based on what I want to do. So scrollbars don't take up room on my windows until I want to scroll. The dock is invisible until I'm pulling stuff from it and then the icons expand so I can easily click them. etc...
But ultimately if you want 1990s capabilities Wayland offers you nothing. X11 works great for simple desktops and simple applications. The problems with X, like any system only become apparent if you are going to push it. The question is not how a system works at 1% utilization but at 30,50,70,90%.
Thanks for the tip. I like the theory and I'd agree that in theory such an approach might work to get (c) to an acceptable speed. But the actual experimental results are:
a) NX is a lot faster than X b) NS is about on par with VNC
And VNC is still rather slow.
So at least so far it doesn't appear to solve the problem of high latency or low bandwidth.
Yes support Wayland. That's why I said 6. I'm assuming by KDE 6 / Gnome 5 they will be ready to drop X11 in exchange for the speed advantages of Wayland.
The X developers are the Wayland developers. Wayland came out of the people working on X being asked to do things that were too hard or impossible with X.
I don't know what an LN is. But the main feature would be things like video integrated throughout the OS, like it is on OSX. That sort of high speed system with dozens of complex animations of videos is impossible under X11.
I would imagine by Gnome 5, KDE 6 they will be Wayland only. The reason will be the enhanced possibilities / features once the video buffer and the application are sharing RAM. That's what's going to drive the move to Wayland only apps.
a) Running an application on a machine sharing ram with the video card.
b) Running applications on a machine close enough to the video card that the latency between them is lowish and the bandwidth is plentiful and performance is irrelevant.
c) Running applications on a machine where either the latency is high or the bandwidth is limited
X11 does terrific for (b) in exchange for damaging (a) and (c). X11 was designed in a world where (b) is common. The entire X11 approach is optimized for (b). If you live in the world of (b) Wayland is going to be a downgrade.
A) Local desktop B) High speed low latency Network. C) Low speed or high latency Network.
X11 is optimized for case (B). Given we can't do much about the speed of light, relative to the size of the earth (C) type problems are permanently unsolvable for X11. Moreover, given that networks are focusing on reducing jitter while increasing bandwidth to implement QoS, we might see latency increases over the next generation or at least not large decreases.
I think you are thinking of their manufacturing license. Their hardware development license is no bid deal. http://mfi.apple.com/faqs.html They require individuals to manufacturer via. a big company but no such requirement for development.
As for lawyers executing an NDA that can required by states. For example in NJ there are fairly strong protections regarding agreements signed by an individual without council. I agree with you that means they want an enforceable NDA.
Good point. So if this gimmick works well it would have been something Apple would have done. And if it doesn't work well, Apple improves it, rebrands it and claims it. Yeah I agree with you.
Now lets see what happens over the next few years with wireless charging.
First off the growth is pretty fast. Number of people is up 528% over the last dozen years. I also think you are forgetting about smartphone which are increasing the usage and more importantly increasing the number of devices per family. Also increasing IP demand.
And I agree that there will be a period fo strong demand for v4 addresses. I don't think it will be too bad though. Carriers can move consumers / small business over and that will free up tons of v4 space.
This was about connectors. When it comes to hardware Apple can be either conservative or drive the industry. For example they only recently moved to USB 3 on their laptops, quite a bit behind windows. While on the other hand they are super early with the whole thunderbolt conversion. That was true during the Jobs era as well.
I don't know why they haven't done much with NFC it may not work well enough yet or not offer enough advantages over BlueTooth. As far as wireless charging / inductive charging that is the sort of technology Apple would generally be excited about. On the other hand in practice it doesn't seem to do very much that a simple cable can't. It seems like to gimmick to me, though I might be missing something.
Apple can write low level interfaces which are smart of both sides. Do you really think they are going to release the documentation so Stalks can do it?
Probably. Apple does tend to document their low level interfaces rather well. And they do encourage the 3rd party hardware market. I can't see any reason they wouldn't.
Also, realize that that is the only reason for all Apple proprietary connectors. So you can't easily switch to a competitors device.
Baloney. On both the iPhone 4S and the iPad2/3 the batteries tolerances are below commercial standards. A cheap dumb cable and you would damage or destroy your battery. Apple is getting extra battery life for the 4S and the iPand2/3. The new cable is programmable which will allow for much cooler types of connections.
Yes they are. The pins are programmable on both ends. You can write low level interfaces which are smart on both sides. The old adapter couldn't do that.
Slashdot Mirror
It isn't coming from fraud. The life expectancy on smartphones (insured or not) is 11.5 months. Between, loss, defect and accidental damage they just don't tend to survive. Houses on the other hand do quite a bit better.
I understand that, I said that. Right now QT offers support for Wayland the way it does for any foreign interface. That's very different than QT/KDE making use of Wayland only or Wayland primary features that either don't work or don't work well under X11. We'll know whether that happens around 2017 or so.
I'm just reading the test results: http://vis.lbl.gov/Events/SC08/RemoteX/index.html
NX does seem to offer some improvement. That there is room for more, for example HP's SSH is much faster than Sun's (the open source one commonly used), which could help a lot as well. NX definitely seems like an interesting approach for getting 2-10x as much effective bandwidth. It also claims to reduce some of the latency problems. It doesn't appear to be faster than VNC yet, but it would be nice if NX created a fast network transparent system.
I mentioned 3 cases:
a) Running an application on a machine sharing ram with the video card.
b) Running applications on a machine close enough to the video card that the latency between them is lowish and the bandwidth is plentiful and performance is irrelevant.
c) Running applications on a machine where either the latency is high or the bandwidth is limited
If because of NX (c) became acceptable then we are really down to a much deeper choice as to whether building for (a) as the primary use case more sense than building for (b) & (c). The big issue with X11 right now is that it doesn't handle (c) well. NX seems to already make (c) better but not good enough.
I don't think they'll have a choice. But say 2025 yes I expect all the BSDs to be getting their X11 on Wayland and not having it run native on the video card.
I suspect that QT or KDE will move quickly to Wayland.
You can do things when the video system and the application buffer share RAM (i.e. very high bandwidth, 0 or near 0 latency connection) that you can't when they don't. KDE and Gnome are going to want to do those things. It is entirely possible that QT will offer those features and than offer a way to simulate a unified buffer with 2 buffers communicating but in practice such a system could be very flaky.
Ultimately the Unix GUIs will have to choose what scenario to optimize for. With X11 being so dominant they had no choice but to go with X11's choice: LAN style bandwidth and latency. What happens on a LAN is much much slower than what happens inside your computer's RAM.
The why is making video as smooth as text leads you to use video like you use text. Prior to the early 2000s I never cut and paste video or images, today I do very casually. I do that because of tremendous work to make it seamless enough. Those animations on my desktop allow my desktop to expand or contract things based on what I want to do. So scrollbars don't take up room on my windows until I want to scroll. The dock is invisible until I'm pulling stuff from it and then the icons expand so I can easily click them. etc...
But ultimately if you want 1990s capabilities Wayland offers you nothing. X11 works great for simple desktops and simple applications. The problems with X, like any system only become apparent if you are going to push it. The question is not how a system works at 1% utilization but at 30,50,70,90%.
Thanks for the tip. I like the theory and I'd agree that in theory such an approach might work to get (c) to an acceptable speed. But the actual experimental results are:
a) NX is a lot faster than X
b) NS is about on par with VNC
And VNC is still rather slow.
So at least so far it doesn't appear to solve the problem of high latency or low bandwidth.
Yes support Wayland. That's why I said 6. I'm assuming by KDE 6 / Gnome 5 they will be ready to drop X11 in exchange for the speed advantages of Wayland.
The X developers are the Wayland developers. Wayland came out of the people working on X being asked to do things that were too hard or impossible with X.
I don't know what an LN is. But the main feature would be things like video integrated throughout the OS, like it is on OSX. That sort of high speed system with dozens of complex animations of videos is impossible under X11.
I would imagine by Gnome 5, KDE 6 they will be Wayland only. The reason will be the enhanced possibilities / features once the video buffer and the application are sharing RAM. That's what's going to drive the move to Wayland only apps.
Ultimately there are 3 situations:
a) Running an application on a machine sharing ram with the video card.
b) Running applications on a machine close enough to the video card that the latency between them is lowish and the bandwidth is plentiful and performance is irrelevant.
c) Running applications on a machine where either the latency is high or the bandwidth is limited
X11 does terrific for (b) in exchange for damaging (a) and (c). X11 was designed in a world where (b) is common. The entire X11 approach is optimized for (b). If you live in the world of (b) Wayland is going to be a downgrade.
Really? How is X11 going to solve the problem with high latency connections? What upgrade can work with X11's model?
And Wayland will not be able to display efficiently to any other machine. It will require some shitty pixel-scraping technology like VNC.
Actually Wayland is going to implement something like RDB but that will be at the GUI level (i.e.KDE or Gnome).
There are 3 situations.
A) Local desktop
B) High speed low latency Network.
C) Low speed or high latency Network.
X11 is optimized for case (B). Given we can't do much about the speed of light, relative to the size of the earth (C) type problems are permanently unsolvable for X11. Moreover, given that networks are focusing on reducing jitter while increasing bandwidth to implement QoS, we might see latency increases over the next generation or at least not large decreases.
X11 is not a solution to networked desktops.
Most likely BSD will get a port of Wayland long before Gnome and KDE migrate to Wayland only.
If you mean Linux is now setting standards for the Unix GUIs it has been for over a decade.
Yes and I'm not sure how that disagrees with what I said. They adopted Thunderbolt early, as early as Intel made it available and USB 3 late.
I think you are thinking of their manufacturing license. Their hardware development license is no bid deal. http://mfi.apple.com/faqs.html They require individuals to manufacturer via. a big company but no such requirement for development.
As for lawyers executing an NDA that can required by states. For example in NJ there are fairly strong protections regarding agreements signed by an individual without council. I agree with you that means they want an enforceable NDA.
Good point. So if this gimmick works well it would have been something Apple would have done. And if it doesn't work well, Apple improves it, rebrands it and claims it. Yeah I agree with you.
Now lets see what happens over the next few years with wireless charging.
First off the growth is pretty fast. Number of people is up 528% over the last dozen years. I also think you are forgetting about smartphone which are increasing the usage and more importantly increasing the number of devices per family. Also increasing IP demand.
And I agree that there will be a period fo strong demand for v4 addresses. I don't think it will be too bad though. Carriers can move consumers / small business over and that will free up tons of v4 space.
This was about connectors. When it comes to hardware Apple can be either conservative or drive the industry. For example they only recently moved to USB 3 on their laptops, quite a bit behind windows. While on the other hand they are super early with the whole thunderbolt conversion. That was true during the Jobs era as well.
I don't know why they haven't done much with NFC it may not work well enough yet or not offer enough advantages over BlueTooth. As far as wireless charging / inductive charging that is the sort of technology Apple would generally be excited about. On the other hand in practice it doesn't seem to do very much that a simple cable can't. It seems like to gimmick to me, though I might be missing something.
Apple can write low level interfaces which are smart of both sides. Do you really think they are going to release the documentation so Stalks can do it?
Probably. Apple does tend to document their low level interfaces rather well. And they do encourage the 3rd party hardware market. I can't see any reason they wouldn't.
Apple's Lightning to USB connector only provides USB 2.0 speeds
That doesn't prove anything. The issue is what is possible with lightning designed devices from the ground up.
Also, realize that that is the only reason for all Apple proprietary connectors. So you can't easily switch to a competitors device.
Baloney. On both the iPhone 4S and the iPad2/3 the batteries tolerances are below commercial standards. A cheap dumb cable and you would damage or destroy your battery. Apple is getting extra battery life for the 4S and the iPand2/3. The new cable is programmable which will allow for much cooler types of connections.
Yes they are. The pins are programmable on both ends. You can write low level interfaces which are smart on both sides. The old adapter couldn't do that.