But X WAS re-written in the last 10 years. All the extensions actually circumvent the protocol, and try to take shortcuts. And it just doesn't work. It's bloated and it's painful to work with. Just add a new keyboard mapping to X, and you'll see what I'm talking about.
The X.org and XFree86 codebase is incredibly old. That means a lot of things, including the fact that it's incompatible with the way programmers think, work and expect things to behave this days. It is a steaming pile of s***, and tons of legacy code. Legacy bugs, that is, which are harder to fix because people are relying on them.
Newer code is not necessarily buggier. It can be smarter, better written, more sustainable. I doubt that having 16 extra years of experience makes you do stupider things.
Just one question: when was the last time when you wrote code using XLib? Or XCB for that matter. I would take ANYTIME any kind of API that gives me some power, and doesn't make me stupid in the process.
It's very hard to do stuff with the old ways of X. It's very hard to get over the damned protocol to actually have some fast graphics. The X protocol is bad, and it's bad not because the design is bad (some ideas are very neat, really) but because the evolution of hardware and software made it obsolete.
It's a damn shame that Qt and Gtk actually rely on X to do performance jobs. But not KDE is the problem - if you want to keep your old applications you can very well keep them - you can still install Qt 3 or Qt 4, and work with X, and patch your application.
But the 'old anonymous coward fart' wants to use his xfig, he's more than welcome. He can use it in a virtual machine, where he runs his old distribution, hopefully with better performances because Wayland helps instead of getting in the way.
And BTW: I wonder how many FTP servers implement that feature you're talking about.
Fluxbox really gets in the way of doing things since it doesn't help you. The idea of a DE is to help you, not to put a clock on the screen.
Could you give a practical example? I'm curious, as I actually feel that Fluxbox does not get in my way, and that it helps me get things done better/faster/easier than Gnome or KDE.
By not having the same shortcuts readily available - you don't have the screen icons, you don't have the task bar, and a lot of us got used to having them very near. I don't like the super-crowded menus - for that KDE4's menu is 10 times better. My favorite blend is KDE3.5 + the KDE4 menu, but, as we know, it doesn't exist in reality.
It's like you're telling me you don't like a 5 stars hotel room because the 1 star hotel is more efficient:).
That's actually a nice analogy. I wouldn't mind a 5 star room, if I didn't have to pay much extra in the form of money, CPU/GPU/RAM, or screen real estate. In fact, when it comes to real-life hotel rooms, I feel that the cheaper one has much more bang per buck (if you know what I mean, nudge nudge). A hotel room is a means to spend time at some remote event, such as a seminar or a party, and that's what counts to me, not spending time in the room itself.
I for one go to a 5 stars hotel for the leisure - for a vacation, or for a short holiday. Where I get the bang for buck that I don't afford for a daily basis.;) I guess, that's why we see things differently (*wink* *wink*).
Does somebody have an idea why a hardcore Linux guy would ever like to use a Windows/OSX lookalike?
Because he needs something that works, that's simple, that doesn't get in the way and still looks nice, somewhat friendly and feels easy to use. That was what Windows was all about, right?
I think a plain window manager like Fluxbox makes much more sense. No panels to take up space and attention, just the application windows. Programs themselves can be launched from the command line, which I think is more convenient than managing a graphical menu, and I only have menu items for terminals and browsers.
I don't really think he wants that. I think that the goal is different: Fluxbox really gets in the way of doing things since it doesn't help you. The idea of a DE is to help you, not to put a clock on the screen. It's like you're telling me you don't like a 5 stars hotel room because the 1 star hotel is more efficient:).
Perhaps the best thing that Linux vendors can do is actually show the facts. And, very important, not saying that: "Look, we outperform Windows with this and that", but instead saying: "We offer you this set of performances. Microsoft feels the need to compare to us, but we don't."
Microsoft is now going under with these articles. No longer "the sure thing", no longer the market dominant... But now there's Linux. They acknowledge it. They use it as a comparison, so they are afraid...
Wonderful point, and this reply should be modded up. I have one more point to add - probably rh 6.2 and rh 73 are the distros that really created this large community around RH products - and that is where 1.5/2 years of development on the same idea lead to success. Perhaps if the RH9 would have been followed by a RH9 rev. 2/3/4 it would've been a plus for the RHEL.
But this one is not a.0 release, let's say an.0.5 release instead - It is too little different from RH9. Looks to me that with every release the system gets bulkier
Let's take this example: very upset at the fonts available for konsole (but VERY upset) I removed XFree86-libs. And all the dependencies (typed by hand). And the notorious X applications 'mc' and 'passwd' had to be removed as well... Now... isn't that silly?
Did anyone noticed that the iLoo hoax came the day that Gates announced something like: 'nobody will be forced to use Longhorn, but you'll use it anyway'.
I think the hoax was a distraction from the silly messages of microsoft that day
Slashdot Mirror
But X WAS re-written in the last 10 years. All the extensions actually circumvent the protocol, and try to take shortcuts. And it just doesn't work. It's bloated and it's painful to work with. Just add a new keyboard mapping to X, and you'll see what I'm talking about.
The X.org and XFree86 codebase is incredibly old. That means a lot of things, including the fact that it's incompatible with the way programmers think, work and expect things to behave this days. It is a steaming pile of s***, and tons of legacy code. Legacy bugs, that is, which are harder to fix because people are relying on them.
Newer code is not necessarily buggier. It can be smarter, better written, more sustainable. I doubt that having 16 extra years of experience makes you do stupider things.
Just one question: when was the last time when you wrote code using XLib? Or XCB for that matter. I would take ANYTIME any kind of API that gives me some power, and doesn't make me stupid in the process.
It's very hard to do stuff with the old ways of X. It's very hard to get over the damned protocol to actually have some fast graphics. The X protocol is bad, and it's bad not because the design is bad (some ideas are very neat, really) but because the evolution of hardware and software made it obsolete.
It's a damn shame that Qt and Gtk actually rely on X to do performance jobs. But not KDE is the problem - if you want to keep your old applications you can very well keep them - you can still install Qt 3 or Qt 4, and work with X, and patch your application.
But the 'old anonymous coward fart' wants to use his xfig, he's more than welcome. He can use it in a virtual machine, where he runs his old distribution, hopefully with better performances because Wayland helps instead of getting in the way.
And BTW: I wonder how many FTP servers implement that feature you're talking about.
Fluxbox really gets in the way of doing things since it doesn't help you. The idea of a DE is to help you, not to put a clock on the screen.
Could you give a practical example? I'm curious, as I actually feel that Fluxbox does not get in my way, and that it helps me get things done better/faster/easier than Gnome or KDE.
By not having the same shortcuts readily available - you don't have the screen icons, you don't have the task bar, and a lot of us got used to having them very near. I don't like the super-crowded menus - for that KDE4's menu is 10 times better. My favorite blend is KDE3.5 + the KDE4 menu, but, as we know, it doesn't exist in reality.
It's like you're telling me you don't like a 5 stars hotel room because the 1 star hotel is more efficient :).
That's actually a nice analogy. I wouldn't mind a 5 star room, if I didn't have to pay much extra in the form of money, CPU/GPU/RAM, or screen real estate. In fact, when it comes to real-life hotel rooms, I feel that the cheaper one has much more bang per buck (if you know what I mean, nudge nudge). A hotel room is a means to spend time at some remote event, such as a seminar or a party, and that's what counts to me, not spending time in the room itself.
I for one go to a 5 stars hotel for the leisure - for a vacation, or for a short holiday. Where I get the bang for buck that I don't afford for a daily basis. ;) I guess, that's why we see things differently (*wink* *wink*).
Does somebody have an idea why a hardcore Linux guy would ever like to use a Windows/OSX lookalike?
Because he needs something that works, that's simple, that doesn't get in the way and still looks nice, somewhat friendly and feels easy to use. That was what Windows was all about, right?
I think a plain window manager like Fluxbox makes much more sense. No panels to take up space and attention, just the application windows. Programs themselves can be launched from the command line, which I think is more convenient than managing a graphical menu, and I only have menu items for terminals and browsers.
I don't really think he wants that. I think that the goal is different: Fluxbox really gets in the way of doing things since it doesn't help you. The idea of a DE is to help you, not to put a clock on the screen. It's like you're telling me you don't like a 5 stars hotel room because the 1 star hotel is more efficient :).
Perhaps the best thing that Linux vendors can do is actually show the facts. And, very important, not saying that: "Look, we outperform Windows with this and that", but instead saying: "We offer you this set of performances. Microsoft feels the need to compare to us, but we don't." Microsoft is now going under with these articles. No longer "the sure thing", no longer the market dominant... But now there's Linux. They acknowledge it. They use it as a comparison, so they are afraid...
... SCO's "I own Linux"?
Uuuh, not porven yet?
Wonderful point, and this reply should be modded up. I have one more point to add - probably rh 6.2 and rh 73 are the distros that really created this large community around RH products - and that is where 1.5/2 years of development on the same idea lead to success. Perhaps if the RH9 would have been followed by a RH9 rev. 2/3/4 it would've been a plus for the RHEL.
But this one is not a .0 release, let's say an .0.5 release instead - It is too little different from RH9. Looks to me that with every release the system gets bulkier
Let's take this example: very upset at the fonts available for konsole (but VERY upset) I removed XFree86-libs. And all the dependencies (typed by hand). And the notorious X applications 'mc' and 'passwd' had to be removed as well... Now... isn't that silly?
Did anyone noticed that the iLoo hoax came the day that Gates announced something like: 'nobody will be forced to use Longhorn, but you'll use it anyway'. I think the hoax was a distraction from the silly messages of microsoft that day