Sorry... but X is just fine if you know what you are doing. The real problems that most users PERCEIVE as X problems are actually limitations of the applications and desktop environments running on top of X.
I'm not sure what you mean by "resolution issues", but X seems to work just fine for me that way. I can easily pick from any resolution I want and switch between them with a simple key combination. And with the newere resizing features in X, you can easily change rez on the fly (as opposed to virtual rez).
Again, "font problems" could mean any number of things, but they work fine for me. With beautiful and very flexible antialiasing. Looks just as good as Windows or Mac.
You are correct with regard to there not being realtime shadows or alpha blending, but this is not likely to prevent a GUI environment from working. It's just eye candy.
One area that you missed out on was that X could really use a decent set of configuration and adjustment tools. There are a lot of features that X provides to environments and apps that people are unaware of:
-Low bandwidth compression for slow link connections -Exquisite antialiasing -Subpixel antialiasing for LCD displays -Nesting X server -Browseable DM sessions -Ability to run apps on several different machines all on one desktop (rather than separate windows like Microsoft RDP or Citrix)
And as far as other people's complaints about speed go... it's YOUR fault that X is "slow". You are obviously picking poor quality clients, or have slow hardware or have chosen an unaccelerated X server. X (4.X and up) is very responsive if you have an accelerate driver for your card. If you have some bizarre graphics adapter, chances are that you are using the Framebuffer or VGA driver. Those are unaccelerated and depend heavily on your actual system CPU. Even though X uses TCP, it's very fast within one system. I have experienced no latency in the responsiveness of X since X 4.x came out.
The real problems are that setting X up correctly is difficult. It's gotten better in 4.x, but it's still not up to a point where Joe Average can do it. And as far as X's extended functionality, I don't think that those features can easily be used by anyone but the most advanced user. It took me a few years to understand the client/server relationship of X and why it seems like it's reversed. It also took me a while to find out about the Low Bandwidth Extensions. But now tht I know those things, I can do a lot of things with X that NO ONE can do on Windows or Mac. This proves that X is better in terms of functionality. It just needs a better way to allow users to access that functionality.
Additionally, I have no problem with the idea that people are working on alternatives to X (like Berlin), but until they have something that actually is useable for day to day work, it's irrelevant to most users. Think about this though... if Berlin and DirectFB wind up producing systems that work just as well as X, Linux will have multiple approaches to display. That is a win-win situation overall. So don't knock X until you really understand it. Chances are that once you do, you won't knock X at all.
A lot of the ease of use problems that Linux has, realy has very little to do with the "OS" as it is percieved by the average end-user or even some moderate geeks. This still doesn't make the problem any less relevant. What I think Linux distribs need over all is an environment that lays over top of any distrib and makes it really easy to use. I'm not going to get into the Gnome vs. KDE thing because that;s fruitless. Here is what I am suggesting though:
A "Usability" project that focuses on taking advantage of all the faetures that Linux and the accompanying standard software that most distribs have (XFree86, openssh, various GNU packages, etc....) that Windows doesn't. This project's sole focus should be in coming up with application concepts that tie together the underlying functionality of those apps with a clean, simple user interface. For example:
-X has a lot of features that most people are not aware of because of the complexity of the software. Take theses features for my example: Network Transparency and Low Bandwidth Extensions (lbxproxy) -openssh only has a command line interface, but it can do some remarkable things that are just begging for a GUI. For this example: encrypted tunneling, remote execution of commands/applications
Now... we take the features of these apps I mentioned above and we use them in conjunction with one simple GUI front end. The purpose of this utility would be to run remote X apps over the internet or even entire sessions:
The GUI has some simple fields in it's main form: IP Address of your machine at home: Username: Password: "Authkeys" (if you want to use them instead of passwords) checkbox Radio button for Full Desktop (Session) or Program (Application) "Compress for slow link" checkbox "Additional protocol tunnels" button (for more advanced dialog) "Connect" Button "Reset" form button (or maybe reset field buttons near each field)
When you run this app and fill it in, it does the following:
1. Locally sets up xhost + 2. Connects to remote host via ssh, logs in and establishes a tunnel for X and any specified protocols in the form. 3. Remotely executes lbxproxy to compress X traffic for slow links. 4. Remotely executes specified application or starts a full session (GNOME, KDE, TWM, whatever your preference) 5. Hides itself, until your connection ends.
This is something that you can't really do in Windows. Sure, they have IPSec VPN and RDP, but it isn't quite the same thing. This system could be made to have so much more flexibility.
There are lots of instances or features like this in Linux that are never used because even the intermediate users are not fully aware or feel it's still too much of a pain to set up. But with a nice "setup" application, this could easily be made into an advantage for Linux. The only problem is getting from concept to appilication. Anyone can come up with a concept, but only a very few of us can actually make it happen.
This reminds me of a great MST3K line from when they ran the movie "The Undead" in the late 90s. A bunch of peasants are meeting with Statn in the grave yard to sell their souls. One particular whizzened old peasant says in a pathetic tone, "Would, that I could have had the better things in life." To which Crow replies (as satan): "OK. Give the guy a spiral cut ham. NEXT!"
It looks like nothing more than a very small form factor PC with a "special" version of Windows on it. Nothing that a decent geek with a barebones small form factor PC and a customized Linux couldn't do... See also:
This is a shame. Our cell phone services could be so much better if the providers weren't solely motivated by maximum profit. What good is a product if no one wants to buy it because it sucks? The problem is that people ARE buying them, even if the service sucks because they don't know any better. Then they get trapped in these long-term contracts with crappy service. By the time they figure it out, it's too late and the companies already have their money. it's a damn shame... just a damn shame.
My experiences have been fairly positive. I've been able to run the following with Wine from CVS (most recently with the October build). I run a completely Windows-free Wine:
-The Blade Runner (Only works well in "desktop")
-Riven (works pretty well, the occasional stutter and you can't access the save menu. Doh! Might work better in "desktop" mode, haven't tried it though.)
-Myst (Works fine, even with sound now! Occasional color palette problems.)
-Unreal Tournament (I used this before I got it working natively. Worked just fine though. Software rendering only)
-Lighthouse (One of my favorite myst-like games. Worked perfectly. Absolutely no problems. Most impressive!)
-Windows Media Player 6 (Great for me until I found MPlayer. Still allows me to view WM* content off the net though. Very nice. Even works full screen!)
-The Playa (Again, used it before I found MPlayer. Needed it to view DiVX files. Worked pretty well. Had some problems with certain files.
-WinAmp (Perfect operation. I was even able to use the WinAmp plugins! I tried the plugin for XMMS that uses Wine to run the WinAmp plugins but it didn't work very well. Better to use native WinAmp for plugins.)
-Any Macormedia projector/Director file. (I've put in enhanced content music CDs and have been able to watch the music videos included with no problems. The Kylie Minogue - "Can't Get You Out of My Head" and Plaid - "P-Brane" discs worked just fine for me.)
-Quicktime 4 (Worked fairly poorly, but I could watch some net streams with it.)
-Installers of just about any type work flawlessly. Unfortunately this can mislead you into thinking an app will work.
-Sierra Creepnight Pinball (My wife loves this game. It works well without sound. This is a shame since the sound is what she loves. But it works.)
-VNC (Both the viewer AND the server work. it was kind of weird, but the Windows vncserver actually remotely displayed the Linux desktop! Very strange and unexpected.)
-PuTTY (Secure shell worked, but telnet didn't. This is a shame since it would be nice to have a gui based secure shell/telnet app in Linux that saved connection parameters in a menu system like PuTTY does.)
-Acid DJ 2.0 (I was very surprised at this, but it actually ran well. The only problem was some GUI quirkiness which was a little annoying. It also died on me at one point.)
-Trillian (A multiprotocol instant messenger app. I used it for MSN connectivity. It ran pretty well, but you couldn't move the main window without a lockup. If you run it in a "desktop" then you can move the main window. I used it for MSN chat with friends. aMSN has resolved that for me now.)
-Cool Edit Pro (Loaded up and actually ran my multitrack audio projects! Didn't try much else since I still have to rely on a lot of other Windows software for my pro-audio work.)
The things that didn't work for me:
-Internet Explorer 4, 5 and 6
-MSN Messenger 4 (Needs IE. Eventually I found aMSN which is native Tcl\Tk. It's about 80% like the real thing and allows me to communicate with my buds, so this is less of an issue now.)
-MS Office 97 (It installed, and I could run some of the Apps: Word, Excel but they would crash as soon as I tried to do anyting useful. Outlook would appear quickly and disappear. Of course, Evolution has solved that for me as well as OpenOffice.org)
-PowerDVD (The installer actually failed because it couldn't install a specific file for some reason. Even though it was there, the installer complained that it wasn't Getting ANY DVD player to work would be a coup since it would work around the DeCSS problems. I personally use MPlayer and vlc for DVD playback, but I'd love a guilt free DVD player for Linux.)
-Buried in Time 3 (Old Win3.1/Win95 game from Presto Software. Installer worked, but the game crapped out.)
-Myst III: Exile (Some kind of copy protection problem. I would imagine it might work in Transgaming's version of Wine.)
-SuperMap USA (A cheap $5 US atlas on CD-ROM. It installed, but wouldn't run. Again... a shame since it would have been great to have on raod trips. I've actually considered trying to write an app that can use the data off the CD for native Linux use.)
-WinZip (This actually kind of ran, but it had a lot of problems because of it's desktop integration in Windows. The button graphics were missing too, so it was hard to use.)
-Adobe Acrobat Reader 5 (Just wouldn't install or work)
-Adobe Book Reader (Same as above)
-Baldur's Gate (No worky)
-Starcraft (No Worky)
-Diablo and Diablo 2 (Installed, but menu was inaccessible. Didn't seem to work at all, even if I tried to guess where the menu buttons were.)
-WRQ Reflection 2 (This is the prefered telnet client at work for connecting to our VMS systems. It died during the install.)
I've tried others for the past half a year or so, but I can't remember everything. As you can see it's been a mixed experience with more successes than failures. I think Wine has progressed a LOT in the past year. When I first tried it in 1997, it was pretty paltry... I could only run Notepad and Calculator. But since it runs quite a few games and apps that I still use from time to time, it's allowed me to leave Windows off of every system at home except my audio workstation. I look forward to what Wine will have in another year or so... Please contribute to Codeweavers or Transgaming since they are bringing further flexibility and versatility to Linux. That can only be a good thing...
There's nothing wrong with X. Most of the problems that people have with X don't have anything to do with the stability of X, they have to do with the API/toolkit, environment (KDE or GNOME), and/or the window manager. Those are the entities that "crash" the GUI. The problem is that a lot of newbies and even moderate users are not familiar enough with the system to understand this. They assume that because X disappeared off their screen, that X is to blame. I used to think this way as well, but after having gotten into Linux really in depth and compiled X a few times, I see now that the real culprit are the X clients, not the X server itself. The only thing the X server does that would lead someone to this conclusion is that it usually restarts: (Screen goes black, and X restarts, either resulting in just the X cursor on the checked background, or a DM pops up 'XDM, KDM, GDM, etc...' And, last not not least, if you are starting X with 'startx' (unmanaged), then yes... the GUI just disappears and takes you back to a *sh shell.)
The latest realease of X actually has a lot of really great features that a lot of users are unaware of. Features that put it on par, if not slightly beyond the Windows GUI. (Mac OSX still has X beat:( ) Of course, the best feature hands down is the network transparency. Running X apps remotely and having them display on a local system is just great and much more flexible than Windows XP RDP. Especially since you can have applications running on several different systems all displaying on the same desktop (not in separate windows like RDP). Combine this with the Low Bandwidth Extensions (lbx) and you can do this over slow links with speeds that are pretty close to RDP. Your local X display becomes the main head for multiple servers this way! How cool is that?
Of course, there is plenty of antialiasing and subpixel shading (for laptops) that again is on par with Windows XP's GUI.
Overall, X is actually extremely stable, but ti does need a few improvements. I think the biggest flaw in X that makes people think it's unstable is that the session needs to restart when an app or client session dies. If X could be kept active and just allow the clients or apps to reconnect without ever going away, I think you would see a lot of people change their tune about X. It would also be nice if X allowed for reconnection of stateful sessions (Like XP allows for multiple users to be logged in with apps running). I'm not sure, but I think Xnest might allow for this, although I haven't tried it.
The biggest problem with X is that a lot of the extra functionality is not easy to use. lbxproxy (for low bandwidth connections) could use a nice GUI based tool combines with ssh to make setup really simple. For example:
1. You run the LBX Proxy Connector GUI on your local system. You enter the IP address of the remote system, select whether you want to run a specific app or a complete session (GNOME, KDE, etc...) and then click the connect button.
2. In the background the Proxy connector establishes an ssh connection to the remote system and executes the appropriate ssh commands to run the remote app or environment with lbx, and establish an ssh tunnel.
3. Locally, you see the app appear on your current desktop, or a new X display starts and runs the remote environment.
That would just be damn cool. You would get compression, encryption and either just the remote apps you need, or an entire remote session (KDE or GNOME).
So... please don't say that we need to get rid of X. Having alternatives to it that are useful in certain situations but X is a cutting edge and very stable/mature system that only needs a few utilities added to make it easier to exploit all of it's functionality.
Slashdot Mirror
Sorry... but X is just fine if you know what you are doing. The real problems that most users PERCEIVE as X problems are actually limitations of the applications and desktop environments running on top of X.
I'm not sure what you mean by "resolution issues", but X seems to work just fine for me that way. I can easily pick from any resolution I want and switch between them with a simple key combination. And with the newere resizing features in X, you can easily change rez on the fly (as opposed to virtual rez).
Again, "font problems" could mean any number of things, but they work fine for me. With beautiful and very flexible antialiasing. Looks just as good as Windows or Mac.
You are correct with regard to there not being realtime shadows or alpha blending, but this is not likely to prevent a GUI environment from working. It's just eye candy.
One area that you missed out on was that X could really use a decent set of configuration and adjustment tools. There are a lot of features that X provides to environments and apps that people are unaware of:
-Low bandwidth compression for slow link connections
-Exquisite antialiasing
-Subpixel antialiasing for LCD displays
-Nesting X server
-Browseable DM sessions
-Ability to run apps on several different machines all on one desktop (rather than separate windows like Microsoft RDP or Citrix)
And as far as other people's complaints about speed go... it's YOUR fault that X is "slow". You are obviously picking poor quality clients, or have slow hardware or have chosen an unaccelerated X server. X (4.X and up) is very responsive if you have an accelerate driver for your card. If you have some bizarre graphics adapter, chances are that you are using the Framebuffer or VGA driver. Those are unaccelerated and depend heavily on your actual system CPU. Even though X uses TCP, it's very fast within one system. I have experienced no latency in the responsiveness of X since X 4.x came out.
The real problems are that setting X up correctly is difficult. It's gotten better in 4.x, but it's still not up to a point where Joe Average can do it. And as far as X's extended functionality, I don't think that those features can easily be used by anyone but the most advanced user. It took me a few years to understand the client/server relationship of X and why it seems like it's reversed. It also took me a while to find out about the Low Bandwidth Extensions. But now tht I know those things, I can do a lot of things with X that NO ONE can do on Windows or Mac. This proves that X is better in terms of functionality. It just needs a better way to allow users to access that functionality.
Additionally, I have no problem with the idea that people are working on alternatives to X (like Berlin), but until they have something that actually is useable for day to day work, it's irrelevant to most users. Think about this though... if Berlin and DirectFB wind up producing systems that work just as well as X, Linux will have multiple approaches to display. That is a win-win situation overall. So don't knock X until you really understand it. Chances are that once you do, you won't knock X at all.
A lot of the ease of use problems that Linux has, realy has very little to do with the "OS" as it is percieved by the average end-user or even some moderate geeks. This still doesn't make the problem any less relevant. What I think Linux distribs need over all is an environment that lays over top of any distrib and makes it really easy to use. I'm not going to get into the Gnome vs. KDE thing because that;s fruitless. Here is what I am suggesting though:
A "Usability" project that focuses on taking advantage of all the faetures that Linux and the accompanying standard software that most distribs have (XFree86, openssh, various GNU packages, etc....) that Windows doesn't. This project's sole focus should be in coming up with application concepts that tie together the underlying functionality of those apps with a clean, simple user interface. For example:
-X has a lot of features that most people are not aware of because of the complexity of the software. Take theses features for my example: Network Transparency and Low Bandwidth Extensions (lbxproxy)
-openssh only has a command line interface, but it can do some remarkable things that are just begging for a GUI. For this example: encrypted tunneling, remote execution of commands/applications
Now... we take the features of these apps I mentioned above and we use them in conjunction with one simple GUI front end. The purpose of this utility would be to run remote X apps over the internet or even entire sessions:
The GUI has some simple fields in it's main form:
IP Address of your machine at home:
Username:
Password:
"Authkeys" (if you want to use them instead of passwords) checkbox
Radio button for Full Desktop (Session) or Program (Application)
"Compress for slow link" checkbox
"Additional protocol tunnels" button (for more advanced dialog)
"Connect" Button
"Reset" form button (or maybe reset field buttons near each field)
When you run this app and fill it in, it does the following:
1. Locally sets up xhost +
2. Connects to remote host via ssh, logs in and establishes a tunnel for X and any specified protocols in the form.
3. Remotely executes lbxproxy to compress X traffic for slow links.
4. Remotely executes specified application or starts a full session (GNOME, KDE, TWM, whatever your preference)
5. Hides itself, until your connection ends.
This is something that you can't really do in Windows. Sure, they have IPSec VPN and RDP, but it isn't quite the same thing. This system could be made to have so much more flexibility.
There are lots of instances or features like this in Linux that are never used because even the intermediate users are not fully aware or feel it's still too much of a pain to set up. But with a nice "setup" application, this could easily be made into an advantage for Linux. The only problem is getting from concept to appilication. Anyone can come up with a concept, but only a very few of us can actually make it happen.
This reminds me of a great MST3K line from when they ran the movie "The Undead" in the late 90s. A bunch of peasants are meeting with Statn in the grave yard to sell their souls. One particular whizzened old peasant says in a pathetic tone, "Would, that I could have had the better things in life." To which Crow replies (as satan): "OK. Give the guy a spiral cut ham. NEXT!"
It looks like nothing more than a very small form factor PC with a "special" version of Windows on it. Nothing that a decent geek with a barebones small form factor PC and a customized Linux couldn't do... See also:
Freevo-http://freevo.sourceforge.net/
MythTV-http://www.mythtv.org/
Discuss amongst yourselves.
I am a troll, yessir yessir I am a troll. Three bags full and all the jazz.
Bill,
Are you out of your Vulcan mind!!!??
Trolling4Dollars
This is a shame. Our cell phone services could be so much better if the providers weren't solely motivated by maximum profit. What good is a product if no one wants to buy it because it sucks? The problem is that people ARE buying them, even if the service sucks because they don't know any better. Then they get trapped in these long-term contracts with crappy service. By the time they figure it out, it's too late and the companies already have their money. it's a damn shame... just a damn shame.
My experiences have been fairly positive. I've been able to run the following with Wine from CVS (most recently with the October build). I run a completely Windows-free Wine: -The Blade Runner (Only works well in "desktop") -Riven (works pretty well, the occasional stutter and you can't access the save menu. Doh! Might work better in "desktop" mode, haven't tried it though.) -Myst (Works fine, even with sound now! Occasional color palette problems.) -Unreal Tournament (I used this before I got it working natively. Worked just fine though. Software rendering only) -Lighthouse (One of my favorite myst-like games. Worked perfectly. Absolutely no problems. Most impressive!) -Windows Media Player 6 (Great for me until I found MPlayer. Still allows me to view WM* content off the net though. Very nice. Even works full screen!) -The Playa (Again, used it before I found MPlayer. Needed it to view DiVX files. Worked pretty well. Had some problems with certain files. -WinAmp (Perfect operation. I was even able to use the WinAmp plugins! I tried the plugin for XMMS that uses Wine to run the WinAmp plugins but it didn't work very well. Better to use native WinAmp for plugins.) -Any Macormedia projector/Director file. (I've put in enhanced content music CDs and have been able to watch the music videos included with no problems. The Kylie Minogue - "Can't Get You Out of My Head" and Plaid - "P-Brane" discs worked just fine for me.) -Quicktime 4 (Worked fairly poorly, but I could watch some net streams with it.) -Installers of just about any type work flawlessly. Unfortunately this can mislead you into thinking an app will work. -Sierra Creepnight Pinball (My wife loves this game. It works well without sound. This is a shame since the sound is what she loves. But it works.) -VNC (Both the viewer AND the server work. it was kind of weird, but the Windows vncserver actually remotely displayed the Linux desktop! Very strange and unexpected.) -PuTTY (Secure shell worked, but telnet didn't. This is a shame since it would be nice to have a gui based secure shell/telnet app in Linux that saved connection parameters in a menu system like PuTTY does.) -Acid DJ 2.0 (I was very surprised at this, but it actually ran well. The only problem was some GUI quirkiness which was a little annoying. It also died on me at one point.) -Trillian (A multiprotocol instant messenger app. I used it for MSN connectivity. It ran pretty well, but you couldn't move the main window without a lockup. If you run it in a "desktop" then you can move the main window. I used it for MSN chat with friends. aMSN has resolved that for me now.) -Cool Edit Pro (Loaded up and actually ran my multitrack audio projects! Didn't try much else since I still have to rely on a lot of other Windows software for my pro-audio work.) The things that didn't work for me: -Internet Explorer 4, 5 and 6 -MSN Messenger 4 (Needs IE. Eventually I found aMSN which is native Tcl\Tk. It's about 80% like the real thing and allows me to communicate with my buds, so this is less of an issue now.) -MS Office 97 (It installed, and I could run some of the Apps: Word, Excel but they would crash as soon as I tried to do anyting useful. Outlook would appear quickly and disappear. Of course, Evolution has solved that for me as well as OpenOffice.org) -PowerDVD (The installer actually failed because it couldn't install a specific file for some reason. Even though it was there, the installer complained that it wasn't Getting ANY DVD player to work would be a coup since it would work around the DeCSS problems. I personally use MPlayer and vlc for DVD playback, but I'd love a guilt free DVD player for Linux.) -Buried in Time 3 (Old Win3.1/Win95 game from Presto Software. Installer worked, but the game crapped out.) -Myst III: Exile (Some kind of copy protection problem. I would imagine it might work in Transgaming's version of Wine.) -SuperMap USA (A cheap $5 US atlas on CD-ROM. It installed, but wouldn't run. Again... a shame since it would have been great to have on raod trips. I've actually considered trying to write an app that can use the data off the CD for native Linux use.) -WinZip (This actually kind of ran, but it had a lot of problems because of it's desktop integration in Windows. The button graphics were missing too, so it was hard to use.) -Adobe Acrobat Reader 5 (Just wouldn't install or work) -Adobe Book Reader (Same as above) -Baldur's Gate (No worky) -Starcraft (No Worky) -Diablo and Diablo 2 (Installed, but menu was inaccessible. Didn't seem to work at all, even if I tried to guess where the menu buttons were.) -WRQ Reflection 2 (This is the prefered telnet client at work for connecting to our VMS systems. It died during the install.) I've tried others for the past half a year or so, but I can't remember everything. As you can see it's been a mixed experience with more successes than failures. I think Wine has progressed a LOT in the past year. When I first tried it in 1997, it was pretty paltry... I could only run Notepad and Calculator. But since it runs quite a few games and apps that I still use from time to time, it's allowed me to leave Windows off of every system at home except my audio workstation. I look forward to what Wine will have in another year or so... Please contribute to Codeweavers or Transgaming since they are bringing further flexibility and versatility to Linux. That can only be a good thing...
There's nothing wrong with X. Most of the problems that people have with X don't have anything to do with the stability of X, they have to do with the API/toolkit, environment (KDE or GNOME), and/or the window manager. Those are the entities that "crash" the GUI. The problem is that a lot of newbies and even moderate users are not familiar enough with the system to understand this. They assume that because X disappeared off their screen, that X is to blame. I used to think this way as well, but after having gotten into Linux really in depth and compiled X a few times, I see now that the real culprit are the X clients, not the X server itself. The only thing the X server does that would lead someone to this conclusion is that it usually restarts: (Screen goes black, and X restarts, either resulting in just the X cursor on the checked background, or a DM pops up 'XDM, KDM, GDM, etc...' And, last not not least, if you are starting X with 'startx' (unmanaged), then yes... the GUI just disappears and takes you back to a *sh shell.) The latest realease of X actually has a lot of really great features that a lot of users are unaware of. Features that put it on par, if not slightly beyond the Windows GUI. (Mac OSX still has X beat :( ) Of course, the best feature hands down is the network transparency. Running X apps remotely and having them display on a local system is just great and much more flexible than Windows XP RDP. Especially since you can have applications running on several different systems all displaying on the same desktop (not in separate windows like RDP). Combine this with the Low Bandwidth Extensions (lbx) and you can do this over slow links with speeds that are pretty close to RDP. Your local X display becomes the main head for multiple servers this way! How cool is that?
Of course, there is plenty of antialiasing and subpixel shading (for laptops) that again is on par with Windows XP's GUI.
Overall, X is actually extremely stable, but ti does need a few improvements. I think the biggest flaw in X that makes people think it's unstable is that the session needs to restart when an app or client session dies. If X could be kept active and just allow the clients or apps to reconnect without ever going away, I think you would see a lot of people change their tune about X. It would also be nice if X allowed for reconnection of stateful sessions (Like XP allows for multiple users to be logged in with apps running). I'm not sure, but I think Xnest might allow for this, although I haven't tried it.
The biggest problem with X is that a lot of the extra functionality is not easy to use. lbxproxy (for low bandwidth connections) could use a nice GUI based tool combines with ssh to make setup really simple. For example:
1. You run the LBX Proxy Connector GUI on your local system. You enter the IP address of the remote system, select whether you want to run a specific app or a complete session (GNOME, KDE, etc...) and then click the connect button.
2. In the background the Proxy connector establishes an ssh connection to the remote system and executes the appropriate ssh commands to run the remote app or environment with lbx, and establish an ssh tunnel.
3. Locally, you see the app appear on your current desktop, or a new X display starts and runs the remote environment.
That would just be damn cool. You would get compression, encryption and either just the remote apps you need, or an entire remote session (KDE or GNOME).
So... please don't say that we need to get rid of X. Having alternatives to it that are useful in certain situations but X is a cutting edge and very stable/mature system that only needs a few utilities added to make it easier to exploit all of it's functionality.