The Linux (Ubuntu) version seems pretty flaky on the Acid3 test. Every time I reload the page it gives me different results/scores - sometimes 98/100, sometimes 100/100, and almost every reload results in a bad rendering. FF 3.6.3 on the other hand gives exactly the same score (94/100) and the same rendering on each reload.
X is certainly big. What I would like to see is an alternate X (maybe Y will do that?), which is slimmer and has a subset of X functionality. Don't we all complain about the unwanted excess baggage M$ imposes on us? For a true desktop PC, why have all those features of being able to display remote processes screens on your display? We shouldn't go for a "one size fits all" policy.
Remember: I'm NOT saying X should be replaced - only that we should have a choice of a slimmer and meaner alternate windowing system. Isn't that what "free" is about?
Slashdot Mirror
I wonder if this device was at all inspired by this story?
The Linux (Ubuntu) version seems pretty flaky on the Acid3 test. Every time I reload the page it gives me different results/scores - sometimes 98/100, sometimes 100/100, and almost every reload results in a bad rendering. FF 3.6.3 on the other hand gives exactly the same score (94/100) and the same rendering on each reload.
X is certainly big. What I would like to see is an alternate X (maybe Y will do that?), which is slimmer and has a subset of X functionality. Don't we all complain about the unwanted excess baggage M$ imposes on us? For a true desktop PC, why have all those features of being able to display remote processes screens on your display? We shouldn't go for a "one size fits all" policy.
Remember: I'm NOT saying X should be replaced - only that we should have a choice of a slimmer and meaner alternate windowing system. Isn't that what "free" is about?