I'll use Linux as a desktop machine when someone writes a GUI that doesn't suck. Until that happens I'm going to continue to use ssh for my UNIX needs.
I see someone doesn't understand what X is. It is terrible, but not in a way that has any bearing on the suckiness of the GUI.
Name:
Anonymous2009-07-02 21:46
>>2 The X Window System (commonly X or X11) is a computer software system and network protocol that provides a graphical user interface (GUI) for networked computers
Please leave this thread and do not return.
Name:
Anonymous2009-07-02 21:52
>>3
When someone says, "this GUI sucks", they really mean, "I am confused about the layout/workflow for operating this system". The application programmers describe the program workflow, not the X windowing system.
Name:
Anonymous2009-07-02 21:52
>>3
You're an idiot.
You're supposed to run something like XFCE or KDE over the top of it.
Name:
Anonymous2009-07-02 22:01
>>4 >>5
What I'm saying is that X is highly flawed in design. Is very buggy in implementation. And its layering strategy is very enterprise-y and bad. Windows are just a rectangle that you can move around paint in and click the x button to close, whats so hard about that eh?
Name:
Anonymous2009-07-02 22:21
>>6
X must be awesome if that's your harshest critique: a couple of vague assertions.
Name:
Anonymous2009-07-02 22:53
>>7
sorry, that's all i have. Since most of my experience with X is watching it be buggy as hell and wondering how somebody could mess up a windowing system so badly.
>>6
I used to rabidly follow the development of X11 alternatives. And then I actually used Linux and went "Oh, right, this has hardware acceleration and doesn't suck"
And then the developers of stuff died horribly in a rape accident
Name:
FrozenVoid2009-07-03 1:47
X is like an old mechanical clock which gets upgraded each year with new mechanisms while everyone moved on to electronic versions. The guy who wrote the Framebuffer Graphics GUI was right. X has to go. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DirectFB <--This should replace X
>>7
As much as I hate LinuxHater's delivery for his critiques, I cannot ignore the real message behind it. Try looking for posts about X as I couldn't be bothered locating it myself.
What the fuck kind of a name is X, anyway? And for that matter, C? Fucking nerds can't name shit.
Name:
Anonymous2009-07-05 6:43
>>15
LHB and a message? Beside the usual "Freetards suck". You have got to be kidding me.
The problem with X is purely technical. It's original purpose was not performance but network transparency. It needs re-purposing but the X server is a huge code base.
The funny thing is that nVidia apparently did just that but doesn't/can't publish their work and the X team has to reinvent the wheel with DRI2. Hopefully DRI2 will fix these issues and X will have both network transparency and 3D acceleration. The performance and OGL support in the X intel driver, for example, shapes up nicely in Fedora 11
>>20
LHB's rhetoric and faulty logic makes me rage to no end. That doesn't mean he doesn't raise valid issues about the GNU/Linux associated system and community.
>>22
He also uses the word “FAIL” a bit too much, which makes me believe he's secretly a /b/tard.
Name:
Anonymous2009-07-05 11:37
>>22 That doesn't mean he doesn't raise valid issues about the GNU/Linux associated system and community.
He doesn't raise valid points. He gobbles up anything negative, regardless of relevance. He distorts the idea with hyperbole and vulgarity and then regurgitates as a stream of vomit.
If you think he makes valid points then YHBT.
Name:
Anonymous2009-07-05 11:59
He gobbles up anything negative, regardless of relevance. He distorts the idea with hyperbole and vulgarity and then regurgitates as a stream of vomit.
That's the reason why I don't spend much time there, too much of his rhetoric is twisted beyond reason.
If you think he makes valid points then YHBT.
I always feel trolled reading his shit. This post is an example of a valid point: bug trackers are not the panacea that many believe them to be. In my experience, his ficticious example occurs way too often.
My trump to anything relating to technical relating to free software AND is not related to proprietary technologies is this: find a skilled friend that is willing to help you or hire your own professional to help you.
Name:
Anonymous2009-07-05 13:01
>>25 http://linuxhaters.blogspot.com/2008/08/one-bug-report-to-rule-them-all.html
That is a valid example, but as I said, he is just regurgitating.
That whole shitfest of a post can be summed up in his own words: Bug trackers can be useful tools to coordinate work between competent developers and testers who speak the same language, and who work within a well-design development workflow.
I like how multiple freetards came in and said "the problem is [thing completely unrelated to other stuff freetards have mentioned]" and there was even a "do it your fucking self" post, which is great.
I know there's a fair amount of trolling going on in this thread, but please continue. It's making me laugh.
So is XCB really an improvement over Xlib? I haven't used either, but everyone says Xlib is fucking horrible.
Name:
Anonymous2009-07-10 9:02
>>31 XCB
Who said anything about that? But yes, it does look like an improvement over Xlib, partly because much of it has been proven correct, unlike Xlib.
What do you mean X sucks? All I need is a shell with popular tools such as screen, emacs, et cetera, and graphical output to browse the web with firefox. Nothing more.
XCB is built atop an XML description of the core X protocol and the protocol of most of the extensions in common use today. This allows much of the XCB code to be auto-generated, eases generation of XCB-like and/or XCB-aware bindings to programming languages other than C, and enables the rapid development of other protocol-level tools by leveraging the protocol description.