e in framebuffer?

2009-04-29 Thread c_c
: http://n2.nabble.com/e-in-framebuffer--tp2738995p2738995.html Sent from the Openmoko Community mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ Openmoko community mailing list community@lists.openmoko.org http://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community

Re: e in framebuffer?

2009-04-29 Thread Rui Miguel Silva Seabra
On Tue, Apr 28, 2009 at 11:59:28PM -0700, c_c wrote: The thought came from the fact that QTE seems faster. So, if X was removed from the equation - how would the freerunner perform? I tried it and it *didn't* seem faster. The speed bottleneck is that the graphics card doesn't have enough

Re: e in framebuffer?

2009-04-29 Thread Michael 'Mickey' Lauer
On Wednesday 29 April 2009 08:59:28 c_c wrote: I know this will irritate the purists - but with e providing a reasonable windowing environment, with SHR developing a lot of apps in elementary and with the number of apps written in efl/elementary on the rise - this **could** be a viable

Re: e in framebuffer?

2009-04-29 Thread Tilman Baumann
c_c wrote: The thought came from the fact that QTE seems faster. So, if X was removed from the equation - how would the freerunner perform? I never felt a noticeable speed difference. with e providing a reasonable windowing environment, Window management on plain framebuffer? Are you

Re: e in framebuffer?

2009-04-29 Thread Michael 'Mickey' Lauer
On Wednesday 29 April 2009 13:04:09 Tilman Baumann wrote: c_c wrote: The thought came from the fact that QTE seems faster. So, if X was removed from the equation - how would the freerunner perform? I never felt a noticeable speed difference. Well, I did some measurements on the GTA01

Re: e in framebuffer?

2009-04-29 Thread c_c
Hi, Michael 'Mickey' Lauer-2 wrote: if only we had illume's softkeyboard working... Wonder how QTE does it. I know this will irritate the purists Please avoid insulting people. @ Rui : None intended. :-) -- View this message in context: http://n2.nabble.com/e-in-framebuffer

Re: e in framebuffer?

2009-04-29 Thread Tilman Baumann
Michael 'Mickey' Lauer wrote: with e providing a reasonable windowing environment, Window management on plain framebuffer? Are you sure? I would be very interested in learning more about this. My expectation would be that you still need some fb multiplexer that needs to be relatively

Re: e in framebuffer?

2009-04-29 Thread Michael 'Mickey' Lauer
On Wednesday 29 April 2009 14:16:09 c_c wrote: Michael 'Mickey' Lauer-2 wrote: if only we had illume's softkeyboard working... Wonder how QTE does it. They have their own, designed to work on pure-fb. :M: ___ Openmoko community mailing list

Re: e in framebuffer?

2009-04-29 Thread The Rasterman
the purists Please avoid insulting people. @ Rui : None intended. :-) -- View this message in context: http://n2.nabble.com/e-in-framebuffer--tp2738995p2740209.html Sent from the Openmoko Community mailing list archive at Nabble.com

Re: e in framebuffer?

2009-04-29 Thread The Rasterman
On Wed, 29 Apr 2009 12:04:09 +0100 (BST) Tilman Baumann til...@baumann.name said: c_c wrote: The thought came from the fact that QTE seems faster. So, if X was removed from the equation - how would the freerunner perform? I never felt a noticeable speed difference. with e

Re: e in framebuffer?

2009-04-29 Thread The Rasterman
On Wed, 29 Apr 2009 13:20:50 +0100 (BST) Tilman Baumann til...@baumann.name said: Michael 'Mickey' Lauer wrote: with e providing a reasonable windowing environment, Window management on plain framebuffer? Are you sure? I would be very interested in learning more about this.

Re: e in framebuffer?

2009-04-29 Thread c_c
Hi, Carsten Haitzler (The Rasterman)-2 wrote: bingo. stic to x. it buys you gtk, qt, sdl, gl, blah blah blah Thanks for clearing that up. So maybe a compiled phone stack will push performance to the next level. -- View this message in context: http://n2.nabble.com/e-in-framebuffer

Re: e in framebuffer?

2009-04-29 Thread fredrik normann
maybe a compiled phone stack will push performance to the next level. -- View this message in context: http://n2.nabble.com/e-in-framebuffer--tp2738995p2741567.html Sent from the Openmoko Community mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ Openmoko

Re: e in framebuffer?

2009-04-29 Thread Marcel
: Hi, Carsten Haitzler (The Rasterman)-2 wrote: bingo. stic to x. it buys you gtk, qt, sdl, gl, blah blah blah Thanks for clearing that up. So maybe a compiled phone stack will push performance to the next level. -- View this message in context: http://n2.nabble.com/e

Re: e in framebuffer?

2009-04-29 Thread Michael 'Mickey' Lauer
On Wednesday 29 April 2009 20:47:23 Marcel wrote: Should be fast, but how would you control that with a touchscreen (- mouse)? gpm. :M: ___ Openmoko community mailing list community@lists.openmoko.org

Re: e in framebuffer?

2009-04-29 Thread Marcel
Am Mittwoch, 29. April 2009 20:56:39 schrieb Michael 'Mickey' Lauer: On Wednesday 29 April 2009 20:47:23 Marcel wrote: Should be fast, but how would you control that with a touchscreen (- mouse)? gpm. Oh. I didn't even think of that may working... *g* -- Marcel