Framebuffer versus abstraction is what I am saying. I understand what the toolkits are for, fine, but there's too many of them. KDE is crap, don't take my word for it though. GNOME is fine, just a few very annoying bugs I've only experienced on (Open)Solaris.
James On May 25, 2008, at 2:43 PM, Bob Friesenhahn wrote: > On Sun, 25 May 2008, James Cornell wrote: > >> X11 abstracts things and exponentially increases complexity, and in >> addition it alone is probably the main problem with the UNIX >> desktop experience. Too many toolkits for X11, too many licenses, >> too many badly engineered applications which don't integrate, and >> too many extremists on all sides of the fractured X11 desktop war >> claiming their WM is better, they all are horrid and so is X11. > > Not having used KDE 4.0 and latest GNOME, I was almost ready to buy > into your diatribe until I got to this bit about X11 being the main > problem with the UNIX desktop experience. That causes me to believe > that most of the other stuff you said is likely dubious as well. > Better luck next time. > > Gtk+ and Qt are portable abstraction layers which remove X11 from > the complexity equation. In fact, they defeat much of what was > previously known as X11 except for the ability to display a program > remotely. However, sometimes they require special X11 server-side > extensions to run efficiently, much as Windows Vista requires exotic > video cards in order to be able to even move its mouse pointer > efficiently. > > Bob > ====================================== > Bob Friesenhahn > bfriesen at simple.dallas.tx.us, http://www.simplesystems.org/users/bfriesen/ > GraphicsMagick Maintainer, http://www.GraphicsMagick.org/ > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/desktop-discuss/attachments/20080525/0acaa13e/attachment.html>
