> I've had the opposite experience. With compiz and multi-head (second > display) acceleration usually got disabled and was at best hit-n-miss.
I have 2 displays and am running compiz 0.9.5 (with nvidia), no problems at all - full hardware acceleration. Even with 0.8.6 running 2 displays, i didn't have any real issues. > GNOME3 is now working with a second display [not in fail-over mode] > which is much appreciated. For me GNOME3's OpenGL based shell seems > both faster and more robust than compiz + GNOME2. and what sort of heavy-duty 3D applications are you actually using with your setup? You know, the kinds of applications that can turn compositors on their head? ie: gaming, transgaming, 3d animation, etc... faster? - it's not... you can't even reduce/increase the speed of your effects with the click of a mouse. the defaults for transitions in gnome-shell have slow timing - smooth yes, but slow moving from start to finish time.... so what exactly are you basing this on??? - possibly biased benchmarks made by developers, who clearly want people to use Mutter/gnome-shell and not compiz? your own eyes?? (in which case, you have no way of being able to tell the difference, as you probably can't stress mutter, and test against compiz - frame for frame). more robust? - if that was true --> then in any and all circumstances gnome-shell/mutter should have zero tearing, zero graphical errors, in situations that would break compiz. If you had read my comments to Allen, you would have noticed i gave examples as to where gnome-shell/mutter was anything BUT robust. One trip to youtube and watching gnome-shell reviews will show you that it isn't as robust as you think. You've (im assuming) even saw my screenshots from Maya (that i posted a month or so ago on the list). Compiz handles all this stuff fine, gnome-shell/mutter does not.... I'm not saying it's not going to get there, it probably will - but it ain't there yet. Also, Mutter doesn't even have much to compare with Compiz. I haven't seen mutter produce even a fraction of types of transitions/plugins/GFX that compiz can. When Mutter starts doing more complicated types of effects (like 3D, not just scale/zoom) we will see how it performs then. until you can speed up the effects, and there are more hardcore transitions/effetcs to equally compare - i think it's pretty hard to compare mutter to anything but metacity, or possibly cairo-compmgr. fail-over mode..? lol. fallback is what has kept gnome on my desktops (and many other users), i would hardly associate that with "failure". it potentially means, down-the-line if gnome-shell gets to be more to my liking (or other people who aren't using it with gnome3) ~ we won't have already moved on to something like KDE, and completely ditched gnome! ~ that to me, means fallback mode is a "success", and a good thing. jordan _______________________________________________ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list