On 2017-10-09, Marko Rauhamaa <ma...@pacujo.net> wrote: > I can't comment on Windows. However, X11's remote access is hardly > usable.
15 years ago it worked great over 256Kbps DSL links. Even on dialup links it was usable (if a bit clumsy). It's the toolkits that are broken when it comes to remote access. > The problem is it's too low-level ("mechanism, not a policy"). What > we'd need is this setup: > > +---------+ > | client | > +---------+ > | toolkit | > | RPC | > +----+----+ > | > | TCP > | > +----+----+ > | toolkit | > | server | > +----+----+ > | > | Local > | > +------+------+ > | Wayland | > | compositor | > +-------------+ But then you need to re-impliment that for each and every toolkit. With the old X11 scheme, it only need to be implimented once. > Unfortunately, what we wil be given is: > > +---------+ > | client | > +---------+ > | toolkit | > | lib | > +----+----+ > | > | Local > | > +------+------+ > | Wayland | > | compositor | > +-------------+ > > > Which will get rid of the network transparency altogether. For all practial purposes, X11 network transparancy has been gone for years: it only works for apps that nobody cares about. I still use it occasionally just to verify that a remotely upgraded/installed wxPython app will start up, but it's way too slow to actually _use_ the app. -- Grant Edwards grant.b.edwards Yow! I want the presidency at so bad I can already taste gmail.com the hors d'oeuvres. -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list