RE: Snappy GUI response
"Sottek, Matthew J" <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.xfree86.forum |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
I have to agree with David. Yes, Alan is correct, that X has a tight protocol and was implemented when every clock counted. However, X was also implemented when it was reasonable to draw an interface using rectangles and stipple patterns. Mark said: > This is because people writing X applications (and particularly >X toolkits) have little understanding of graphics performance issues >in the X-Window system. But you could just as reasonably state that X's design seems to have little understanding of how a modern GUI is drawn. With every passing generation you move from a "rendered" GUI (Where an acceleration engine creates the data from commands like "draw rectangle") to a composted GUI (where the acceleration engine just assembles rich media) The GUI is moving in that direction because that is what it takes to create high quality desktops, regardless of the limitations of X11. Clearly there is more to the story than "X isn't designed for modern applications". If you gave up your protocol today and made a completely direct rendered X server and ended up with really snappy performance, you may end up wishing you had the protocol back in a few more years when everyone's display is again disconnected from the host machine. -Matt -----Original Message----- From: Alan Cox [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Thursday, July 03, 2003 1:49 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [forum] Snappy GUI response > IMO, a bigger contributing factor is that the X design does not have > application performance as its number one objective, and the resulting Wrong. When X was designed every clock counted. 8Mhz was "elite cool workstation to fight over" _______________________________________________ Forum mailing list [email protected] http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/forum