LinuxQuestions.org
Welcome to the most active Linux Forum on the web.
Go Back   LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Linux Forums > Linux - General
User Name
Password
Linux - General This Linux forum is for general Linux questions and discussion.
If it is Linux Related and doesn't seem to fit in any other forum then this is the place.

Notices


Reply
  Search this Thread
Old 03-18-2005, 11:47 PM   #1
aratis
Member
 
Registered: Oct 2003
Location: Paris, Texas
Distribution: RHEL4
Posts: 48

Rep: Reputation: 15
Question What is up with the Linux GUI System?


I have come across a website named "Linux Sux" (linsux.org), and this person poses an excellent point:

"The foundation of the Linux GUI, X11, hasn't experienced any revolutionary changes to its structure since its creation. . . . . . . . . Until a viable replacement for X11 hits the market, Linux will always suck, and that's just life."

Now granted I don't believe that Linux "sucks" as a whole, contrarily I disagree. I do, however, LOVE the new OS X GUI system. It is amazingly reliable. So all of this rant leads me to my question:

When will there be or Is there a GUI system in development that doesn't rely on the Client/Server methodology? Something along the lines of Quartz/Aqua for OS X. Maybe this is an idiot question, but I for one have experienced MANY video problems with Linux in the past and didn't understand why it had to be so complicated.

please bare with me as my ignorance in Linux proceeds me and I am somewhat simple minded.

-aratis
 
Old 03-18-2005, 11:58 PM   #2
Thoreau
Senior Member
 
Registered: May 2003
Location: /var/log/cabin
Distribution: All
Posts: 1,167

Rep: Reputation: 45
"please bare with me as my ignorance in Linux proceeds me and I am somewhat simple minded"

Being aware of your sins is admirable, but being a Mac user sadly cancels that out.

XFree86 has been replaced with X all major linux distributions.
 
Old 03-19-2005, 12:17 AM   #3
frob23
Senior Member
 
Registered: Jan 2004
Location: Roughly 29.467N / 81.206W
Distribution: OpenBSD, Debian, FreeBSD
Posts: 1,450

Rep: Reputation: 48
The client/server model does not have as massive a performance hit as he would like to make out. He doesn't state it but he gives the impression that the throughput of a communication is limited to 10/100Mbps as you would find on a standard LAN. Which is completely misleading. Unless you are truely communication across a LAN or larger network of some kind, which is one of the benefits of the methodology.

That being said, I have a network full of BSD computers at home, and the amount of time I spend taking advantage of the client/server setup is insane compared to my thinking when I used Windows. The ease of doing this is something you should not overlook. Being able to throw commands at a computer and have it automatically open new windows or message boxes on your local terminal in a well defined manner is priceless.

Finally, he mentions games and other huge graphics performance intensive applications which already have the ability to over-ride the client/server methods and use DRI and other functions to directly manipulate the hardware and graphics. So the point he is trying to make is really moot.

There are areas where things can be improved. But the situation is not nearly as bad as the author of that page tried to make it out to be.

Last edited by frob23; 03-19-2005 at 12:20 AM.
 
Old 03-19-2005, 12:35 AM   #4
frob23
Senior Member
 
Registered: Jan 2004
Location: Roughly 29.467N / 81.206W
Distribution: OpenBSD, Debian, FreeBSD
Posts: 1,450

Rep: Reputation: 48
Oh, let me add one more little comment on this FUD:

Quote:
It's simple. Linux (as a desktop environment) is based on a set of technologies which haven't radically changed in the last 20 years. The foundation of the Linux GUI, X11, hasn't experienced any revolutionary changes to its structure since its creation.

....

By requiring two separate components - designed to be separated by a 10/100mbit ethernet link ...
20 years ago they designed X for a technology (100Mbps ethernet) which would be invented 10 years ago.

Note: There was thicknet (10Mbps) ethernet about the time X Window was originally created... but the limits of the network speed were not built into the communication. If anything, the API was trimmed as much as possible to reduce local latency to compensate for the network latency which was introduced.

Last edited by frob23; 03-19-2005 at 03:24 AM.
 
Old 03-19-2005, 03:08 AM   #5
aratis
Member
 
Registered: Oct 2003
Location: Paris, Texas
Distribution: RHEL4
Posts: 48

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 15
Thank You so much for the quick replies. Very intuitive, and I can understand the situation better now with opposing opinions. For the record the MAC usage is strictly related to work related tasks.

-aratis
 
  


Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
How to get into CUI rather than GUI When system boots praveenv Linux - Newbie 4 08-14-2004 09:33 AM
Isn't Windows 95 or 98 a better GUI solution for old machines than an old Linux GUI lynchmob09 General 10 04-20-2004 01:24 AM
system monitor gui? shazaam Linux - Newbie 4 01-25-2004 02:36 AM
ALSA not working with system (GUI) sounds. martinman Linux - General 3 11-01-2003 06:30 PM
System Log GUI Crashed_Again Linux - Software 2 01-26-2003 08:34 AM

LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Linux Forums > Linux - General

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:30 AM.

Main Menu
Advertisement
My LQ
Write for LQ
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute content, let us know.
Main Menu
Syndicate
RSS1  Latest Threads
RSS1  LQ News
Twitter: @linuxquestions
Open Source Consulting | Domain Registration