I am to understand that these are the two free open-source badboys to drive your X-Window system (I think X-window system is synonymous with "capable of purdy graphics"). I also understand there is a premium one out there, but because I'm interested in using FREE STUFF, well....

I don't know how many distros come bundled with which one and I suppose that would be cool to know.

Debian Sarge: XFree86 4.3.0

I think I've read somewhere that XFree86 is on its way out, that only a couple left-wing-wacko programmers even maintain it, that there was a bloody coup and most developers headed over to Xorg.

So which is "BETTER"? If it is better then why doesn't Debian (teh schtuff!!!!) use it? Opinions welcome. Thx.

ß

Xorg was forked from XFree86 because some parts of the licence of XFree86 (IIRC) made it less free.

They both do the same job, so I'm not sure what you mean by "better"........

I don't know if you're aware of this but recently Debian SID (unstable branch of debian) has made the jump to X.org 6.8.2. Sarge will never use X.org because it has been released. Eventually Etch will probably get it before it's released. I actually enjoy x.org more, mainly because in a recent update my fonts have been vastly improved. It also seems to be smoother (although that is probably my imagination). If you want to try it on sarge you could try to search apt-get.org to see if there are backports for sarge or maybe even etch. Of course, if XFree86 4.3 works fine there's no need to hurry, it'll come eventually.

There aren't huge differences for the average user yet but since most of the work is going on in XOrg, it is probably best to move that way eventually but there is no hurry to do so - XFree86 will be fine for a while yet.

like he said
Xorg is yet another incarnation of the X consortium and is the original MIT x server
Xfree was a fork from Xorg back when Xorg decided not to be free
Xorg became moribund and for years and years did nothing but essentially copy Xfree
Xfree held a seat on the Xorg board
so both are the same right now with small differences

which will be better remains to be seen now that they have split or even if they have actually split.
There is nothing i see that keeps Xorg for still just copying Xfree.
Xorg makes a big deal about the Xfree clause to acknowledge when it's code is used but seems to be doing the acknowledgement anyway.
also could just be the tables have reversed and some Xfree developers have moved to Xorg and now
Xfree will copy Xorg changes ?

thx for your replys gents.

I guess what I meant by "better" is no more than why a person should lean one way or the other. Possibly analogous to "which is better: IE or Firefox"I also was kinda getting a feel for whether or not it's worth it to try to install Xorg in place of XFree86 (if it's even possible). Like, would it make life easier as an ATI user to have one or the other. Nvidia seems like cake to install. For ATI I'm just looking for any possible advantage...

ß

foo_bar_foo>

You have it backwards; Xorg is more free than XFree86 is. The whole point of Xorg is to be more free than XFree86.

from http://www.internetnews.com/dev-news...le.php/3338031

Also: where is the composite extension in XFree86?
Where is a stable DRI in XFree86?

Xorg is where the action really is.

If anything expect XFree86 to either fade away or to begin borrowing from Xorg.

I only wanted to make one correction here.

There isn't a more premium Xwindowing system than Xorg. Now there may be one out there that
does more wizbang stuff like maybe a 3d virtual reality desktop. But you're really asking for trouble to put that kind of experimentware on your computer. Anyway most of that stuff don't work.

If you really want to try that kind of stuff out go to Enlightenment.org and get their
experimental desktop I believe it's version 1.7, and try that out. It's purty but a pain
to setup unless you know what you're doing.

It's purty but not quite ready for prime time. Although the older stable version 1.6-whatever
is a great eye candy builder.


Have fun.

Xorg is where all the development is focused now and it already has more improvements and new features than Xfree as Kimvette mentioned. This gap between Xorg and Xfree will only get bigger in future unless Xfree has a major increase in interest and development activity.

aren't press releases great ! we all know they are all so factual and truthfull. especially when large mega corporations are involved.

I base what i said on conversations with the x developers at SUN microsystems which might be a more reliable source than press releases.

hmmmmmm
or possibly this (note the perfectly kept numbering sequence)
Menlo Park, CA., April 23, 2001 - X.Org, the global consortium empowered to develop, stabilize, maintain, and promote the X Window System technology and standard, announces today the release of X11R6.6.

exactly when does a press release become a lie ?
is it not untill people like KimVette give up on the hype ?
or is it a lie even while everyone believs it ?

I don't see how a press release is less reliable than some random guy on a message board who says "I know someone at Sun who said...". What KimVette said was perfectly true - X.org (the new X.org since they forked from Xfree) has a less restrictive licence and since it forked off Xfree 4.3.xx. Its also introduced new features and plans to do significantly more - eg. re-architect it to be modular, and integrate OpenGL/Mesa by making that the only hardware access method. I find it extremely difficult to believe that X.org is copying off Xfree, beyond the obvious fact that X.org is a fork of Xfree from just before 4.4 was released, since allmost all the development work is being focused on X.org.

The whole reason for X.org was discussed at great length when it happened. It was no secret that XFree86 made changes to the licence that a number of the developers didn't like. So they too the last acceptable version of XFree86 and forked off xorg.

It was discussed at /. and on numerous websites and mailing lists.

Your confusing the original X.org with the more newly created (January 22, 2004) X.org Foundation. According to the state of Delaware, the X.org Foundation is a non-profit scientific charity.

The board members are the following:

Stuart Anderson, Free Standards Group
Egbert Eich - SUSE
Jim Gettys - Hewlett Packard
Stuart Kreitman - SUN Microsystems
Kevin Martin - Red Hat
Jim McQuillan - Linux Terminal Server Project
Keith Packard - Hewlett Packard
Leon Shiman - Shiman Associates

You'll notice some key names here as far as historical xwindows development, including Keith Packard whom, if I'm not mistaken, has a great deal to do with the new composite extension and the new Exa rendering.

As has already been said.. the current state of x.org is a direct result of developers from xfree86 not wanting the new license changes around the time of xfree 4.4. There was also a large disagreement over XFree's handling of new people trying to help with the development. You'll notice several distros also had major problems with the XFree 4.4 license and as a result wouldn't include the package.

the new or or suposedly new xorg is not in any way a fork of xfree iregardless of how many people say it is.

xfree code (fork) was put in the stable archive on the server
original xorg code was put in the unstable slot on the web server
and the two were folded together.

this is easiest thing in the world to check.

this is exactly the way old xorg has done this for years
which is why name and version number remain constant.

this is simply not a fork
or perhaps we can explain how old 2.4 kernel only modules not present in xfree ended up in a new modern fork of xfree.

the notion it is a fork is a confused notion.

now there was what was most likely a fork of xfree on freedesktop.org for a short time before all this hapenned but what came of it who knows.

and yes this has been discussed alot mostly in line with massive amounts of corporate paopaganda spin.

perhaps the idea is that it's inapropriate to question corporate propaganda.

why is it such a bad thing to say we switched to xorg as xorg decided to change its mode of doing buisness and people were dissatisfied with xfree.

again not a fork !

An interesting question to answer if xorg is in fact a fork of xfree as everyone claims, and i would be very intrerested in the answer, is.

What happened to the original MIT X consortium code being maintained by xorg and owned by the Open Group ?

after all these years did they just delete it ?

is it still being maintained by another group or by the Open Group in some way ?

or did it become open source and become part of Linux ?

this is a question regarding transparency we who "have discussed this alot" should understand and be able to answer.