| |||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
The X Window System, past and futureThe X Window System, past and futurePosted Mar 28, 2003 0:23 UTC (Fri) by josh_stern (guest, #4868)In reply to: The X Window System, past and future by slamb Parent article: The X Window System, past and future
Agree with slamb as far as it goes, but further analysis argues that the *real* problem with X is the social/organizational one of getting new extensions to become standard. The universal design of the protocol communicating primitives works great for its intended application - non graphics intensive applications in a LAN environment - in a programmer transparent way. But as you imply, extensions are needed for graphic intensive and internet use. In fact, a general purpose, suitable, substitute already exists: display lists with GLX. But usage is only possible for particular combinations of client libraries and X servers, which are still not common enough (and bug free enough) to make it a viable, general purpose, application programming strategy. So here is an example where we can see how a larger programming team (more horses for implementation) and a more aggressive approach to promoting change and new standards could help! So the current debate is key, *because* the issues are not fundamentally ones of technical design.
(Log in to post comments)
|
|
||||||||||||