> I don't understand why "Network Transparency" and "High-Performance" need to be mutually-exclusive.
I don't think that people are suggesting that. At least especially Keith is not suggesting that.
It is just that X, without big changes, is mutually exclusive with performance. At least without huge headaches that nobody has to put up with on any other platform.
Something like that.
If getting a simpler and faster Linux means dumping X then sacrificing X Windows may be worth it. And it's not even true then that we need to give up X altogether. Windows and OS X users can use X remotely just as about as much as we can with Linux. They both can even host X clients... but you have to realize the fact that almost nobody does that may help indicate how little utility most people get from X Windows networking.
I like the networking aspect, certainly. Hell we finally have a decent sound server to go along with X networking: PulseAudio. Then AIGLX works on most hardware. I can host a Linux KVM Guest on my Ubuntu laptop running Redhat or Fedora and use GDM's secure remote login stuff to be able to get full GUI, natively, with OpenGL acceleration and sound with a VM!!! Gnome/GTK folks have put a lot of work optimizing their applications for it. X networking is better then it's ever been in the past!
But it still may not be enough. I just don't know. X Windows networking is just one good feature among a huge number of really bad and obsolete features that is becoming increasingly burdensome with no really positive effect except backwards compatibility.