| |||||||||||||
Worst case scenario: non-free drivers gain acceptanceWorst case scenario: non-free drivers gain acceptancePosted Mar 6, 2013 17:33 UTC (Wed) by drag (subscriber, #31333)In reply to: Worst case scenario: non-free drivers gain acceptance by coriordan Parent article: Canonical reveals plans to launch Mir display server (The H)
I don't think it will make much of a difference because display servers are moving out of the hardware management business. Any new display server is going to, or should, be using standardized application APIs for it's foundation.
So it should not matter what display server you are using. The display server needs to conform to the APIs provided by low level system libraries and the kernel, not the other way around.
With X windows in Linux the display server had to have it's own driver to drive the hardware directly, which is a idiotic design and is a disaster. It's one of the major reasons open source drivers got so far behind.
(Log in to post comments)
Worst case scenario: non-free drivers gain acceptance Posted Mar 6, 2013 19:34 UTC (Wed) by dlang (✭ supporter ✭, #313) [Link]
> With X windows in Linux the display server had to have it's own driver to drive the hardware directly, which is a idiotic design and is a disaster. It's one of the major reasons open source drivers got so far behind.
no, the main reason that open source drivers got so far behind is that they had to reverse engineer everything, vendors were actively hostile to them.
Worst case scenario: non-free drivers gain acceptance Posted Mar 7, 2013 10:38 UTC (Thu) by Wol (guest, #4433) [Link]
No. Probably THE major reason is the guys with power in XFree86 (not the guys doing the work, they left to form Xorg) said "if you want a gui, use Windows".
Sad but true - I think the final straw was when ?Keith Packard (who had been doing 90% of the coding) had his commit rights withdrawn.
Cheers,
|
|||||||||||||