Weekly edition	Kernel	Security	Distributions	Contact Us	Search
Archives	Calendar	Subscribe	Write for LWN	LWN.net FAQ	Sponsors

Bad NIH, good NIH

Posted Mar 11, 2013 15:27 UTC (Mon) by nix (subscriber, #2304)
In reply to: Bad NIH, good NIH by dgm
Parent article: Canonical reveals plans to launch Mir display server (The H)

I find it hard to believe that you think that playing video rendered over the network (without using something like Youtube) is a more common case than rendering scrolling text buffers over the network. The latter is about 99% of what people use X remotely *for*.

(Log in to post comments)

Bad NIH, good NIH

Posted Mar 12, 2013 12:21 UTC (Tue) by dgm (subscriber, #49227) [Link]

> rendering scrolling text buffers over the network [...] is about 99% of what people use X remotely *for*.

Probably, but what percentage of people do use X remotely, actually?

Does it make sense to design the solution around that use case? Or would it be better to design things around the *common* use case (computing and display on the same node), specially when alternative solutions do exist?

Bad NIH, good NIH

Posted Mar 13, 2013 21:41 UTC (Wed) by nix (subscriber, #2304) [Link]

I can't tell you how common it is, or isn't. I don't see how you could claim that you know that non-remote use is so common that the remote case should be disregarded, either.