X Windows must DIE!!!

X Windows must DIE!!!

Post by Christopher Brow » Sat, 29 Apr 2000 04:00:00



Centuries ago, Nostradamus foresaw a time when bytes256 would say:

Quote:>Am I the only one here who thinks that X Windows is crap?
>X Windows is extremely archaic, ridiculously bloated,
>way too slow, and extremely hard to install.

>Let's get rid of it completely.

Feel free.

What were you planning to run distributed graphical applications on
top of, as a replacement for X?
--
"Purely applicative languages are poorly applicable." -- Alan Perlis

 
 
 

X Windows must DIE!!!

Post by Jimmy Navarr » Sat, 29 Apr 2000 04:00:00



> Centuries ago, Nostradamus foresaw a time when bytes256 would say:
> >Am I the only one here who thinks that X Windows is crap?
> >X Windows is extremely archaic, ridiculously bloated,
> >way too slow, and extremely hard to install.

> >Let's get rid of it completely.

> Feel free.

> What were you planning to run distributed graphical applications on
> top of, as a replacement for X?
> --
> "Purely applicative languages are poorly applicable." -- Alan Perlis


I guess he may need to try the iMac...

 
 
 

X Windows must DIE!!!

Post by Christopher Brow » Sun, 30 Apr 2000 04:00:00


Centuries ago, Nostradamus foresaw a time when Jimmy Navarro would say:


>> Centuries ago, Nostradamus foresaw a time when bytes256 would say:
>> >Am I the only one here who thinks that X Windows is crap?
>> >X Windows is extremely archaic, ridiculously bloated,
>> >way too slow, and extremely hard to install.

>> >Let's get rid of it completely.

>> Feel free.

>> What were you planning to run distributed graphical applications on
>> top of, as a replacement for X?

>I guess he may need to try the iMac...

And this is an answer how?

The iMac runs a graphical system that is controlled voraciously by Apple.
It is _not_ a distributable system, whether we speak of MacOS8, MacOS9,
or the (now NXHost-less, what with Adobe unwilling to license DPS) OS-X.
--
Rules of the Evil Overlord #84. "No matter how many shorts we have in
the system, my guards will be instructed to treat every surveillance
camera malfunction as a full-scale emergency."
<http://www.eviloverlord.com/lists/overlord.html>

 
 
 

X Windows must DIE!!!

Post by Marty Dipp » Tue, 02 May 2000 04:00:00



>>> Centuries ago, Nostradamus foresaw a time when bytes256 would say:
>>> >Am I the only one here who thinks that X Windows is crap?
>>> >X Windows is extremely archaic, ridiculously bloated,
>>> >way too slow, and extremely hard to install.

>>> >Let's get rid of it completely.

>>> Feel free.

>>> What were you planning to run distributed graphical applications on
>>> top of, as a replacement for X?

>>I guess he may need to try the iMac...

> And this is an answer how?

> The iMac runs a graphical system that is controlled voraciously by Apple.
> It is _not_ a distributable system, whether we speak of MacOS8, MacOS9,
> or the (now NXHost-less, what with Adobe unwilling to license DPS) OS-X.

Yeah- let's throw out X and rewrite it.  And NFS.  And the filesystem(s).
And PGP.  And SSH.  And the printing system.  And the man pages.
They all suck.  Let's re-write it all, not document any of it, and proclaim
it all to be the new "standard".  And then we can all wink knowingly at each
other, convinced that we've done something useful by creating a much cooler
*nix than any of the other *nixes.  And *our* stuff won't suck at all, 'cause
we're so much smarter than the unimaginative twits that wrote the originals!

Never mind me- I'm just having a bad day.  But it *does* seem this way to
me sometimes...  

----------------------------------------------------------------
Marty Dippel
Sr. Systems Analyst
High Energy Physics
The University of Chicago

 
 
 

X Windows must DIE!!!

Post by Matthias Wark » Tue, 02 May 2000 04:00:00


It was the Mon, 01 May 2000 16:37:32 GMT...

Quote:> Yeah- let's throw out X and rewrite it.  And NFS.  And the filesystem(s).
> And PGP.  And SSH.  And the printing system.  And the man pages.
> They all suck.  Let's re-write it all, not document any of it, and proclaim
> it all to be the new "standard".  And then we can all wink knowingly at each
> other, convinced that we've done something useful by creating a much cooler
> *nix than any of the other *nixes.  And *our* stuff won't suck at all, 'cause
> we're so much smarter than the unimaginative twits that wrote the originals!

If you strike "not document any", this sounds like the stance of the
VMS developers -- or the Windows developers, for that matter :)

mawa
--
But when she was with Chacko, old limits were pushed back. Horizons
expanded. She had never before met a man who spoke of the world [...]
in the way other men she knew discussed [...] their weekends at the
beach.                     -- Arundhati Roy, _The_God_of_Small_Things_

 
 
 

X Windows must DIE!!!

Post by bytes25 » Fri, 05 May 2000 04:00:00




> It was the Mon, 01 May 2000 16:37:32 GMT...

> > Yeah- let's throw out X and rewrite it.  And NFS.  And the
filesystem(s).
> > And PGP.  And SSH.  And the printing system.  And the man pages.
> > They all suck.  Let's re-write it all, not document any of it, and
proclaim
> > it all to be the new "standard".  And then we can all wink
knowingly at each
> > other, convinced that we've done something useful by creating a
much cooler
> > *nix than any of the other *nixes.  And *our* stuff won't suck at
all, 'cause
> > we're so much smarter than the unimaginative twits that wrote the
originals!

> If you strike "not document any", this sounds like the stance of the
> VMS developers -- or the Windows developers, for that matter :)

> mawa
> --
> But when she was with Chacko, old limits were pushed back. Horizons
> expanded. She had never before met a man who spoke of the world [...]
> in the way other men she knew discussed [...] their weekends at the
> beach.                     -- Arundhati Roy, _The_God_of_Small_Things_

My point is quite simply put: XWindows does not best meet the needs of
the average Linux user.  It is far more complicated than necessary.
And then it leaves out important functionality that people want.
(Standardized controls, High performance, easy installation, etc.)

Don't shoot the messenger...revolutions have to start somewhere.

--
And if you listen very hard
The tune will come to you at last.
When all are one and one is all
To be a rock and not to roll.  -Led Zeppelin

Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.

 
 
 

X Windows must DIE!!!

Post by Stefaan A Eecke » Fri, 05 May 2000 04:00:00




Quote:

> My point is quite simply put: XWindows does not best meet the needs of
> the average Linux user.

Says who?

Quote:> It is far more complicated than necessary.

Bullocks.

Quote:> And then it leaves out important functionality that people want.
> (Standardized controls,

Easy. Only use KDE, or only use GNOME. Since when
was having a choice a problem?

Quote:> High performance,

So who cares it's not the best games platform? There are
alternatives. Any reason why X needs to be the only
display interface?

Quote:> easy installation, etc.)

Marvelllous. Junk the system instead of writing an installer.
That's efficiency, that's sound thinking.

Quote:

> Don't shoot the messenger...revolutions have to start somewhere.

They usually start by someone writing code.

HAND

--
Stefaan
--
--PGP key available from PGP key servers (http://www.pgp.net/pgpnet/)--
Ninety-Ninety Rule of Project Schedules:
        The first ninety percent of the task takes ninety percent of
the time, and the last ten percent takes the other ninety percent.

 
 
 

X Windows must DIE!!!

Post by JEDIDI » Fri, 05 May 2000 04:00:00





>> It was the Mon, 01 May 2000 16:37:32 GMT...

>> > Yeah- let's throw out X and rewrite it.  And NFS.  And the
>filesystem(s).
>> > And PGP.  And SSH.  And the printing system.  And the man pages.
>> > They all suck.  Let's re-write it all, not document any of it, and
>proclaim
>> > it all to be the new "standard".  And then we can all wink
>knowingly at each
>> > other, convinced that we've done something useful by creating a
>much cooler
>> > *nix than any of the other *nixes.  And *our* stuff won't suck at
>all, 'cause
>> > we're so much smarter than the unimaginative twits that wrote the
>originals!

>> If you strike "not document any", this sounds like the stance of the
>> VMS developers -- or the Windows developers, for that matter :)

>> mawa
>> --
>> But when she was with Chacko, old limits were pushed back. Horizons
>> expanded. She had never before met a man who spoke of the world [...]
>> in the way other men she knew discussed [...] their weekends at the
>> beach.                     -- Arundhati Roy, _The_God_of_Small_Things_

>My point is quite simply put: XWindows does not best meet the needs of
>the average Linux user.  It is far more complicated than necessary.

        No it isn't. The average user typically only needs to let the
        X configuration utility probe the hardware and then chose
        some resolutions and bit depths.

        This notion that end users typically need to manually tweak
        modelines is more urban legend and FUD than anything else.

Quote:>And then it leaves out important functionality that people want.
>(Standardized controls, High performance, easy installation, etc.)

>Don't shoot the messenger...revolutions have to start somewhere.

        X has high performance, it can even go toe to toe with DirectX
        in 3D rendering (dri).
        X has easy installation and has had it for quite awhile now.

        Stiffling standardization is of questionable value.

--

                                                                        |||
                                                                       / | \

                                      Need sane PPP docs? Try penguin.lvcm.com.

 
 
 

X Windows must DIE!!!

Post by Matthias Wark » Fri, 05 May 2000 04:00:00


It was the Thu, 04 May 2000 13:17:03 GMT...


> My point is quite simply put: XWindows does not best meet the needs of
> the average Linux user.  It is far more complicated than necessary.
> And then it leaves out important functionality that people want.
> (Standardized controls, High performance, easy installation, etc.)

Please
a) explain why these issues should be addressed by a goddamn windowing
   system of all things
b) prove to me that this is not only what people want, but also that
   they are willing to accept negative effects of realising it.

mawa
--
Who'd A Thought It, Alabama  |  Toad Suck, Arkansas       |  Two Egg,
Eek, Alaska                  |  Turkey Scratch, Arkansas  |  Florida
Greasy Corner, Arkansas      |  Zyzx Springs, California  |
                                                     -- U.S. placenames

 
 
 

X Windows must DIE!!!

Post by bytes25 » Sat, 06 May 2000 04:00:00




> It was the Thu, 04 May 2000 13:17:03 GMT...

> > My point is quite simply put: XWindows does not best meet the needs
of
> > the average Linux user.  It is far more complicated than necessary.
> > And then it leaves out important functionality that people want.
> > (Standardized controls, High performance, easy installation, etc.)

> Please
> a) explain why these issues should be addressed by a goddamn windowing
>    system of all things
> b) prove to me that this is not only what people want, but also that
>    they are willing to accept negative effects of realising it.

> mawa
> --
> Who'd A Thought It, Alabama  |  Toad Suck, Arkansas       |  Two Egg,
> Eek, Alaska                  |  Turkey Scratch, Arkansas  |  Florida
> Greasy Corner, Arkansas      |  Zyzx Springs, California  |
>                                                      -- U.S.
placenames

I think i've finally realized why criticism of X really pisses you
zealots off.  X is the one area where WinBLOZE beats Linux and UN*X in
general.  Granted, i absolutely adore Linux (I USE IT WHENEVER I CAN!)
but let's face it's not perfect (no present OS is).
Is it such a bad thing to completely overhaul a dinosaur?
(I could be wrong about this but) Surely this wouldn't be the first
time that an integral part of the UNIX architecture was replaced with
something superior.  Reliable signals, for instance.

--
And if you listen very hard
The tune will come to you at last.
When all are one and one is all
To be a rock and not to roll.  -Led Zeppelin

Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.

 
 
 

X Windows must DIE!!!

Post by I R A Darth Agg » Sat, 06 May 2000 04:00:00


On Fri, 05 May 2000 14:29:14 GMT,

+ Is it such a bad thing to completely overhaul a dinosaur?

No. Where is your code? You may want to take a look at
<url:http://www.hex.net/~cbbrowne/xbloat.html>, you might be able to
find a suitable project to work on...

James
--
Consulting Minister for Consultants, DNRC
The Bill of Rights is paid in Responsibilities - Jean McGuire
To cure your perl CGI problems, please look at:
<url:http://www.perl.com/CPAN/doc/FAQs/cgi/idiots-guide.html>

 
 
 

X Windows must DIE!!!

Post by JEDIDI » Sat, 06 May 2000 04:00:00





>> It was the Thu, 04 May 2000 13:17:03 GMT...

>> > My point is quite simply put: XWindows does not best meet the needs
>of
>> > the average Linux user.  It is far more complicated than necessary.
>> > And then it leaves out important functionality that people want.
>> > (Standardized controls, High performance, easy installation, etc.)

>> Please
>> a) explain why these issues should be addressed by a goddamn windowing
>>    system of all things
>> b) prove to me that this is not only what people want, but also that
>>    they are willing to accept negative effects of realising it.

>> mawa
>> --
>> Who'd A Thought It, Alabama  |  Toad Suck, Arkansas       |  Two Egg,
>> Eek, Alaska                  |  Turkey Scratch, Arkansas  |  Florida
>> Greasy Corner, Arkansas      |  Zyzx Springs, California  |
>>                                                      -- U.S.
>placenames

>I think i've finally realized why criticism of X really pisses you
>zealots off.  X is the one area where WinBLOZE beats Linux and UN*X in
>general.  Granted, i absolutely adore Linux (I USE IT WHENEVER I CAN!)

        I what?

        Flexibility? X has always been more flexible.
        Features? X has always had more features.
        3D? Nope, X beat Windows on that as well.
        Speed? Nope, X implementations have always been
                able to keep up with Windows on the same
                hardware. Today, even the FREE X implementation
                can.

Quote:>but let's face it's not perfect (no present OS is).
>Is it such a bad thing to completely overhaul a dinosaur?

        As dinosaurs go, it's not so bad.

Quote:>(I could be wrong about this but) Surely this wouldn't be the first
>time that an integral part of the UNIX architecture was replaced with
>something superior.  Reliable signals, for instance.

        "Reliable signals"? : sounds like a TCP socket.      

--

                                                                        |||
                                                                       / | \

                                      Need sane PPP docs? Try penguin.lvcm.com.

 
 
 

X Windows must DIE!!!

Post by Joe Pfeiffe » Sat, 06 May 2000 04:00:00



> I think i've finally realized why criticism of X really pisses you
> zealots off.  X is the one area where WinBLOZE beats Linux and UN*X in
> general.  Granted, i absolutely adore Linux (I USE IT WHENEVER I CAN!)
> but let's face it's not perfect (no present OS is).
> Is it such a bad thing to completely overhaul a dinosaur?
> (I could be wrong about this but) Surely this wouldn't be the first
> time that an integral part of the UNIX architecture was replaced with
> something superior.  Reliable signals, for instance.

No, it's because we hear the same criticisms every couple of months,
and every time it's from somebody who doesn't understand how X works,
repeats a lot of urban legends regarding its performance, and doesn't
understand the different roles of the server, the window manager, and
the toolkit used to create applications.
--
Joseph J. Pfeiffer, Jr., Ph.D.       Phone -- (505) 646-1605
Department of Computer Science       FAX   -- (505) 646-1002
New Mexico State University          http://www.cs.nmsu.edu/~pfeiffer
VL 2000 Homepage:  http://www.cs.orst.edu/~burnett/vl2000/
 
 
 

X Windows must DIE!!!

Post by root » Sat, 06 May 2000 04:00:00






> >> It was the Thu, 04 May 2000 13:17:03 GMT...

> >> > My point is quite simply put: XWindows does not best meet the needs
> >of
> >> > the average Linux user.  It is far more complicated than necessary.
> >> > And then it leaves out important functionality that people want.
> >> > (Standardized controls, High performance, easy installation, etc.)

> >> Please
> >> a) explain why these issues should be addressed by a goddamn windowing
> >>    system of all things
> >> b) prove to me that this is not only what people want, but also that
> >>    they are willing to accept negative effects of realising it.

> >> mawa
> >> --

>         Flexibility? X has always been more flexible.
>         Features? X has always had more features.
>         3D? Nope, X beat Windows on that as well.
>         Speed? Nope, X implementations have always been
>                 able to keep up with Windows on the same
>                 hardware. Today, even the FREE X implementation
>                 can.

> >but let's face it's not perfect (no present OS is).
> >Is it such a bad thing to completely overhaul a dinosaur?

I just recently started using Linux on my home PC after using Win98 for quite some
time.  I now use both and they each get their own hard-drive.  My initial reaction
to Linux is this:
1)  Xwindows has a different look and feel about it (but what do I expect?  It is
a different OS)
2)  The action with my mouse is slower but not that big of deal.
3)  Linux does not appear to like my monitor.  Windows has no problems with it.
When using Linux 1/3 of my monitor is fuzzy.  I have tried everything short of
another monitor or video component.  But Linux definently losses this comparison.
I should not have to change any hardware or edit mode-lines, period.
3)  Linux does not play with hardware near as good as, at least, MSWindows does.
Case in point, even though I am successfully using the same hardware with Linux,
it was not without a fight.  I had MINOR struggles with EVERYTHING.  I capitalize
those two words because one is positive and the other negative.  Only MINOR
problems, which is good, it shows Linux is improving in those areas, but
EVERYTHING required extensive reading and trial and error.  Not very good for the
masses to flock to this OS.
5)  Linux already appears more stable.  The system has only locked me up once so
far as compared to nearly daily with MSWindows.
6)  I like being able to pull up the command the line without losing any
functionality.  Windows is all point and click which is truly one-dimensional but
also which has made Windows the "fast-food" product it is.
7)  I like having options to run programs that integrate so freely with the OS and
expand the overall functionality of the system (I specifically speak of the
ability of Linux to work as a desktop PC AND AS a server in a LAN or WAN)  It has
only been until now (Win2000) that MS has offered this and probably still doesn't
compare.

Conclusion.  Obviously Linux is free and to expect perfection is asking a lot.
But if it is ever to compete with Windows (if, in fact, that is the goal.  I don't
know.  What is the mission statement for Linux?) I feel it must consolidate its
distributions.  All these distributions is confusing and intimidating.  It needs
to become less command-line oriented for the average/less knowledgable user.  The
"mounting" and/or "configuration" of hardware/devices needs to be more automated
and all of that taken care of upon boot up without having to read a book to do it.

Thanks for allowing me the avenue to express myself.

hoffy

 
 
 

X Windows must DIE!!!

Post by JEDIDI » Sat, 06 May 2000 04:00:00







>> >> It was the Thu, 04 May 2000 13:17:03 GMT...

>> >> > My point is quite simply put: XWindows does not best meet the needs
>> >of
>> >> > the average Linux user.  It is far more complicated than necessary.
>> >> > And then it leaves out important functionality that people want.
>> >> > (Standardized controls, High performance, easy installation, etc.)

>> >> Please
>> >> a) explain why these issues should be addressed by a goddamn windowing
>> >>    system of all things
>> >> b) prove to me that this is not only what people want, but also that
>> >>    they are willing to accept negative effects of realising it.

>> >> mawa
>> >> --

>>         Flexibility? X has always been more flexible.
>>         Features? X has always had more features.
>>         3D? Nope, X beat Windows on that as well.
>>         Speed? Nope, X implementations have always been
>>                 able to keep up with Windows on the same
>>                 hardware. Today, even the FREE X implementation
>>                 can.

>> >but let's face it's not perfect (no present OS is).
>> >Is it such a bad thing to completely overhaul a dinosaur?

>I just recently started using Linux on my home PC after using Win98 for quite some
>time.  I now use both and they each get their own hard-drive.  My initial reaction
>to Linux is this:
>1)  Xwindows has a different look and feel about it (but what do I expect?  It is
>a different OS)
>2)  The action with my mouse is slower but not that big of deal.

        This is adjustable just like it is in Windows. There are even
        shiny happy gui tools to do this with in Linux.

Quote:>3)  Linux does not appear to like my monitor.  Windows has no problems with it.
>When using Linux 1/3 of my monitor is fuzzy.  I have tried everything short of
>another monitor or video component.  But Linux definently losses this comparison.

        That's a new complaint. I've seen various Unixen and WinDOS versions
        running on a wide cross section of monitors as have my colleagues and
        this is not something I've seen or heard complaints of.

        This includes from low cost low scanrate 14" monitors as well as
        better brand name high scanrate 19" and 21" monitors

Quote:>I should not have to change any hardware or edit mode-lines, period.

        You can tweak quite a bit without even getting into mode lines.

        Mode line tweaking is more appropriate for things that WinDOS is
        simply incapable of doing.

Quote:>3)  Linux does not play with hardware near as good as, at least, MSWindows does.
>Case in point, even though I am successfully using the same hardware with Linux,
>it was not without a fight.  I had MINOR struggles with EVERYTHING.  I capitalize

        That's funny. One of my primariy motivations for starting to use
        Linux was because Win9x didn't like my particular monitor that much
        and wasn't very adept at letting me fully exploit it without knowing
        what brand it is.

Quote:>those two words because one is positive and the other negative.  Only MINOR
>problems, which is good, it shows Linux is improving in those areas, but
>EVERYTHING required extensive reading and trial and error.  Not very good for the
>masses to flock to this OS.

        That, quite simply is BULLSHIT.

        Everything doesn't even require reading under a vintage copy
        of Slackware (that distro which drew me away from Win95 originally).

[deletia]

--

                                                                        |||
                                                                       / | \

                                      Need sane PPP docs? Try penguin.lvcm.com.

 
 
 

1. PC-NFS, printing, bannerpage. die.die.die

Hi, can someone tell me how I get rid of the accursed banner
page under 2.3 & PC-NFS.  Why is this bannerpage a default
in the first place?

Thanks in advance, -P.

--

Zoologiska Institutionen   | obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither
Stockholms Universitet     | liberty or safety. - Benjamin Franklin

2. more detailed log

3. Zombie die die die

4. Problem with Creative CDROM installation

5. /ethan die,die,die

6. 2.5.5final compile error

7. Freeware (was Re: Die Netscape Die)

8. RAM size?

9. windows that don't die

10. DSL dies=gateway dies

11. 1 * BdmUnlusq-application dies when window is closed

12. X-Window must die! What's alternative?

13. X window server dies, naturally taking CDE with it...