X.org X11 Server Release 6.8 463
kormoc writes "The developers of X.org have just release the long-desired version 6.8.0. This release brings real translucency and allows one to set values on different windows. Also, nifty drop shadows as well as XDamage, an extention that limits redrawing of windows to only the areas that were damaged. The Xcomposite extention is still not stable, but it works well for some people. Why not give it a shot?"
Great News, but... (Score:5, Insightful)
How about waiting until X.org announces it? Until then, it's just a directory of files on an FTP server.
Re:Why do people care so much about drop shadows? (Score:2, Insightful)
Not all Eye-candy is as useless as it may seem
Re:Why do people care so much about drop shadows? (Score:5, Insightful)
They look good.
That's it. No hidden meaning, no technical advantage, no uberl33th@x0r nonesense, nothing about skinning...just straightfowardly it looks good. No deeper explanation exists. Or needs to exist.
Cheers,
Ian
Progress (Score:2, Insightful)
Ah, so now the developers will start moving away from XFree86 in droves!
Re:Double standards (Score:5, Insightful)
When a company charges for a product or service and it is defective, you try to return it, report the bug, and complain about the problem on discussion groups.
When a volunteer gives you a product for free and it is defective, you let the person know what's wrong, offer to retest it if they try to fix it, and if you have any time & talent to draw on, you offer to fix the problem and send in a patch. You NEVER, EVER complain. The worst you have the right to say is "I hope they take care of it in the next release".
Other than that, in response to your last sentence, on behalf of everyone whose ever given software away for free, STFU.
Having both both "nvidia" and "nv" in xorg.conf? (Score:4, Insightful)
Use "nvidia", but if that fails use "nv".
This feature would be worth a thousand dropshadow effects
Re:Is it as good as Citrix? (Score:5, Insightful)
X may not perform as well, but at least it is designed properly - so you can share per application, or even per window, rather than having a goofy desktop in a window.
The best performing remote desktop solution for X is NX from nomachine. And yes, it does perform better than Citrix.
They have primarily pursued the goofy desktop in a window model as well. But there is nothing in their protocol mandating this : it is merely a limitation of the current client.
Best of all, NX is Free Software released under the GPL. Its a seperate process than the X server, so no legal viruses are going to eat up your nVidia driver.
NX sell a proprietary packaged up version. There is a project called FreeNX aiming to produce a fully Free set of NX tools ; however they appear to be closely allied to KDE, and aim to make it a feature for KDE to lord over Gnome. I hope I'm wrong.
Goodbye to XFree forever (Score:5, Insightful)
I am glad to see the amount of progress that is being made, and can only imagine what time will bring now that there is a way to actually contribute code to the X codebase again.
Kudos to KP, JG et al...
Re:Translucency (Score:5, Insightful)
Hmmm...
You know how I check my e-mail when I am on my laptop or away from home?
ssh my.desktop's.address evolution
Then it opens up on my laptop, just the same as if I was sitting in front of my computer.
You know I also have multiple X servers.
on my Debian machine:
ctrl-alt-F7 takes me to my Gnome desktop.
ctrl-alt-F8 takes me to my KDE desktop... running from my laptop.
ctrl-alt-F9 takes me to a Fluxbox running quake3 fullscreen on a server.
That's network transparency. I can run multiple X servers running from multiple machines. If I had a Redhat server to admin, I could open up the Redhat desktop on my Debian administration machine. All secure thru ssh tunnels, much better then VNC or Window's remote desktop.
No special software, no special software. Any and all Linux, Unix, or BSD machine running X windows can do this.
I can also have virtual desktops were I can move windows back and forth between them. You can get that with some add-on software in Windows, but it's nothing compared to what I can do.
Eventually I'll be able to do stuff like close out a X server session on one computer, move to another computer and re-open it. Thanks to improvements in X.org.
Stuff like XDamage is going to make this more efficient network-wise, and new tunneling technology will replace the generic tunnelling with OpenSSH with something more geared specificly towards X windows. Newer compression technics and data types will make it even faster ontop of that.
You Windows guys don't know what your missing by not using a OS that has REAL multiuser support (having sudo and actually having it MORE conveinent to be a user rather then logged in as administrator.) with powerfull network technology, in a stable and SECURE enviroment.
X Windows rocks. XFree86 and politics held it back, but now with X.org it is beginning to have the same rate of developement that the rest of Free software enjoys.
Fedora and OpenBSD have new releases every 6 months. Using stuff like apt-get and ports it's EASY and CONVIENENT to keep up to date and patched. All the software gets up to date, not just the core system like in MS.
How often do you Windows guys get to play around with new stuff? Every 6 years, now?
Re:Why do people care so much about drop shadows? (Score:3, Insightful)
To All The "Drop Shadow Nay-Sayers" (Again) (Score:5, Insightful)
I think it needs to be made clear (no pun) yet again, that all this work is not just about drop shadows (they are just one thing you can do with it) or "useless" eye-candy (sometimes beautification is critical to the user). This work is about new options in enhancing usability and improving performance. These new extentions do far more than just add shadows and transparency (no, not translucency, that is something else).
Off-screen compositing allows new effects that can add emphasis to certain user interface elements. They allow for windows with arbitrary shapes that do not appear "jagged" and "rough". Better performance means we can create more fluid effects in windowing systems. For instance, users are much more comfortable with things that slide around or fade smoothly rather than just snapping into position. It allows the eye to keep track of what's changing. Tools like Exposé [apple.com] are now possible. Overall, there are more possibilities for open source user interface developers to add significantly more polish to the desktop without resorting to cheap hacks (such as the static transparency found in KDE, Eterm [eterm.org], and Aterm [sourceforge.net]).
And just to reinforce the classic uses of this: drop shadows really do add emphasis to the current focused window (I write this on an OSX box). Also, it can be really convenient to have window transparency in many cases (for example, when I have multiple Terminals open I can read a man page behind the console I'm currently typing in). Again, keep in mind that these features are not the goal but simply benefits of the new extentions.
The future of the F/OSS desktop is really looking up thanks to new technology like this. Eventually these things will be hardware accelerated (like Quartz Extreme [apple.com]) and then some really cool things will be possible.
So, in conclusion, don't knock or belittle the work that's going into X.org these days. In the future, most of you will appreciate them the same way you appreciate the flexibility you have now with choosing how to configure your window managers to your liking. No doubt a lot of people will take this stuff and produce a lot of crap, but we'll definitely see a lot of excellent work that will use it to improve the user experience.
Modularity and Stability (Score:3, Insightful)
I keep hearing this argument. However, I am not all that convinced that modularity will improve stability. After all, things tend to break around the edges. More modules means more edges, thus more opportunities to break.
Also, modules only work by virtue of well-defined interfaces. What if some of the interfaces turn out to be suboptimal? Retaining the interface can severely burden development and innovation. Changing the interface can require massive code changes.
I am all for modularity, but I can't assume that it will lead to more stability and productivity.
Re:composite rules! (Score:3, Insightful)
Are you comparing a linux install you've done yourself with a Windows installation that came pre-installed? A lot of the fiddling and adjustments for Windows is done by the OEM.
When I have to install Windows it ususally takes longer than a linux install on the same box - both elapsed and my attention required. Windows needs about ten reboots and a few CDs (os+drivers) for a basic install before any office or dev tools go on. With SuSE its ten minutes booting the DVD and configuring the install, then everything including three different types of kitchen sink is installed and working while I do something else.
Linux isn't perfect but I don't blame 'linux' for the newest hardware not always being supported - it's not a technical problem if manufacturers don't support linux but it is a royal pain. I would like to be able to use my Stylus Photo R300 in linux one day - it would be one less reason to have Windows.
Re:Why do people care so much about drop shadows? (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Screw the eye candy, where is the integration? (Score:3, Insightful)
there was in issue around ownership of tmp file fixed in this release, and integration with selinux should be not far behind.
When will we see some innovation instead of eye candy? Why does something have to be invented on OSX or Windows instead of pioneered on linux?
do you have any idea how this stuff was done? completely network transparent window rendering and compositing? windows and mac can't do that!
The hooks for modular gui plugins should be there - just as with any gui. OS/2 had the object based interface, windows has the pretty indepth theme integration and OSX has the PDF display..
and render and and composite are extensions to the X protocol (i.e. plugins). Gnome and KDE have object based UIs and indepth theme integration, and render is a Porter-Duff based compositing model that can be hooked into Cairo for a PDF like API. I'm starting to think I have just bitten into a troll here...
Why not work on something to compete against microsofts new gui/api interffaces based upon 3d rendering instead of pixel rendering? why not kill 2d before the competition and work on an graphical interface that is competitive instead of intriguing.
that was the whole point. or maybe you haven't been paying attention?
Quick release cycles don't do anything for corporate adoption. Give us the "killer app" - in this case a desktop/windowing system that delivers everything we seem to bash in other systems as insecure or proprietary.
The time based realease plans now being used by Gnome and X.org have given us some pretty cool stuff in a short period of time. I'm really not sure what you're complaining about.
Re:Having both both "nvidia" and "nv" in xorg.conf (Score:1, Insightful)
The XF86Config file itself should "go" (well, it shouldn't, but it shouldn't be _necessary_) - X should autodetect and do something sane in the complete absence of a file, and allow on-the-fly dynamic tweaking of screen layout, color depth and basically all other parameters (see XRANDR, but do it for _everything_, except maybe actual card changes), then allow persisting the current settings to the Config file.
Edit text-file, restart x, edit text file, restart x is NOT ACCEPTABLE on the desktop. I didn't put up with it on my 1993 amiga, for feck's sake!.
Thank XFree for starting this (Score:3, Insightful)
We stand on the shoulders of giants.
Re:Help ! I'm all mixed up with X version numbers. (Score:3, Insightful)
Think of it like this: The side which is initiating the conversation is the client (just like a webbrowser). The one responding is the server (just like a webserver). When an application wants to draw something on the screen, it will initiate the conversation, so this is the client. The display is just quietly waiting for somebody to give him something to do.
Re:Application Publishing (Score:3, Insightful)
It's a good hack, but still a hack.