Fresco M1 Released 282
rajan r writes "The first release after 18 months, Fresco, previously known as Berlin, released M1 or Milestone 1. The release notes here, screenshots here. The original 'press release' follows: 'I'm proud to announce that milestone 1 of Fresco (formerly known as Berlin) has (at long last) been released. A lot has changed since the last release, but this isn't that surprising, since the last release was more then 18 months ago; most of the real work for the past few months has been behind the scenes (changing hosts, a new web site infrastructure, improved build system, an issue tracker (hooray!), better documentation (and more to come), etc.). Source (no packages at the moment, but debs will be available soon, and the tree contains .spec files for building your own rpms) The name change. Enjoy! -- Nathaniel '"
You know, Fresco...doesn't ring a bell? (Score:4, Insightful)
P.S. It's a system for tracking calories from consumed donuts.
Re:You know, Fresco...doesn't ring a bell? (Score:3, Informative)
Also back in the late 1990's many linux users still used pentium 1's and 486's with only 32 or 64 megs of ram! The client/server nature of X was not only inadaquate but it was considered bloated and obsolete. After all, who runs X on terminals anymore? Luckily this has changed since HP and SGI have both donated code and X came out with dri for much better performance. Without dri even the fastest of machines redrew graphics commands at a slugish rate.
If a pda and the original mac could have a better gui then X in 1/100th of the memory then it had to go. However today with fast video cards with lots of memory and dri and other improvements all the negatives on X are obsolete or do not matter as much.
I use to be an X hater untill recently. Berlin is no longer needed except on older systems or pda's. I prefer to not have the complexities of a window manager. But all gui unix apps require X so the point is useless. I do find it redicolous that in 1998 that %80 of my memory was used just for X!
Re:You know, Fresco...doesn't ring a bell? (Score:2)
Errmm.. DRI is not used for X.
Berlin is no longer needed except on older systems or pda's.
Rather ironically, it seems that Berlin is also too slow for PDAs due to very heavy use of floating point. (see the text beside the screenshot of berlin on the Zaurus).
Re:You know, Fresco...doesn't ring a bell? (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:You know, Fresco...doesn't ring a bell? (Score:2)
e.g. if you have one of those matrox parhelia cards with 256 MB ram in there, X will show up as using at lead 256 MB mem + a little bit. So the reports of X being a memory hog are exaggerated.
As for Fresco/Berlin, I hope that there will be an X compat layer so all my old apps will run. It's not a strange request. Lots of operating systems that don't usually run X (BeOS, QNX, Mac OS X, Windows, etc.) have an X server available one can install.
It would be nifty having a rootless X server for Fresco.
How soon we forget. (Score:2)
Yea, just as bloated as on my R3k 25Mhz with 16mb of RAM, right?
Wrong. X11 servers with proper frame buffers ran on stuff wimpier than my Palm Vx with no problems!
XFree86 has always been the problem. That is why so much work went in the 4.x tree towards making the drivers not suck, and why we're starting to see those efforts pay off.
Now it just needs a little more in the basic spec to support more modern windowing features, as well as making everything easier to automate. End users don't want to know about copying dot files with X11 auth permissions, they just want a magic "Roam" button which lets them take their desktop elsewhere in the house.
Re:You know, Fresco...doesn't ring a bell? (Score:2)
HP and SGI did not contribute to the DRI.
The DRI is only used for GLX. Maybe this will change in the future, but Xlib operations today still use the old indirect rendering model.
Re:You know, Fresco...doesn't ring a bell? (Score:5, Insightful)
(Oh and I *REALLY* hate the sites that link to other sites that might have further information... like they expect me to *read* something about the subject. Ha! FAQ and search engines? Not for me my bucko - I want it spoon fed!)
--
Evan "Played golf and cricket in school, still have only a dim idea of how (American) football works"
Re:You know, Fresco...doesn't ring a bell? (Score:2)
Good grief.
Well... (Score:2)
Of course, since slashdot has gone down in quality so much most of the people from long ago are gone (actualy the comments have been getting a little better lately, but the stories are still crappy as hell)
Re:You know, Fresco...doesn't ring a bell? (Score:2)
Re:You know, Fresco...doesn't ring a bell? (Score:4, Informative)
Just a couple of points:
1.) I have the images and stuff turned off. I'm sure other people do too. X doesn't show up on that preference.
2.) Not everybody knows what that X icon means either. It looks to me like the Xerox logo, heh.
Re:You know, Fresco...doesn't ring a bell? (Score:2)
1.) You're an idiot.
2.) Now everyone knows it. "
I'm an idiot? At least I know how to log in.
Berlin (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Berlin (Score:2)
The program itself is still called Berlin, only the project's name changed to Fresco.
My first guess at why has proven to be on their list, easy, available, domain name: fresco.org is much easier than berlin-consortium.org.
Also apparantly there was an old project to make a gui, called Fresco, and the original developers no longer own the rights to that name, so their paying homage to who they stole ideas from.
Why Berlin is now called Fresco (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Berlin (Score:2)
Re:Berlin (Score:3, Funny)
Nobody wants to have his toy project associated with it anymore. It was cool in the 90s, but the times, they are changing...
Re:Berlin (Score:2)
Berlin - Fresco name change (Score:2)
See THIS LINK [fresco.org] in the story.
Re:Berlin (Score:2)
And if you'd read the linked article, you'd know why the project was renamed Fresco, although the display server implementation retains the name Berlin.
Re:Berlin (Score:2)
Guelph (about 20 miles down the road from Kitchener-Waterloo, for those not familiar with the geography of southern Ontario) was named Guelph when it was founded in 1827 by John Galt. (No, not that John Galt.) Guelph was one of the family names of the British royal family.
(I used to live in Waterloo and work at U of Guelph. My commute took me past Waterloo-Wellington Airport, so on nice days I'd sometimes stop and get in some flying practise.)
Re:Berlin (Score:2)
I'm not aware of anything that forbids it, but I'm having a hard time coming up with an example, either.
I'm not aware of a Moose Jaw, Ont, but there is a Moose Factory, also a Moosonee, both near the mouth of the Moose River on James Bay.
(googles around a bit...)
Hah! Found one: there's a Trenton, Nova Scotia and a Trenton, Ontario.
Berlin (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Berlin (Score:3, Informative)
Confusion (Score:5, Informative)
Debian packages (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Debian packages (Score:2)
Re:Debian packages (Score:2)
(The debs themselves use -R nameserver, btw, which is why you'll need omniorb4 + the nameserver package. I also can't comment on how well they work, but try 'em!)
CORBA? (Score:3, Insightful)
(Okay, actually I think CORBA is gross, period.)
-Kevin
Re:CORBA? (Score:4, Insightful)
It's the single issue that people take most issue with - it's truly bizarre.
If Fresco needed to drop CORBA they'd have to reimplement a system similar to CORBA to have the same features, only to satisfy NIH syndrome. And they'd drop all the work that has gone into CORBA's design _and_ implementations (there's some good well performing ORB's out there)
In other words, CORBA is a good fit for a project like Fresco.
Check out these links with some answers to your question
- http://wiki.fresco.org/index.cgi/ArchitectureQues
- http://wiki.fresco.org/index.cgi/MicroGUI
- http://www.fresco.org/introduction.html
Re:CORBA? (Score:2, Insightful)
I'm just not sold on the idea of using CORBA for a component model in this manner. Gnome does this too so it's not a new idea to me. I have read many arguments, but I'm still skeptical. Why can't I have a proxy API that makes local library calls or CORBA calls, depending on what is needed? A language that doesn't want to call native code can use CORBA. There are also some "philosophical" issues about the realities of network transparency as I mentioned in another post.
-Kevin
Re:CORBA? (Score:2)
>>>>>>>>
Most likely how X supports it: bypassing the protocol via something like the DRI.
Re:CORBA? (Score:3, Insightful)
For things like movie playing they'd take a shortcut indeed (SHM). I found this in http://wiki.fresco.org/ArchitectureQuestions
"... In the exceptional case that a client application requires serious bandwidth to the videocard and there is a good reason not to move drawing code to the server (like, say, a game) there's nothing preventing an X-like shared memory segment from being negotiated between the client and server. ..."
I think that's what's being done when using XGGI in Berlin (running X in a window in Berlin)
As for what Gnome does - imho they're using corba as a network protocol, not what corba was intended for. They write wrappers (bonobo) around the corba binding (admittedly this is necessary because the C corba binding is horrible)
As for your comment: "Why can't I have a proxy API that makes local library calls or CORBA calls, depending on what is needed?" - a decent ORB does this already for you.
OmniORB4 is a very well-performing and compliant (and GPL) ORB - they state on their webpage (http://omniorb.sourceforge.net/cgi-bin/moin.cgi/O mniOrb4DevelopmentStatus)
"... When a servant for an object is in the same address space as the client, omniORB uses a colocation optimisation that makes the call significantly faster than a remote call. However, to adhere to the CORBA specification, there is still a fair bit of work involved in a local call, including locking to make sure everything is thread safe, per-thread data access for POACurrent, and all sorts of other things. This adds up to mean that a colocated call is significantly slower than a direct virtual function call would be.
..."
omniORB 4 supports a proprietary POA policy that allows local calls to shortcut all of this, resulting in local calls that are almost as fast as virtual function calls.
Fresco has used this "shortcut" and it can speed everything up quite a bit.
Re:CORBA? (Score:2)
Am I the only one who thinks CORBA for local system calls is gross? I wonder what the overhead to draw a pixel is like.
Several portions of GNOME, including the GNOME panel, use CORBA for local system calls. It's not quite as responsive as direct X calls, but even on a K6-400 I find it quite usable.
Desktops are so overpowered in regards to normal use, it's perfectly reasonable in my mind to use some of that power to make things:
1) More flexible
2) Easier to develop
Fresco might just offer that
Re:CORBA? Perhaps SOAP! (Score:2)
I think SOAP is much better than CORBA to bring a network transparency to GUI. SOAP is more flexible and more language independent (People who tried CJava comm over CORBA will understand).
Unfortunately, SOAP has problems too:
Re:CORBA? Perhaps SOAP! (Score:2)
Re:CORBA? (Score:2, Interesting)
Besides, we could debate whether network transparency even exists since local and remote resources are fundamentally different (network glitches don't affect local resources, and you generally need retry and error logic for networked resources).
I'm not trying to dis Fresco here, just think about the design tradeoffs. The problem with the X protocol is that it's low level, so even though it's a more efficient TCP-based protocol, you would be sending many more low level packets. In the end it could break even with the IIOP and marshalling overhead of CORBA since Fresco is high level.
-Kevin
gui (Score:4, Funny)
An intro that actually introduces would be helpful (Score:4, Informative)
I know, it's a novel concept, an introduction actually introducing the readers to the subject...
Re:An intro that actually introduces would be help (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:An intro that actually introduces would be help (Score:4, Insightful)
So, do you make comments like this on CNN? "Where the heck is Israel and what's the big deal about the west bank? Sheesh, can't you guys put a short history lesson about each area and the conflicts involved in every article?"
Some basic facts: (Score:5, Informative)
*) Yes Fresco uses CORBA and it is a good thing. It gives network transparency and language transparency for free. Yes, we know it is slower then using raw sockets, but CORBA is the only thing available powerful enough for our needs. It's not bloat if you need the features;-)
*) Fresco is not X: Yes, we do not extend X. X is good, we do think so too, but it has certain shortcommings we do want to adress. Improving X is not an option: We'd need to carry along tons of code we do not need and blow the code size out of proportion (example: xlib, networking code).
*) Fresco is not x compatible now. Support for that can and will be added later. Options for that are manigfold, See our FAQ for more infos on this topic. Again: we do not see that extending X is a good idea: Extending X will result in apps using that extension not being able to run on the unextended X. Fresco apps don't do so either. Both, an extended X and a Fresco with compatibility layer can run X apps. NO, there is no compatibility layer yet.
*) We do not write drivers. We can use whichever drivers are supported by our rendering backends. That's a surprising lot. You can run Fresco in a window in X, using your XFree-driver too.
*) Fresco is device independent. So changing the screen resolution will not make windows smaller and you can print everything you can display on screen. That's a good thing (if you want your windows to become smaller you adjust their zoom factor).
*) No, Fresco is not about rotating windows. We can rotate windows, we do so in our screenshots. That's basically because making windows not rotateable would require us to write code to prevent it! And it's an eye catcher.
*) No, this is in no way ready for the end user. Developers are welcome.
That's the basic things I want to get straight early on. From earlier
Regards,
Tobias
Re:Some basic facts: (Score:2)
Re:Some basic facts: (Score:2)
I haven't used CORBA, but the two distributed systems PhDs I've worked with gag every time I mention it. I figure that there has to be something wrong there. Plus, this thing has to do parameter marshalling for even local calls?
We do not write drivers
After reading the FAQ, I'm afraid I still don't understand what is hardware accelerated here. If I want to render a translucent, rotated window, is this done in software?
we'd need to carry along tons of code we do not need...xlib
I wonder whether it's reasonable for only 24 bit color to be used. Half of xlib is palette/color space management.
CORBA (Score:2)
Re:Some basic facts: (Score:4, Insightful)
The demo application uses a bandwith of about 1.9kBit/s... That's because the server pings the clients to check wether they are stoll alive.
Re:Some basic facts: (Score:2)
Re:Some basic facts: (Score:2, Interesting)
Well, you could do one way calls with callbacks, or you could create an event queue on the client side to batch up API calls before doing a CORBA call. I don't see this as a CORBA-specific issue or a fundamental problem any more serious than how a TCP/IP based protocol would have to deal with asynchronous issues.
I think 20ms is on the cynical side. On a good local network it should easily be < 5 ms, don't you think?
-Kevin
It's been a long time... (Score:5, Informative)
I don't think that Fresco will replace X anytime soon, if ever, but it's an interesting technology demo that will surely influence other projects. Playing around with the Quartz technology in MacOS X has convinced me that better and more interesting ways of doing graphics are possible - the Fresco project, by using device independent rendering (OpenGL / Postscript) and an ORB merges some of the advantages of X and DPS / Display PDF.
Why the name change? (Score:2, Informative)
Ant Fresco [antlimited.com].
Re:Why the name change? (Score:4, Informative)
We meat the last maintainer from Fresco a couple of times, he told us it's fine with him for us to adopt the name, we got the domain,
Getting higher speeds out of Linux graphics (Score:4, Insightful)
In an earlier comment somebody said, "Fresco is not X: Yes, we do not extend X. X is good, we do think so too, but it has certain shortcommings we do want to adress. Improving X is not an option: We'd need to carry along tons of code we do not need and blow the code size out of proportion (example: xlib, networking code)."
X may be good but sometimes it is simply too slow and, worse, the documentation does not go out of its way to explain properly the speedups that are available.
Ok, there's shared memory pixmaps and shared memory images [reptiles.org] but the documentation is incomplete.
When you need speed and don't care about hardware-dependency you can use Direct Graphics Access module - DGA. But where's good documentation for DGA? Is there anything faster than DGA in X? Where's the good documentation?
When will Xrender be completed? (Score:4, Interesting)
X is just now getting anti alaised fonts and everyone is saying X is so great, we are about a year away from the release of Xfree5.0 which is supposed to have the finished Xrender, only one guy is working on Xrender (Keith Packard)
The founder of the X project Mr. Dawes claims they are just now beginning to focus on
Quotes from David Dawes David Dawes: There has been some work on a new rendering model for XFree86 that provides some more advance composition techniques (including transparency), this currently being implemented in software. For XFree86 5.0 we'll be investigating this as part of our review of rendering models, and seeing if a hardware implementation would not be more appropriate.
Currently Xrender is still in the planning stages, its at about the same level as Fresco, not really useable to anyone but perhaps Keith Packard and a select few developers, its unfinished, its beta but to users and not so skilled programmers its vaporware.
I'm looking towards XFree86 5.0, which will be the next significant step in XFree86. We're only just starting to think seriously about it. We'll start by re-evaluating what we would like from a graphics/windowing system, and not limit ourselves to the ones that currently exist. With XFree86 4.0 our main focus was on the device-dependent component of the X server (DDX), and to do that we needed to provide a more modular infrastructure. The features that came out of that process showed how much it was needed, and it has given us a solid DDX base from which to expand into other areas. For 5.0 I expect that we'll move more into the device-independent (DIX) and protocol areas as well as making some adjustments to the DDX area based on our experiences with 4.x.
Ok so for Xfree86 5.0 they will focus on improving the rendering, and bringing X to the levels of Aqua, but by the time 5.0 gets here expect Longhorn to be released, and expect OS 11 to be released by Apple which takes things to the next level.
Linux needs to do more than just keep afloat and compete, Linux has to dominate to beat Microsoft.
Currently the only thing preventing Linux from taking the desktop market, is the fact that the currently Linux interface doesnt look polished enough, theres enough programs for grandma, theres games, theres plenty of office apps, the casual user can use Linux, the only reason they wont use Linux is because OSX is better than Linux.
Why buy a Linux dell laptop for college when you can get an Ibook thats just as powerful but better?
Why get Linux if its just like Windows? This is why Windows users would sooner switch to Mac.
X is now one of Linux's biggest bottlenecks, along with the fact that they have no music apps and not enough file sharing apps.
Re:When will Xrender be completed? (Score:2)
Why bother with XRender when there's the proven GLX [sgi.com]?
Re:When will Xrender be completed? (Score:2)
Re:When will Xrender be completed? (Score:2)
Re:When will Xrender be completed? (Score:2)
RENDER is basically done. What you're thinking of is, we don't have true transparency yet. Well what do you know, that's because
a) Transparency is useless for virtually anything except screenshots, making a list of places where it enhances usability for instance is very hard.... and
b) X has bigger issues which need resolving first, like on the fly resolution switching (R&R, done), decent cursors (XCursor, done), reducing the amount of configuration work needed (ongoing, the aim is to eliminate the XF86Config file eventually).
And FYI the Matrox drivers already have hardware accelerated alpha blending.
People make such a big deal of having "true" transparency, but you know what? I'd probably turn most of it off. Truly transparent terminal windows I find are harder to use than the desktop wallpaper transparency that KDE and GNOME use. One shows you all the text, lines etc, the latter just gives you a nice working background. Maybe if they were blended as well to make the background less distracting, that'd be cool, but at the end of the day it's just FUN, not USEFUL.
Usability isnt the issue, Quality is the issue. (Score:2)
Linux looks like shit because it has no Alpha channel effects, Note I didnt say transparency, thats not what I mean, what I mean is, the ability for windows to have diffrent levels of alpha channelling.
This is VERY useful, look at OSX and see how its used, even WindowsXP uses it when you move your icons, the icons become transparent so you can see where you are moving them.
The cursor also needs to become transparent so that it can have proper shadows and look professional, the fonts would also look better, along with the windows.
This isnt about usability, geeks care about usability, WindowsXP isnt the most usable, neither is OSX, you have to balance usability and presentation.
Linux is already easier to use meaning better usability than Windows in most areas, the only real problems left are the lack of polish, Linux still looks amateur, KDE3 can add all these nice effects but if they all are fake, the whole thing looks like a hacker OS that it still is.
Things need to look professional, and this is the purpose of eye candy.
Re:Usability isnt the issue, Quality is the issue. (Score:2)
This is VERY useful, look at OSX and see how its used, even Windows XP uses it when you move your icons, the icons become transparent so you can see where you are moving them.
>>>>>>>>>>
Um, how exactly is this useful? First, I doubt you can make out two tiny icon-sized images alpha-blended together. Second, if you're drop target is the size of an icon, there is some serious design error. Besides, Linux has it too. I don't have desktop icons in KDE (I hate icons) but if I did, they'd be translucent when moved.
The cursor also needs to become transparent so that it can have proper shadows and look professional,
>>>>>>>>>
Um, shadows on cursors looks cheesy, not professional. Are you telling me that before Windows 2000 and it's drop shadow effect, there was no professional looking GUI? Beyond that, you're just wrong on so many levels. All cursors (since like Windows 2.0) have transparency (they're two bitmaps, a color one and a mask). That's why it looks like an arrow rather than a big square. Besides, the XCursor extension (already in XFree CVS) does drop shadows and animation and all that.
the fonts would also look better, along with the windows.
>>>>>>>>
Um, translucency at the screen level (which X doesn't support) has nothing to do with translucency at the window level (which X does support, via XRender). Translucency at the screen level is needed for window drop-shadows, while translucency at the window level works just fine for anti-aliased text. On top of that, my AA fonts look better in X than in Windows, and a hell of a lot better than OS X.
This isnt about usability, geeks care about usability, WindowsXP isnt the most usable, neither is OSX, you have to balance usability and presentation.
>>>>>>>
Usability is king. If something can look nice and still be usable, great. If looks interferes with usability, you've fucked up the design.
KDE3 can add all these nice effects but if they all are fake, the whole thing looks like a hacker OS that it still is.
>>>>>>>>>
How is it fake? I've got transparent menus and cool eye candy in KDE, and I sure as a hell can't tell the difference between it and OS X, aside from the god-damned window drop-shadows. There are two rendering models at work here, and despite what Apple would have you believe, Aqua's isn't better than X's.
X has a model that maps very well to current hardware, and is very fast. Do benchmarks if you don't believe me on the 'fast' part. I've done them, and X whips some ass. As a trade-off for this, it has to implement certain eye-candy tricks as hacks. This is just fine, because eye candy isn't drawn that often anyway. If the user doesn't notice, it's working just fine.
Aqua uses a model that does not map well at all to current hardware. It's coupling to DisplayPDF precludes a lot of hardware acceleration possibilities, and it uses inordinate amounts of RAM. However, it enables certain things like window shadows and the genie effect to be done "naturally."
The major problem with Aqua is it trades "real work" performance for "stupid eye-candy" performance. That's a no-no.
(Note, I'm just comparing the window rendering methods. Aqua's *real* killer feature is the Quartz vector API, which Apple unfortunately does half-assedly by rendering everything to giant bitmaps...)
Things need to look professional, and this is the purpose of eye candy.
>>>>>>>>>>.
Um, even Apple realized that it had to cut down on eye candy to look more professional. Hence, Aqua Graphite.
Re:When will Xrender be completed? (Score:2)
You'd imagine wrong. The original author probably ment music creation apps. This is often a big gripe among free-software naysayers. He's wrong, as there is stuff out there - just not the products he's comfortable with, most likely those only availible on Windows or Mac platforms.
Kde3 better than OSX? What are you smoking? (Score:2)
KDE doesnt do alpha channel properly, it cannot do realtime shadows yet, it cannot do image transformations such as genie effect, it cannot do realtime scaling, it doesnt fully anti alias everything on screen, it doesnt use your video card to do this in hardware if you do find some software hacks to do this, so X is extremely slow.
KDE better than OSX? hell no, check back in 2-3 years and maybe you'll be right.
Re:Kde3 better than OSX? What are you smoking? (Score:2)
>>>>>>>>
Not to windows it can't, but it can do them inside windows, which is far more important.
it cannot do realtime scaling
>>>>>
What's that? If you mean scaling the graphics because the drawing API is vector based, nothing else can either. If you didn't notice, most OS X widgets are bitmaps.
it doesnt fully anti alias everything on screen
>>>>>
This is legitimate.
it doesnt use your video card to do this in hardware if you do find some software hacks to do this, so X is extremely slow.
>>>>>>
Actually, certain X driver (Matrox, NVIDIA) *do* accelerate XRender in hardware. Quartz, right now, does everything in software, and can't even theoretically do stuff in hardware (blame Display PDF) without a lot of overhead in translating the format.
KDE better than OSX? hell no, check back in 2-3 years and maybe you'll be right.
>>>>>>
It's already better from a features point of view, and in terms of locks, it's a wash. OS X has window shadows and smooth icon-zooming, which KDE doesn't have, but the fact that it's actively hostile to theming give KDE an advantage. The only thing missing is a vector API , which will arrive in months rather than years (check the XRender mailing lists). The future, however, is outside both KDE and OS X. The future is stuff like EVAS and Longhorn, and OS X has the disadvantage that it's display model is so closely tied to DisplayPDF it will need some significant reworking to compete with those.
Re:When will Xrender be completed? (Score:2)
Please tell me if Xrender is completely finished, why is it not being used by anyone?
If its so finished perhaps its too hard to use so no ones using it, the only people who seem to be able to use it are keith packard and Xfree developer types.
For God's sake (Score:5, Insightful)
1. "Why?"
2. "What's wrong with X?"
3. "It looks like crap."
Nobody realizes the answers are easy.
1. Why not? They want a better, simpler windowing environment.
2. Read the page. There are performance issues, resolution issues, and network issues. They also hope to add an X compatibilty layer at some point.
3. It's not done, not by a longshot.
Frankly, a rival project is a good thing. Good luck to Fresco for doing something that no one else dares, writing what could turn in to an X substitue.
Editors, PLEASE add value here (Score:2, Offtopic)
.
deeper issues (Score:2, Insightful)
I am not talking about software applications here, but everyday things like webpages (images in a web page are not generally resolution independant) and games.
Hardware is the same. My monitor is an LCD device with exactly 1280*1024 pixels. With a 100% vector display it would be awful to look at all day. I like the ability to be able to turn on or off 1 pixex, or subpixel, on my monitor.
You end up with an awful and awkward looking experience just for this "feature" which actually isnt all that important.
Re:deeper issues (Score:2, Interesting)
Just as sub pixel AA aka cleartype you love so much, rinse the m$ propaganda off and reconsider. This stuff really gives you headaches: the sides of a font have different tints, everything looks like your monitor blew a fuse and no pro graphic will ever have this crap interfere with the color calibration system. Need better edges? Buy a 1600x1200 monitor and stop whining; the fonts are ant like? Increase size; the GUI is screwed Redmond hardcoded the widget sizes? I pity you. BTW, OsX is all about vector based formats from the truetype fonts - oh, but your rest of the computing world doesn't use them - to svg resizable icons and widgets (where the difference between pathetic winblast theming progs and the original really shines)
I hate to be hard but... are you shure you're a nerd?
Re:deeper issues (Score:2)
Comparison to PicoGUI? (Score:4, Insightful)
I think it's also neat that PicoGUI supports multiple (programming) languages simply by having a documented net protocol -- language bindings talk directly with the renderer over the net, instead of wrapping some C interface.
PicoGUI is also small and cross platform. It's certainly not as old as Fresco, but it looks like they're going to lap Fresco pretty easily.
On another front -- what's Fresco's comparison to NeWS [art.net]? NeWS, a competitor to X from Sun (late 80's?), had some concepts that were similar to Fresco (and PicoGUI). Considerably more display logic was on the server (renderer). It apparently had lots of bugs and issues, but it actually did reach a usable state. Have they learned from this predecessor? Neither project seems as flexible (NeWS used Postscript for its widgets, so new widgets could be nearly arbitrarily complex)... that flexibility may have been NeWS downfall.
Anyway, it always seemed like a neat idea and an important project to learn from.
Re:Comparison to PicoGUI? (Score:2, Informative)
Fresco is another GUI (http://fresco.org) that has some similarities to PicoGUI. Fresco has been around for quite a while longer than PicoGUI, but when PicoGUI was started MicahDowty didn't know about Fresco.
Similarities between PicoGUI and Fresco:
-Standard widgets on the server side
-Separation between applications and device coordinates
-Server keeps a scene graph
-New GUI architecture, with no backward compatibility
-Language-independent client/server protocol
Differences between PicoGUI and Fresco:
-PicoGUI takes a lot of shortcuts compared to Fresco, to make it more suitable for embedded systems
-Fresco uses device independent coordinates everywhere, while PicoGUI's themes and layout engine still use pixels
-Fresco uses CORBA, while PicoGUI has its own network protocol
-There's nothing like PicoGUI's theme interpreter in Fresco
-Fresco handles overlapping, and uses a homogeneous scene graph making it more suitable for generic drawing apps and desktop window management
-PicoGUI has features taylored for embedded systems, such as support for low-end display hardware, and keyboard-only navigation
-Fresco does real transparency, while PicoGUI usually cheats
-Fresco relies heavily on floating point math, PicoGUI's core is 100% integer. Of course this means that picogui's layout engine has to operate in integer pixel units. (See below)
Of course they have more in common - both are seen as traitors and main enemy by all the X zealots who come out of their holes every time there's an article about (perhaps) better replacements on
Re:Comparison to PicoGUI? (Score:2)
For instance, fresco has subpixel addressing, a scene graph based windowing model etc. These aren't buzzwords, but I can't really explain them all in depth, i'm too tired right now.
Fresco is based on corba which is implicitly multilanguage, so that's not just picogui.
NeWS was an early attempt but it had design issues and never really went anywhere.
Yeah, I'll second the last comment. It's good to see people trying out new ideas. I suspect that soon X will have most of the features people want in the short term, and we'll all be happy, but that doesn't mean X is perfect and cannot be improved upon. It's good to know people are thinking about a future beyond "we want transparency".
Why is this in the X section? (Score:2, Insightful)
Wow, it's pretty ugly. (Score:2)
How extensible is the API that these people are using, as far as the ability to theme the widgets/windows/etc?
Fresco (Score:2)
This Fresco is cheap middleware on a product of limited utility, and could last for thousands of days, maybe. Maybe not.
Re:MacOSX ? (Score:2)
Re:good thing (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:good thing (Score:2, Insightful)
No, it isn't the "only thing holding back Linux" at all. There are many things holding Linux back from this (dubious) goal and X just isn't one of them
Re:good thing (Score:2)
X is what is holding linux back, not lack of apps, you see people complain linux is too hard to use, and it cant be made easier until X is fixed.
Re:good thing (Score:4, Insightful)
What will be (and already is) making Linux suceed on the desktop is a friendly desktop environment, such as KDE. The underlying windowing system that it uses to draw on the screen is largely irrelevant.
X is not getting in the way of the Linux desktop succeeding. It has all the important features now: font antialiasing, video, on the fly resolution switching, several great looking toolkits to choose from, and the network transparency is just a bonus. In fact I'd find it pretty hard to work without it.
Re:good thing (Score:2)
What about resolution issues? Font problems anyone?
No realtime shadows, no hardware alpha channel, software alpha channel is too slow and buggy to be useful.
But it's not irrelevant. (Score:2)
IT's still too difficult for developers to know what toolkit to use to write applications for Linux... especially if they wan't something modern.
Yes, they can use GTK. Yes they can use QT.
What version should they pick? What will be the most compatable?
It would be nice to have a NEW display API that really rocks... that's what this is about.
Re:good thing (Score:2)
"Quartz Extreme" is'nt analagous to "Quartz." "Quartz Extreme" is a way to hardware accelerate window compositing while Quartz is (mostly) a software renderer to draw stuff inside those windows.
Re:good thing (Score:2)
Personally, I haven't noticed any specific slowness in X for years. Some applications manage to be slow (openoffice sometimes redraws its window pretty slowly after switching workspace, as one example), but in the vast majority the speed of drawing feels practically instant, just the same than on other operating systems (or their GUIs). So I think that the only slowness that I notice is caused by the few applications themselves (or their GUI toolkits) rather than X itself.
CTWT (Score:2, Funny)
CTWT: 'Cause They Want To.
Can be changed to work better in first person...
CIWT: 'Cause I Want To.
Maybe I'll try it on my girlfriend next time she "has a headache."
-kentyman
Re:Why...? (Score:3, Interesting)
Transparency is also a big part of anti-aliased text. Some people like that.
Spinning window thingies isn't so important, but it shows the flexibility of Fresco. Although a window at a 45 degree turn isn't easy to use there's talk of using something like that to grab user attention. When an application needs your input rather than flashing on the toolbar or taking focus it could appear for a few seconds slightly transparent and rotating slowly - you know, like out of the Exorcist. Features like that are what's bring ing Hollywood to Linux, and I for one welcome it.
Re:Why...? (Score:2, Funny)
Re:Why...? (Score:2)
Re:Why...? (Score:2)
Re:Why...? (Score:2)
You've missed the point. (Score:4, Informative)
The point of Fresco is very similar to the point of Quartz on MacOS X. It's a composited windowing system that doesn't "fake" sophisticated rendering like X currently does. Translucent windows now work by taking a "screenshot" of the area occluded by the window, then adding the color values together. This is a hack. A composited render draws things from back to front, taking into account a Z axis position and the alpha bits in a color block (RGBA) (this is fairly layman, but gets my point across).
I don't know why you're considered insightful for this, but rest-assured, we need a project like Fresco to develop a better windowing system. In the future, computer displays aren't going to be treated as fixed-pixel dimentions with static elements. A computer screen will be like a piece of paper. Elements will be drawn by real-world measurements (x centimeters versus x pixels) such that the number of "dots" will become arbitrary. Things will have to rotate freely. Alpha-blending will be absolutely necessary for proper hinting. And so on and so forth.
X11 is great, but very arcaic. It must go away in the future. Apple's got a good lead -- and pretty soon Microsoft will duplicate their efforts. We've got to be in that game too.
Re:You've missed the point. (Score:2)
Ohh...
You mean like Display PostScript - circa late 1980s, or NeWS, which predates even that.
Re:You've missed the point. (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Maybe in 10 years-- no look at their pages (Score:3, Informative)
I hope it is can be the replacement to X that most of us have been waiting for,
for benifit of people not familiar with fresco:
they have moved the window manager and the toolkit portion to server thus achieving (hopefully) consistant look and feel , they use corba heavily and i guess it has some replacement of X protocol , but i have not been able to find from their site.
Re:Old news (Score:2)
And some of the screenshots are treble, like this one [fresco.org]
That "screenshot" is not a screenshot of Fresco. It's a screenshot of gv displaying postscript generated by a very early version of the Postscript DrawingKit -- in effect demonstrating that Fresco can now print.
Re:Any other Fresco themes besides Motif? (Score:2, Informative)
of course you're free to build a better looking one
Re:Does Corba have to be Slow? (Score:2)
Fortunately CORBA can leave out a lot of the overhead in the 'local case' when communicationg with objects on the same mashine or even in the same address space.
Re:My only question is... (Score:2)
This page [brazzil.com] contains an excerpt from Beyond Carnival by James N. Green and tells more about the term. I won't reproduce the text here, or I'll be sent to the Camp of Tolerance. (Hail Lemmiwinks the Gerbil King!)
Re:Blah (Score:2)
That's not true. There's a backport of Linux to the 286 (I believe the big technical issue was no MMU...).
Re:none (Score:2)
PS> As for software installation, you're using the wrong distro. Software installation for me is a two second (literally) process where I type "emerge " Same thing for Debian users. Silly Windows users spend precious minutes scouring around the net, downloading a program, navigating to the installer, and clicking 'next' a bazillion times before the program is installed!