Sorry for overrunning this thread folks. My last shot here. Honest.
Potatohead,
I think you described X11 as "borked". It's not that it has been taken by some and borked up. It's that X11 is really crappy. It was fine back in simpler times but not now.
Do take 40 minutes to watch this presentation from Daniel Stone, a long time X guts developer, about how bad X11 is, how remote display is the feature it is least optimized for, and what they are doing to fix things (Wayland) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RIctzAQOe44
In the final minutes of his presentation he suggests optimizations for remote display over high latency connections. Ironically they sound exactly like the way VNC works!
I'm not sure I believe you. It may have worked some time some place but I find it hard to believe that if I take my Quake3 for linux I can watch it run on a remote X server. This calls for an experiment....
One of the weirdest set ups I ever did went like this:
Take a Windows application, good old WIN32 API stuff, and compile it for Linux against libwine.
From a remote Linux machine, use ssh to login to the machine with the Windows app and export the X session over the connection. Both ends of this connection were in different countries.
Run the Windows app.
At the time this broke all the rules in the book. What, a Windows app running on Linux? What, a Windows app running in one place but presenting its GUI in another? And what, how the hell did yo get through our firewall?:)
Now a days this is common place with, remote desktop or whatever they call it, or VNC etc.
What you can get through the wire depends on how much bandwidth you are willing to pay for.
And I'm hoping Weyland works out. Taking the VNC type path may be the right one. I'm skeptical, but hopeful. You are right about simpler times, but it's not quite as bad as it's made out to be. I say it's borked right now, because there are expectations for how people want things to look, and application developers mixed on how they write and for what too. And it's in that transitional state.
Overall, network transparent apps worked just fine at early DSL speeds, when written well. Some of those same applications today, such as a browser, no longer work well, and it's chasing visual features as much as it is technology issues. Networks are a ton faster too. And that last point has me hopeful because some want it to work well, but there are some who don't care so much either.
Either way, interesting times!
If we get what I got on SGI in the 90's, that's a win IMHO. Right now, I'm watching with interest. I was able to serve 30 users on a mixed 100-1000T network on SGI + X11, using both machines as displays, IRIX Origin doing application serving, 3D solid modeling, full shaded, dynamically rotating models. 1998-2000'ish time frame.
Yeah, my last too. Sorry. I gotta go anyway. Back later.
Yes, perhaps, but that is not he problem here. That is perhaps even a small part of the story in the X11 case. If the protocol you are using is not efficient it does not help to speed up the line.
As a horrible simple example, a client could ask a server for a million data records one at a time. Each one of those involves a request and a response. Or the client could just say "give me all your records" and boom they come streaming back. Which do you think is faster? X11 is described as being more like the former than the later.
Oh well. Another thread completely derailed by them fanatic religious preachers who need over and over again explain the world how fantastic LINUX is and how stupid and dump people are who use Windows.
It's completely fatuous to say that one OS is better than another. They all have their strengths and weaknesses, whether technical or market-based. Over seven computers, I use two versions of Linux, two of Windows, and OS/X. Each has its place and performs the way I want it to for the task at hand. OS religious zeal is just plain silly and has no place in an informed discussion.
Nobody here has said that users of any OS or other are stupid and dumb. It would be stupid and dumb to do so.
Personally I would not like to go so far a to say one OS is better or worse than another on a purely technical basis, I'm not sufficiently versed in OS internals. In fact what we have been discussing here is how crappy one part of Linux/Unix systems is, the X Windows system.
Clearly from a user perspective if an OS allows one person to do one thing better than some other OS then that person has found the superior OS for the job.
Why do all attempts to suggest moving away from proprietary systems get branded as "fanatic religious zealotry"? The arguments presented here for doing so are purely practical in nature.
Still, in the interests of peace and harmony in this inter-OS world we should drop all such talk and get back to the topic at hand. Suggestions for protecting XP and ensuring it's usability into the future have been made but it seems that they are off the table for political or religious reasons.
Potatohead brings up a good point.
Think of all the companies who designed things years ago and somewhere there are computer files written with by programs that are long gone. How do you work with those files if luckily they weren't deleted? The paper files might be warehoused somewhere or could have been tossed years ago. I am sure there is a lot of military equipment that was designed, built, and tested with hardware and software that is long obsolete.
When I was at J&J we had several test stations with ancient hardware and software that wasn't supported anymore but they were used everyday and everytime there was a problem production would grind to halt. I think at one point we lost our backup system because R&D's system died. Everytime I asked I was told that we were supposed to be getting a new system from our sister company.
I was told never to turn that system off but one day the power went out and the battery back-up didn't work, and guess what the computer wouldn't restart. I tried several times and then thought we are screwed because it finally died. I came back awhile later and tried again and amazing it worked so we were back in business. I know though that sooner or later something is finally going to wear out and then it will be extremely expensive to have a replacement flown to us.
That there is the entire argument for moving away from proprietary systems. It is something that has been causing trouble for people for decades now and they have begun to realize how it happens. This very thread about preserving XP is a fine example of how it happens. The argument for Free and Open Source systems is a lot to do with that. It's is a serious practical issue not a mater of religious zeal.
Oh well. Another thread completely derailed by them fanatic religious preachers who need over and over again explain the world how fantastic LINUX is and how stupid and dump people are who use Windows.
Wow.
Mike
Just butting in on the thread .... remember that everyone here was baptised into MS because we didn't have much choice (I loved OS/2 & BeOS but MS killed them too) but later when choice became available some did the hard work in actually choosing. So everyone that uses Linux is very very familiar with MS but many of those who were weaned on MS and stuck with it know little or nothing about Linux, or worse still, they are misinformed. It is true that some find Linux harder to learn but that does not mean Linux is harder to learn than Windows, it's like your mother tongue, it's easy whereas it's always harder to learn something different.
Yet when I say this I actually used Macs for a good decade since they were born and only changed to PCs because they were readily available and all the software I needed ran on them, although I found them ugly to use. After almost 2 decades of MSWIN I managed to break free from the WIN WIN WIN mantra when Linux matured sufficiently for everyday use, so here I am. But mind you I am still fixing Windows on everyone else's PCs, the funny thing being that despite the Nortons and other AVs that people run on their MSWINs is that it always fails to find the real virus that slows down and crashes the PC
This message goes out to those four brave anonymous individuals who decided to download my software.
I sincerely hope that you are enjoying the use of this software, because I know that I love having it and using it. I now have four panes of easy to access and colorful shortcuts. So much easier than going to Favorites or typing in the addresses.
Comments
Potatohead,
I think you described X11 as "borked". It's not that it has been taken by some and borked up. It's that X11 is really crappy. It was fine back in simpler times but not now.
Do take 40 minutes to watch this presentation from Daniel Stone, a long time X guts developer, about how bad X11 is, how remote display is the feature it is least optimized for, and what they are doing to fix things (Wayland) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RIctzAQOe44
In the final minutes of his presentation he suggests optimizations for remote display over high latency connections. Ironically they sound exactly like the way VNC works!
What you can get through the wire depends on how much bandwidth you are willing to pay for.
And I'm hoping Weyland works out. Taking the VNC type path may be the right one. I'm skeptical, but hopeful. You are right about simpler times, but it's not quite as bad as it's made out to be. I say it's borked right now, because there are expectations for how people want things to look, and application developers mixed on how they write and for what too. And it's in that transitional state.
Overall, network transparent apps worked just fine at early DSL speeds, when written well. Some of those same applications today, such as a browser, no longer work well, and it's chasing visual features as much as it is technology issues. Networks are a ton faster too. And that last point has me hopeful because some want it to work well, but there are some who don't care so much either.
Either way, interesting times!
If we get what I got on SGI in the 90's, that's a win IMHO. Right now, I'm watching with interest. I was able to serve 30 users on a mixed 100-1000T network on SGI + X11, using both machines as displays, IRIX Origin doing application serving, 3D solid modeling, full shaded, dynamically rotating models. 1998-2000'ish time frame.
Yeah, my last too. Sorry. I gotta go anyway. Back later.
Yes, perhaps, but that is not he problem here. That is perhaps even a small part of the story in the X11 case. If the protocol you are using is not efficient it does not help to speed up the line.
As a horrible simple example, a client could ask a server for a million data records one at a time. Each one of those involves a request and a response. Or the client could just say "give me all your records" and boom they come streaming back. Which do you think is faster? X11 is described as being more like the former than the later.
Wow.
Mike
buying a PC and not being happy with it Yet still 2 decades in a row buying a PC ..
as long as you dont expect that some day the fine folks in redmond will some day learn from there mistakes . you are OK .
-Phil
Nobody here has said that users of any OS or other are stupid and dumb. It would be stupid and dumb to do so.
Personally I would not like to go so far a to say one OS is better or worse than another on a purely technical basis, I'm not sufficiently versed in OS internals. In fact what we have been discussing here is how crappy one part of Linux/Unix systems is, the X Windows system.
Clearly from a user perspective if an OS allows one person to do one thing better than some other OS then that person has found the superior OS for the job.
Why do all attempts to suggest moving away from proprietary systems get branded as "fanatic religious zealotry"? The arguments presented here for doing so are purely practical in nature.
Still, in the interests of peace and harmony in this inter-OS world we should drop all such talk and get back to the topic at hand. Suggestions for protecting XP and ensuring it's usability into the future have been made but it seems that they are off the table for political or religious reasons.
Think of all the companies who designed things years ago and somewhere there are computer files written with by programs that are long gone. How do you work with those files if luckily they weren't deleted? The paper files might be warehoused somewhere or could have been tossed years ago. I am sure there is a lot of military equipment that was designed, built, and tested with hardware and software that is long obsolete.
When I was at J&J we had several test stations with ancient hardware and software that wasn't supported anymore but they were used everyday and everytime there was a problem production would grind to halt. I think at one point we lost our backup system because R&D's system died. Everytime I asked I was told that we were supposed to be getting a new system from our sister company.
I was told never to turn that system off but one day the power went out and the battery back-up didn't work, and guess what the computer wouldn't restart. I tried several times and then thought we are screwed because it finally died. I came back awhile later and tried again and amazing it worked so we were back in business. I know though that sooner or later something is finally going to wear out and then it will be extremely expensive to have a replacement flown to us.
That there is the entire argument for moving away from proprietary systems. It is something that has been causing trouble for people for decades now and they have begun to realize how it happens. This very thread about preserving XP is a fine example of how it happens. The argument for Free and Open Source systems is a lot to do with that. It's is a serious practical issue not a mater of religious zeal.
Just butting in on the thread .... remember that everyone here was baptised into MS because we didn't have much choice (I loved OS/2 & BeOS but MS killed them too) but later when choice became available some did the hard work in actually choosing. So everyone that uses Linux is very very familiar with MS but many of those who were weaned on MS and stuck with it know little or nothing about Linux, or worse still, they are misinformed. It is true that some find Linux harder to learn but that does not mean Linux is harder to learn than Windows, it's like your mother tongue, it's easy whereas it's always harder to learn something different.
Yet when I say this I actually used Macs for a good decade since they were born and only changed to PCs because they were readily available and all the software I needed ran on them, although I found them ugly to use. After almost 2 decades of MSWIN I managed to break free from the WIN WIN WIN mantra when Linux matured sufficiently for everyday use, so here I am. But mind you I am still fixing Windows on everyone else's PCs, the funny thing being that despite the Nortons and other AVs that people run on their MSWINs is that it always fails to find the real virus that slows down and crashes the PC
I sincerely hope that you are enjoying the use of this software, because I know that I love having it and using it. I now have four panes of easy to access and colorful shortcuts. So much easier than going to Favorites or typing in the addresses.