Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 13 of 13

Thread: A Crazy Demo Showing The Ilixi Compositor In DirectFB 1.6

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    55

    Default

    I always liked DirectFB a *lot*.

    First their logo. It's a rainbow!

    Then, it uses the framebuffer directly. I like that, obviously.

    Then this. 1ghz pc, software rendered, and its more fluid than beos? omg :')

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    79

    Default You forgot

    > Then this. 1ghz pc, software rendered, and its more fluid than beos? omg :')

    At the time I used BeOS, it was on 333MHz PC, and AFAIK video card provided very little HW acceleration, so I'm not surprised that a 1GHz PC does better!

    @bountykiller: Thanks for the description.
    I'm not sure I understand your point about the difference between a "protocol" and "only a library": both have a library, and if you don't use the library in the correct way, it won't work, so each follow a protocol..

    For me, the main difference is that DirectFB only work on top of unaccelerated API currently (the DirectFBGL link is broken), whereas Wayland will work both using shared memory between the client and the compositor (so using CPU rendering normally) or using a buffer in the GPU's memory (so potentially accelerated).
    Last edited by renox; 04-20-2012 at 08:56 AM.

  3. #13

    Default

    For me, the main difference is that DirectFB only work on top of unaccelerated API currently
    DirectFB is accelerated by itself. It access directly to your video card and it does not rely on other library for that.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •