Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 17 of 17

Thread: The New X.Org Server Driver API Is Coming

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    2,264

    Default

    Ah yes, my bad. It was specifically (entire Plan9 OS) designed for distributed networks. But still; stuff like Fuse and streaming entire HD movies isn't a problem over the internet, so what are we even talking about?

    Rio works mostly with commands and discriptions, which is window management transparent, which means resizing a window isn't even consuming bandwith. I'm guessing this is a pain in X.org?

    Should be just fine.

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    83

    Default

    > Ah yes, my bad. It was specifically (entire Plan9 OS) designed for distributed networks.

    Yes, I know but my question was: which network: local or WAN? Both are quite different (especially the RTT).

    > But still; stuff like Fuse and streaming entire HD movies isn't a problem over the internet, so what are we even talking about?

    As said above, mostly about round trip.

    > Rio works mostly with commands and discriptions, which is window management transparent, which means resizing a window isn't even consuming bandwith.

    Uh? Given that if you increase the size of a window a program may display more text/data than it had with its previous size, I don't know how this can be possible, you're sure that you aren't thinking about moving windows?

    > I'm guessing this is a pain in X.org?

    Funny you should say this because in theory you could move Windows in X without paying a RTT, but with Wayland 'normal' design, you cannot avoid this: the decoration is handled by the client.

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    2,264

    Default

    Rendering a webpage doesn't require more bandwith, even when you max the browser window, either. It's drawn by a driver that has nothing to do with the network. Why? Because it's all semi-code and content loading. After that...

    Well that's kindof how Plan9 handles things; with common sence.

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    3,174

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by V!NCENT View Post
    But still; stuff like Fuse and streaming entire HD movies isn't a problem over the internet, so what are we even talking about?
    Something most people overlook when bringing up this argument:

    sure, movies stream fine over the internet for the most part, but check out what happens when you throw in user interaction and seek to the middle - it pauses and buffers before starting up again.

    Such pauses may be acceptable in a video streaming scenario, but you obviously don't want to happen all the time in an interactive desktop.

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    286

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by V!NCENT View Post
    This whole X11 architecture is dead. Instead of defending it, why not evolve it? Plan9 did something similar; network the hell out of everything.
    plan9 has also only ever been used by like ten people.

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Finland
    Posts
    59

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by renox View Post
    Funny you should say this because in theory you could move Windows in X without paying a RTT, but with Wayland 'normal' design, you cannot avoid this: the decoration is handled by the client.
    Hi, just ensuring that little detail about wayland:

    If you move a window in Wayland by clicking and dragging a window element (like the title bar), the round-trip happens once on button-down. After that, it's all compositor play while the button is held down and you wiggle the mouse.

    If you move a window by a compositor hot-key, say, Super+left-mouse-button-drag, the client will never know.

    If the window enters or leaves an output's area, the client gets notified, but that's beside the point.

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    2,264

    Default

    The fact that Plan9 was never used for production use/end use, is because it's a research operating system. It was a moving target and never even advised to be developped for, because it was continuesly changing.

    But that doesn't mean that their research was not valuable. In fact, it was meant to be copied by other operating systems. Apple's backup timemachine hdd was actually an implementation of Plan9's networked harddisk with delta changes. Microsoft copied some of their research for the distributed NT kernel in business network settups (making Windows plus Office the number one solution for businesses).

    Don't underestimate the advances Plan9 made at Bell Labs!

Posting Permissions

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