- Thread Starter
- #76
"Desktop" is the keyword!
I find RDP much more universal: it supports remote audio, directories mapping, clipboards and much more.
RDP?
"Desktop" is the keyword!
I find RDP much more universal: it supports remote audio, directories mapping, clipboards and much more.
I don't think so. It depends mostly on X libs, the installed size with libraries is less than 5MB.It looks ugly bloat, right?
I don't think so. It depends mostly on X libs, the installed size with libraries is less than 5MB.
Why not? If somebody implement a good server part.it cannot be for BSD community
The X11 protocol was invented more than 30 years ago, when programs needed commands to draw lines, rectangles, triangles, circles, and text
It would be nice if the aplications limit themselves to use that and do not need extensions to send binary data. Or do you thing modern programming will draw by sending binary data better than drawing with commands?
PutImage
request, or via an extension such as DRI.The application has to do that itself (or via a specialized library), and then use the X11 protocol to send the resulting bitmap to the display server – either via X11's nativePutImage
request, or via an extension such as DRI.
I'm sorry, I don't understand. Can you word that differently, please?If that is so important for the application, then it must be divided in client and sever, and have a protocol for not sending binary, but to build the bitmap at the client.
Can you word that differently, please?
Ok, if I understand you correctly, you mean introducing another level of abstraction inside the application. That could be done, of course (and there already are libraries that do exactly that), but it's an implementation detail of the application and has nothing to do with the communication with the display server.Not to send bitmap, but vector description. It does not need to be X11 protocol, X11 server, X11 client.
Wayland for young developers, heavy desktops like KDE, Linux gamers ; X11 for Desktop Unix retros.
The only people who take Wayland seriously are the people who just read "it's a new replacement for X11" and don't know what it does; it's not a replacement at all. It turns Unix into Android where you have no control over your own system any more; it's a goddamn walled garden.
What if you had worded the poll differently? For example:The poll clearly shows that users do care about X11, i.e. X11 forward.
I think my worry about Wayland is it will become quite naive like Android or Windows.
For example, VNC on Windows, you can only have 1 session. VNC on Linux/X11 you can have multiple? Why is that? The answer is actually X11.
Sure, X11 itself isn't great for streaming modern GUI software but it opens up VNC and alternatives to a multi-user design.
As it stands VNC servers on Linux can create a new X11 server and even use the old XDMCP query system to get a decent enterprise multi-desktop system going with VNC and RDP.
I can almost guarantee we will lose that with Wayland. Why? Because all the Wayland kids don't even know what remote desking is and don't give a shite, they just want Steam games to work 1% faster :/
That's not a good argument. Regular Windows license doesn't allow multisession, it's not a technical issue. However, you can buy a special license to do so.VNC on Windows, you can only have 1 session. VNC on Linux/X11 you can have multiple? Why is that?
That's not a good argument. Regular Windows license doesn't allow multisession, it's not a technical issue. However, you can buy a special license to do so.
Windows 98 graphics would definitely make a big revolution for Unix - like operating systems.
Windows Server and Enterprise allows multi-users and VNC cannot do it on that platform. You have to use RDP. This has nothing to do with licensing.
Sorry, I still don't understand your point. Each user logged in Windows can run his own VNC server (of course, using different TCP ports). They perfectly work simultaneously.VNC on Windows, you can only have 1 session. VNC on Linux/X11 you can have multiple
It's not different from X11. Both Wayland and X11 servers require a physical display (not counting unusual things like xnest that are not very useful in practice). You can, at most, run one display server per physical display.The question now: is it possible to run two or more Wayland servers simultaneously? I don't now.