Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Preview of X Windows Eye Candy

Zonk posted more than 9 years ago | from the pet-the-penguin dept.

X 462

glenkim writes "Remember Seth Nickell's blog entry about next generation X Window rendering? Well, in case you were wondering what it would look like, he's updated his blog with videos of luminocity, the experimental GNOME window manager, and screenshots of programatically themed widgets." From the post: "The wobbly window effect is mildly addictive. Kristian hasn't gotten much work done since he wrote it. He (and now I) spends all day moving windows around and watching them settle."

cancel ×

462 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Pleasantly surprised (4, Interesting)

squiggleslash (241428) | more than 9 years ago | (#12034728)

There's some nice ideas in there, and some not so nice ones. The wobbly windows thing looks completely unnecessary (worse still, I get it for free when I try to drag opaque windows on a slow machine ;-), and it's hard to see how it can actually improve usability.

On the other hand, the similar effect applied to drop down menus did make some sense. It made the menu appearing more obvious and anyone glancing at an unrelated part of the screen and accidentally activating the menu would be more aware of their mistake with this kind of heavily animated approach. It also looked like it wouldn't get in the way, the way it was implemented.

I also liked the translucent file selector. That's the first time I've seen translucency done in a relevant, useful, manner. Yes, I do want to see the window underneath, damn it! Combined with Apple's "attaching selectors to the window they came from" philosophy, you could have quite a massive improvement in usability.

It's nice to see some of the techniques developed largely as eye-candy actually find uses where they have functional, not just subjectively aesthetic, justification.

Re:Pleasantly surprised (4, Insightful)

10Ghz (453478) | more than 9 years ago | (#12034785)

There's some nice ideas in there, and some not so nice ones. The wobbly windows thing looks completely unnecessary (worse still, I get it for free when I try to drag opaque windows on a slow machine ;-), and it's hard to see how it can actually improve usability.


It's not meant to improve usability. It's meant to look good and show what the tech is capable of. And I think it achieves both goals quite well.

Re:Pleasantly surprised (5, Insightful)

squiggleslash (241428) | more than 9 years ago | (#12034988)

Well, my counter to that is it most certainly should be meant to improve usability. I know that Seth's reason for posting the article is to say "Wheee! Look at this, look at what we can do!", but without context "what we can do" is useless. The context here is that the techniques are designed to improve UIs in various ways.

While a lot of Slashdotters and other geeks find a lot of pleasure in eye-candy without regard to usability, I think it's refreshing that Seth actually did post some examples of techniques used where they had an intuitively obvious improvement on usability. If he hadn't, I'd have ignored the demonstrations, or even flamed them. If everything had been like the initial wobbly windows effect, I'd have put it down as yet another thing that'll pointlessly bloat applications in a year or two in order to satisfy the "Ooo look, pretty colours!" mob.

Context is important. You can't really demonstrate a technique without showing that it's potentially useful. I think Seth, for the most part, wobbly windows aside, did a great job doing just that.

Re:Pleasantly surprised (4, Informative)

Sunspire (784352) | more than 9 years ago | (#12034818)

The current Luminocity effects are strictly tech-demos for now, basically showing what is possible. It will then be up to third parties like distributors and desktop environment to make something useful out of it.

The plan is to eventually merge the Luminocity composition manager and effect engine with the Metacity window manager. You will then be able to switch effects and behaviors like you do themes today.

Re:Pleasantly surprised (3, Informative)

JPelorat (5320) | more than 9 years ago | (#12034884)

Site is borked now, but they did say something like they turned the effect all the way up so it would be obvious in the video, but that it looked much better and much more natural when it just barely bounced when moved.

Re:Pleasantly surprised - Wobbly Windows (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12034895)

At least the wobbly windows effect is set to FULL (so it shows up well in the videos).

It could be quite nice if turned down to a more subtle level.

Re:Pleasantly surprised (5, Interesting)

vdboor (827057) | more than 9 years ago | (#12035037)

The wobbly windows thing looks completely unnecessary [..], and it's hard to see how it can actually improve usability.

Humans visualize a lot of 3D, so why not your windows? I can image computer-illiterates don't see "windows", just a bunch of 2D buttons and mess at a computer screen.

Using subtile animation and shadow effects could make computing a lot easier and accessable. It allows users to distinguish between front and back windows much easier. I would certainly welcome these features if they're stable!

Re:Pleasantly surprised (3, Interesting)

urbanjunkie (173409) | more than 9 years ago | (#12035048)

Improved usability should not be an ultimate goal.

Usability is just one of the components of the overall user experience, and improving the overall user experience is what really counts.

You mean X Window eye candy? (-1, Redundant)

htm3 (253574) | more than 9 years ago | (#12034734)

-htm3

Re:You mean X Window eye candy? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12034827)

You mean X Window System eye candy?

Can't Play The Videos (-1, Offtopic)

matth (22742) | more than 9 years ago | (#12034741)

BaH... I wish I could play the videos.. but nothing on my machine plays any of the formats he has.

Re:Can't Play The Videos (4, Informative)

natrius (642724) | more than 9 years ago | (#12034760)

So download something that can [videolan.org] .

Re:Can't Play The Videos (1, Funny)

LiquidCoooled (634315) | more than 9 years ago | (#12034762)

Given the impending slashdotting its going to get, I don't think you will be alone.

Re:Can't Play The Videos (2, Informative)

ErichTheWebGuy (745925) | more than 9 years ago | (#12034769)

nothing on my machine plays any of the formats he has

Try mplayer [mplayerhq.hu]

then stop using your 286 (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12034849)


and get with the program

Are you from the EU??? (1, Funny)

CaymanIslandCarpedie (868408) | more than 9 years ago | (#12034947)

Shouldn't have bought that new EU version of Windows without media player ;-)

Sure to get trolled, but I wonder how many more posts like this you'll see once "media-less" Windows has been widely distributed?

Re:Can't Play The Videos (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12034979)

All of the most popular multimedia-players for GNU/Linux can play those formats.
Tested with Xine, Totem, VLC and MPlayer.

CoralCDN [mirror] (4, Informative)

danalien (545655) | more than 9 years ago | (#12034744)

http://www.gnome.org.nyud.net:8090/~seth/blog/xsho ts [nyud.net]

... I'm just guessing this might get slashdotted...

Re:CoralCDN [mirror] (1)

xtracto (837672) | more than 9 years ago | (#12034761)

Well, thnks for the mirror but, anyway the cool things cant be seen, as I cant download the videos... seems there must be a mirror service for media also... torrent anyone?

Re:CoralCDN [mirror] (5, Informative)

natrius (642724) | more than 9 years ago | (#12034778)

Re:CoralCDN [mirror] (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12034968)

how do you play these? i have videolan 0.8.1 and nothing happens when i try to watch the first video. I also tried BSPlayer.

Re:CoralCDN [mirror] (2, Informative)

danalien (545655) | more than 9 years ago | (#12035060)

all of em' worked fine in MPlayer, for me...

Re:CoralCDN [mirror] (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12034855)

looks like you guessed right.

Re:CoralCDN [mirror] (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12034899)

Yeah, too bad nyud.net can't bother to pick up the images too. Pretty useless if you ask me.

Please get it right (-1, Offtopic)

palad1 (571416) | more than 9 years ago | (#12034770)

It draws windows, but it's called X-Window.

Re:Please get it right (1)

tolan-b (230077) | more than 9 years ago | (#12034800)

It's called X actually.

Re:Please get it right (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12034869)

It's called The X Window System, actually.

Re:Please get it right (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12034955)

it's called both actually

Re:Please get it right (1)

grub (11606) | more than 9 years ago | (#12035016)


Yep, and if everyone would "man X" they would see:
The X.Org Foundation requests that the following names be used when referring to this software:

X
X Window System
X Version 11
X Window System, Version 11
X11

Re:Please get it right (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12034902)

It draws windows, but it's called X-Window.

No it's not. From X manpage:

The X Consortium requests that the following names be used when refer-
ring to this software:

X
X Window System
X Version 11
X Window System, Version 11
X11

Re:Please get it right (1)

dirty (13560) | more than 9 years ago | (#12034929)

No one cares. Really, no one cares.

Re:Please get it right (1)

ozamosi (615254) | more than 9 years ago | (#12035042)

Well... Even if X Window is right, and X Windows is wrong (which another of your answers sugest isn't true), the headline could mean "Eye Candy of X Window". It's still missing a ' though...

Yeah but can it take a slashdotting (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12034774)

All that window moving appears to have sucked down all his CPU and bandwidth.

Nifty, but the point? (3, Insightful)

NickHydroxide (870424) | more than 9 years ago | (#12034775)

I agree, a lot of these implementations are kind of nifty, but not particularly useful. I looked around but couldn't find any information about how resource-intensive this is.

It seems like part of a loose trend towards bloating Linux for the desktop market. Not that this is a bad thing, but something that should be kept in mind.

Re:Nifty, but the point? (4, Insightful)

natrius (642724) | more than 9 years ago | (#12034805)

From the site:
People have been asking what sort of hardware this was done on. Videos were shot on a mix of an IBM thinkpad X30 (with a paltry Intel i830 video card using open source drivers) and an IBM thinkpad T41 (with a slightly beefier but still pretty old Radeon Mobility 7500, also using open source drivers). Everything we're doing so far is light on hardware requirements.

On the topic of usefulness, that's not really what I think these videos are supposed to show. The point is that we now have the foundation to do useful things with.

Re:Nifty, but the point? (4, Insightful)

10Ghz (453478) | more than 9 years ago | (#12034811)

I agree, a lot of these implementations are kind of nifty, but not particularly useful. I looked around but couldn't find any information about how resource-intensive this is.


The demos in the website run on either Intel integrated vidcard, or on Ati Mobility Radeon 7500 (both with open-source drivers). Bot are very low-end vid-cards these days.

It seems like part of a loose trend towards bloating Linux for the desktop market.


What "bloat" are you talking about? It seems to me that both major desktops (KDE and Gnome) are getting faster and less memory-hungry with each new release. So I REALLY fail to see your point. But if you are worried about bloet, simply don't enable any of the new features, or use XFCE or something similar! Problem solved! Me? I have vid-card, CPU and memory to spare, bring on the advanced features!

Blah, blah, blah, blah (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12034813)

So you looked around, but you were unable to find in the article that they were showcasing this stuff on pretty low rate hardware. (Some internal intel graphics chip iirc.)

And how is actually using the graphic card for what it is supposed to do and thereby using less resources than are needed now bloating?

And something like cairo that gives you faster, better and above all scalable rendering using less resources than are used now is "nifty, but not particularly useful"?

Man, at least try to get a clue befor you start your bitching.

Re:Nifty, but the point? (2, Insightful)

Amiga Lover (708890) | more than 9 years ago | (#12034857)

You have a good point. it's always worth keeping in mind how much bloat things cause, and I feel safe in knowing if it's in linux, it'll be ultra configurable, and can be turned off easily by those who don't want it.

Which to me is a far better solution than that of many who would discard high-level features that are a real benefit to a few, for the excuse that you can do the same thing with a little extra thinking and a little extra work.

That completely undermines the purpose of buying a computer for those people who may use 'bloat' level features. They didn't buy a computer to do a little extra work for it. If you can just turn a feature off, it only ends up as HD bloat, and I have no problem with an OS possibly taking up 5-10GB drive space in an era where we have cheap multiple 200GB drives.

Re:Nifty, but the point? (1)

mattyrobinson69 (751521) | more than 9 years ago | (#12034874)

Hopefully it wont be hard coded in. If its anything like kde is with disabling eye candy, i'l be very happy.

Uh Expose? (3, Interesting)

bogie (31020) | more than 9 years ago | (#12034915)

Luminosity is a testbed for technology. It's not meant to show exactly what Gnome 2.12 or X whatever is going to look like.

You say its not useful but what about something like Expose which many users think is useful? Imagine how boring the early versions of it looked which did nothing interesting or useful? Think outside the box for a minute and realize that by using the technology someone may come up with some new ways of interacting with windows that nobody has ever thought of and turns out to be really useful. Your boring and bloated accusation is way close-minded and short-sighted.

Re:Uh Expose? (1)

NickHydroxide (870424) | more than 9 years ago | (#12034956)

OK, perhaps I should clarify my comment. I in no way think it's a bad and meaningless project, in fact the complete opposite. I also think the developers should be congratulated for innovation in this particular field. I personally, however, would prefer to see smaller/faster implementations of X servers as opposed to kinda cool new window management. That's NOT to say that I don't appreciate such projects, nor that I don't appreciate their contribution to development as a whole.

Re:Nifty, but the point? (4, Insightful)

dogas (312359) | more than 9 years ago | (#12034925)

No dude, if you use linux, you're gonna be forced to have wobbly windows and put up with the low-end hardware accelerated bloat.

Geez... I saw the videos and it looks pretty sweet! If it's going to make my windows friends jealous, I'm on board. Will I use it on my linux desktop? You bet. Will I load it on my linux router? Uh, no.

Re:Nifty, but the point? (1)

genneth (649285) | more than 9 years ago | (#12034938)

Errr. You looked around? Really? Cos he says right at the top and bottom:

these videos show Luminocity running on two different laptops, both with fairly slow/old video cards (Intel i830 and ATI Radeon 7500 mobility) and open source drivers.


Re:Nifty, but the point? (1)

Cougem (734635) | more than 9 years ago | (#12034950)

Maybe not the point, but it worked for apple in OSX.

heh.. (4, Funny)

Quixote (154172) | more than 9 years ago | (#12034780)

The wobbly window effect is mildly addictive.

Wait till you see the "wobbly server effect"...

Who did this? (5, Funny)

althalus1969 (680826) | more than 9 years ago | (#12034781)

Linking to "X Window Eye Candy" Videos on the ./ Frontpage...that's like posting free porn.
You people are crazy. That poor server...

Re:Who did this? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12034982)

Free porn? Now THAT would be AWESOME!!

There is no such thing as X Windows. its ..SYSTEM! (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12034782)

There is no such thing as X Windows. it has always been called :
"The X Window System" not X Windows.

It is called that in all 7 out of 7 of the books I purchased on it a few years ago.

I cannot believe people do not know how to describe The X Window System in Slashdot submissions! Shame shame,

Am I the only one here that knows what it is called?

There is no PLURAL "S" on Window in "The X Window System"

PROOF ? :

http://www.x.org/XOrg_background.html

Shheeeesh!

Re:There is no such thing as X Windows. its ..SYST (0, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12034828)

PROOF ?:

we don't like them there liberal "facts" round these parts pardner

--A.Merican

Calm down... (3, Funny)

raygundan (16760) | more than 9 years ago | (#12034882)

Just pretend the "s" everybody puts at the end stands for "System." You'll feel better.

Re:There is no such thing as X Windows. its ..SYST (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12034906)

Now count the number of people with a life who actually care.

Re:There is no such thing as X Windows. its ..SYST (1)

Cougem (734635) | more than 9 years ago | (#12034966)

There are only two H's and two E's in 'Sheesh'

Re:There is no such thing as X Windows. its ..SYST (1)

hey! (33014) | more than 9 years ago | (#12034980)

Your post will not impact on the way people use language. Irregardless, they will still say "X-Windows".

Re:There is no such thing as X Windows. its ..SYST (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12035045)

As a Slashbot, may I make a joke about how it's actually the "GNU/X Window System", and has been ever since Al Gore invented it, after he was able to invest the millions he got from his MacDonalds Hot Coffee lawsuit into developing it, which he developed on his MAC, and which is now featured in all automated ATM machines.

No? Oh, ok.

Seth Nickell rhyme. (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12034783)

"Seht" dort oben, ein Stück "Nickel". Welch wahr welch wahr. Ein Stück Metall am Firmament.

Already (4, Informative)

cheezemonkhai (638797) | more than 9 years ago | (#12034794)

Appears to be down or at least struggling already :(

Mirrordot should hopefully be created here:

Mirrordot link [mirrordot.org]

Oops here we go again... (-1, Redundant)

asciimonster (305672) | more than 9 years ago | (#12034798)

...And the site is slashdotted again. What we really need is a slashtdot webpage caching service, a la google.

Re:Oops here we go again... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12034815)

free clue for you http://mirrordot.org/ [mirrordot.org]

Re:Oops here we go again... (3, Informative)

mattyrobinson69 (751521) | more than 9 years ago | (#12034898)

It already exists: Mirrordot [mirrordot.org]

She's going down... (1, Informative)

Mmm coffee (679570) | more than 9 years ago | (#12034802)

Already being slashdotted, here's the mirrordot mirror [mirrordot.org] .

Posted with karma bonus so everyone will see this post, please don't mod me up as there's no point.

Buttons/windows still look archaic (-1, Troll)

sjonke (457707) | more than 9 years ago | (#12034814)

With all the effort put into wobbly windows and transparency, it seems like they ought to have windows and buttons themselves looking fairly slick. Instead they look like a slight improvement over Windows 98.

Re:Buttons/windows still look INTELLIGENT (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12034844)

Excpet for shape of buttns, it is MORE INTELLIGENT to not use 3d in any user interface unless the three d imparts useful meaning.

Otherwise much more of the brain is needed to digest the images.

3d is idiotic clutter.

Even ICONS should be 2d and now apple has polluted icons into damned 3d renderred photos

you are a foor to noty understand "clean design"

It would be nice if the user could select a style of button though. ...even the crap you might desire.

You are corrrect that they are wasting time coding useless GUI and not focusing on critical parts.

Re:Buttons/windows still look archaic (4, Informative)

natrius (642724) | more than 9 years ago | (#12034996)

With all the effort put into wobbly windows and transparency, it seems like they ought to have windows and buttons themselves looking fairly slick. Instead they look like a slight improvement over Windows 98.

Since this comment keeps finding its way up from -1, Troll, I guess I'll respond. GTK uses themes. [gnome-look.org]

xgl (5, Informative)

elmartinos (228710) | more than 9 years ago | (#12034816)

Yesterday I have tried Xgl, Which also uses OpenGL to draw X. I think Luminocity and xgl are tightly related, but I am not really shure.

Anyway, what I got was a stable desktop with nice shadow and transparency features. It looks totally cool to have a transparent mplayer behind a transparent xterm that drops a soft shadow on it :-)

Trying it out is fairly easy, just follow this description [gentoo.org] .

Nip it in the bud (4, Insightful)

Morganth (137341) | more than 9 years ago | (#12034820)

I just want to pre-emptively respond to all the posts that are going to say, 'well, as usual, Linux is catching up to Microsoft and Apple a couple years after the fact.'

Yes, you may be right. But the difference is that Linux doesn't have to be first, it just has to be better. And it will be. The rich base of command line utilities and a solid kernel are necessary to have great degrees of stability and richness at the higher levels (like an X server). I find my Linux base indispensable (from the point of view of the usefulness and scriptability of all the UNIX tools and primitives), and I think I concord with other Linux users when I say I'd be perfectly happy with my free Linux desktop when it 'catches up' in the less useful things like eye candy and hardware rendering. Because in the end, I'll have a Free, Powerful Desktop that Looks Just As Good As Yours, while you may be stuck with a good-looking, but still proprietary, mess of a system that is still sorely weak in the basics.

Just my two cents... but undoubtedly in the time it took me to write this post, it will no longer be pre-emptive.

Re:Nip it in the bud (2, Interesting)

10Ghz (453478) | more than 9 years ago | (#12034848)

I just want to pre-emptively respond to all the posts that are going to say, 'well, as usual, Linux is catching up to Microsoft and Apple a couple years after the fact.'


Apple, perhaps, but not Microsoft. Longhorn will have something like this, but Longhorn is still over a year away (at least). It might very well be that this technology will become available on Linux long before Longhorn ships. In that case, Microsoft would be catching up to Linux ;).

Re:Nip it in the bud (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12034908)

Yeah, now Linux distributions just need to fill that huge gaping void that's between the stable kernel and the rich GUI. Because at the moment, the path from shiny-GUI to actual real work getting done is far too over-engineered, too complex and too prone to failure. Some standardisation would hurt; why arn't KDE and MPlayer fully commited to media frameworks like GStreamer yet? Why does it seem that every script on a Linux machine is written in Yet Another Scripting Language? Why hasn't my filesystem become cleaner and easier to manage all these years since the filesystem hierachy was standardised? Why don't we have decent packaging standards so that RPM's (An LSB requirement) are cross-vendor?

I think I want to see less redundency, actually. I don't think I'll hold my breath.

Re:Nip it in the bud (0, Flamebait)

Xiaran (836924) | more than 9 years ago | (#12034926)

I just want to pre-emptively respond to all the posts that are going to say, 'well, as usual, Linux is catching up to Microsoft and Apple a couple years after the fact.'

<RMS> Thats GNU/Linux dammit ! </RMS>

Oh and to be honest with you... I dont think much has to be done to catch up with XPs GUI. It is one of the stupidest, unimaginitve UIs of recent times and does nothing particularly new or interesting or indeed useful. Oh I forgot... there is an irratating animated dog to help you use the (broken) file search features. I wonder if theyve patented that.

Re:Nip it in the bud (1)

m50d (797211) | more than 9 years ago | (#12034977)

Hmm, my X windows has recently become less stable than the winME laptop I sometimes use. Ever since enabling Xinerama I've found it will occasionally lock up for long periods. And it still loses the mouse input quite frequently, requiring a VT switch to get it working again.

Re:Nip it in the bud (1)

natrius (642724) | more than 9 years ago | (#12035029)

less stable than the winME laptop

#DIV/0!

Re:Nip it in the bud (5, Insightful)

BenjyD (316700) | more than 9 years ago | (#12034984)

A second pre-emptive comment:

1) It's a tech demo. Nobody is suggesting wobbly windows are going to improve productivity. Given a wide range of possible effects like this, however, creative people can come up with nice ideas to make your desktop more usable. Decoupling the screen display and window contents rendering allows all sorts of cool things.

2) It runs on old crappy hardware, so no, you won't need to go and buy an Nvidia 69999FX-eXtreme to run it

3) It's not 'bloat' (whatever that is), it's just using the hardware and X-server abilities to their full. By shifting much of the rendering to the graphics card, you could actually lower CPU usage. I'm sure a thousand openbox/console/ion/ratpoison users are waiting to post "I don't need this". To which I say "well go back to your teletype then".

Losing sight of the usability target... (2, Funny)

Junior J. Junior III (192702) | more than 9 years ago | (#12034823)

"The wobbly window effect is mildly addictive. Kristian hasn't gotten much work done since he wrote it. He (and now I) spends all day moving windows around and watching them settle."

Yeah, this is great becasue as millions of Microsoft customers have proven, less productivity from the same hardware is good.

For fucks sake (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12034864)

It's a demo supposed to show what the technologie is capable of. That's all there is to it.

It's not supposed to be the default way of handling windows in metacity, it's not supposed to improve usabiltiy, it is only supposed to show what the new technology can do.

Who cares? (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12034829)

OS X has had it for literally, years. Finally Linux may be catching up, and Windows, ha ha, it'll be another year or two before it has anything similar.

KDE equivalent? (4, Interesting)

ttys00 (235472) | more than 9 years ago | (#12034834)

For those of us who don't know, is there a KDE equivalent in the pipeline?

Re:KDE equivalent? (4, Informative)

10Ghz (453478) | more than 9 years ago | (#12034868)

KDE4 will propably have stuff like this. It should have double-buffered widgets, OpenGL-acceleration and Cairo-support, among other things.

Re:KDE equivalent? (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12034922)

There will be no KDE equivalent, because KDE sucks. Basically, it is just a GNOME ripoff, and all you damn KSuckers should get with the program and learn to realise that it pales in comparison to GNOME. The very fact that you have to ask the question "When will KDE be copying the cool stuff GNOME has?" only serves to prove my point.

Re:KDE equivalent? (2, Informative)

m50d (797211) | more than 9 years ago | (#12034998)

Yeah, KDE's a gnome ripoff. That's why it started before gnome, has had IPC for all applications for years while gnome is only just adding it, had integrated remote access from 3.0 while gnome didn't add it until 2.6, is still the only environment to have a good way to embed applications in each other...I could go on.

I know, I know, don't feed the trolls.

Re:KDE equivalent? (2, Interesting)

nutshell42 (557890) | more than 9 years ago | (#12035051)

I don't know about wobbly windows but KDE 3.4 offers some addictive transparency options based on the composite extension (kcontrol->desktop->window behaviour->transparency). I'm getting timeouts on the article so I can't tell you more until I know what that article is all about. =)

Longhorn (4, Interesting)

alienfluid (677872) | more than 9 years ago | (#12034851)

How does this compare to the upcoming Avalon engine for Longhorn?

Re:Longhorn (2, Informative)

ardor (673957) | more than 9 years ago | (#12034918)

Better. The effects are very similar to Longhorn eyecandy, but the costs are much lower. Note that he does all that stuff on an old Intel graphics chip. Longhorn requires much more GPU power.

Gets old quick (0)

varmittang (849469) | more than 9 years ago | (#12034861)

If I'm watching a video and I move it, I don't want it to wobble around like that. Nor do I want drop down menus to wobble. Though its pretty cool and nifty, I don't see people who want a good OS that looks professional acting like this. Though it does show the power that X can hold in making very cool designs and tansitions, especially when changing virtual desktop areas.

Re:Gets old quick (3, Informative)

justsomebody (525308) | more than 9 years ago | (#12034879)

It is not a feature to be, it is a quality test of performance while in development. More the test is intensive, the better it is

Re:Gets old quick (-1, Flamebait)

EdMack (626543) | more than 9 years ago | (#12035030)

Read the post dipshit. It's just a techdemo. Stop trying to find problems with every fucking thing.

XFixes, Damage and Composite (1)

marvin2k (685952) | more than 9 years ago | (#12034880)

I did enable Composite in Fedora Core 3 (+xorg from rawhide) but somehow applications think Damage and XFixes aren't there and xdpyinfo seems to agree even though according to the logfiles they *are* present and *do* get initialized. Does anyone have an idea what the problem might be? xcompmgr and luminocity refuse to run without these extensions.

nice new features (3, Interesting)

mrmagos (783752) | more than 9 years ago | (#12034883)

Those are some interesting new features, quite innovative actually. However, I would be much more interested in hearing how X is being made smaller and faster. Xserver [freedesktop.org] seems to be a nice continuation of Kdrive [jussieu.fr] since the fork, but it is still lagging behind a full Xorg installation. Most X users are not serving up desktops to thin clients, and only need a full install for things like hardware acceleration and multihead support. I would think a small and fast X would greatly benefit desktop adoption, and if any of you have tried Kdrive on modern equipment, it more than feels snappier, it is.

Very cool.. but (1)

mikefoley (51521) | more than 9 years ago | (#12034887)

... I'd be happy just finding a theme for Metacity that would work well in 800x600. My old Dell LS400 only does 800x600 and when running Linux, the buttons are HUGE and everything is drawn too big.

Still, I'll give this a try :) I'm a sucker for stuff like this.

Re:Very cool.. but (1)

natrius (642724) | more than 9 years ago | (#12034971)

My old Dell LS400 only does 800x600 and when running Linux, the buttons are HUGE and everything is drawn too big.

GTK in general isn't very frugal when it comes to space, but I think that's a good thing. The large icons are pretty helpful in general. However, it sucks under low resolutions, and when you use GTK in Windows, things tend to look pretty ugly since huge buttons with icons are in a sea of small, text only buttons. To help a little in Gnome, go to Menu and Toolbar Preferences and set the toolbar buttons to be text only. Buttons in general won't be affected, and I don't think there's an option for it anywhere.

nice, but (5, Insightful)

ardor (673957) | more than 9 years ago | (#12034890)

he should create a video showing this wobbling effect used decently, rather than exaggerated. I'm inclined to believe him when he says that this movement is pleasant to the eye (actually, the sudden appearance of menus and windows seems to irritate new users whose brain is not used to this).

The translucency is done very very well. As mentioned before, this is the first video showing how translucency can be useful.

One might argue that this is an utter waste of resources. Well, in this is not true. Since most PCs sold after 2003 do have some sort of 3d accelerator included (hell, even the intel graphics chipsets have acceleration!), basic 3D acceleration is very cheap. Of course, there are people exaggerating the usage of 3d acceleration for the desktop. For example, there are rumors saying that Longhorn requires pixel shader support. But the consumer-level technology for basic T&L (hell, even the CPU can do this, since we aren't talking about >50k vertices) and some basic texturing without lighting or any nifty multitexturing has been around for almost a DECADE.

mKod dTown (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12034896)

Irony (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12034897)

Design Fu, Beating the sh*t out of bad apps
Slashdot, Beating the sh*t out of bad boxers

i've been up for 36 hours (2, Funny)

harlemjoe (304815) | more than 9 years ago | (#12034905)

studying for finals

imho the windows already wobble ...

somewhat offtopic.... (3, Insightful)

same_old_story (833424) | more than 9 years ago | (#12034913)

why did they record video shots from the monitor?
excuse my ignorance: is there no video screen capture for linux?

I mean, they did go through all this work to make something look good and then released these crappy monitor shots?

Re:somewhat offtopic.... (0, Flamebait)

the_2nd_coming (444906) | more than 9 years ago | (#12035012)

it is a flipping blog you idiot!!!

Combine it with Enlightenment (5, Interesting)

houghi (78078) | more than 9 years ago | (#12034936)

Combine it with the new Enlightenment stuff:
This one [rasterman.com]
This one [rasterman.com]
This one [rasterman.com]
This one [rasterman.com]

So who said that Linux was mainly textbased?

Torrent? (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12034941)

As often as this has happened lately, you'd think someone would be courteous enough to put up a torrent of the videos rather than blow away various project websites everytime someone posts video-candy.

Wow! That was quick! (1)

JoloK (728770) | more than 9 years ago | (#12034973)

Slashdotted so quickly... Nice work ;)

Live cd (1)

chickanmonkey (642333) | more than 9 years ago | (#12034978)

So how soon before we see a live cd with this on it. Anyone taking bets.

Wobbly Windows (1)

chickanmonkey (642333) | more than 9 years ago | (#12034994)

So that's what the new name for Longhorn will be.

This is a good start, but (4, Insightful)

elucido (870205) | more than 9 years ago | (#12034999)

I think someone needs to create better themes. Coders suck as artists and as theme designers. Coders also suck at designing interfaces. We need an interface design contest now, complete with bounties. All artists should be welcomed and no programming experience should be required to contribute. I suggest we make a glass like interface, or an interface such as the interface in the Lain anime series. Lets make something impressive, also lets make it functional. How can we use the extra dimensions and power to make things work better?
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?