<html>
<head>
<style><!--
.hmmessage P
{
margin:0px;
padding:0px
}
body.hmmessage
{
font-size: 10pt;
font-family:Tahoma
}
--></style>
</head>
<body class='hmmessage'>
> You're mixing up thing here. Most systems do indeed disable direct connections<br>> to the X server (for good reasons) and expect you to use ssh -X instead. <br><br>> > Based on the fact that a generation of users don't see the point,<br>> > windows doesn't do it, iOS doesn't do it then there is<br>> > not a lot of point that Linux carry the flag for a solution to a problem that <br>> > people don't have anymore.<br>> <br>> So what do you do if you want to run apps on system A (probably headless)<br>> and have it display on system B ? Dedicated 'remote' versions or web interfaces<br>> (ROTFL) for each and every of them ? I'm writing this mail logged in to a system <br>> that is located in a different continent and I don't even notice it. <br><br>Fons, you are tripping up over your own arguments here. Firstly you state that a<br>well written app should divorce itself from the underlying medium, then you are<br>arguing that they actually should be using the underlying X11 to be able to be a<br>distributed app. This is a contradiction and, for example, just because I know <br>about this app and how it works, bristol can work headless without X11 as it takes <br>an abstract transport layer in a similar way to the one you are arguing both for and<br>against. You simply do not need X11 for distributed processing or at least if you are <br>dependent on it then, as you state yourself, your solution is badly written.<br><br>> If 'a generation of users' is any reference, we should just forget about<br>> Linux, switch to Windows and call it a day. We should also eat only fast<br>> food, believe everything the TV news and ads tell us, hate strangers and<br>> homosexuals, and generally be ignorant about everything. There's probably<br>> no argument more irrelevant than this sort of populist ones.<br><br>Sarky today. My point is that a generation of users is used to not having to rely <br>on as banal and cumbersome a method as that offered by X11 to distribute their <br>processing - there are other ways it is being done.<br><br>To come back to the original thread, X11 is very old in the tooth. It is based on<br>assumptions that are not longer valid and the result is a pretty cumbersome <br>solution. It was written before reasonable foundations for distributed computing <br>were really put in place. People have been whitening its teeth and giving it a shave <br>here and there to try and make it appear spruce but that does not detract from the <br>fact that it is an ever older horse that at some point has to go to the knackers yard.<br><br>And you are busy putting down the initiatives that may offer an eventual alternative<br>by unencumbering themselves? So now who is proposing ignorant arguments? There<br>is a whole load of changes taking place at the moment and adopting them is going to<br>be more a effective solution than sitting there like King Canute.<br><br>Kind regards, nick.<br> </body>
</html>