Re: Obsoleteness of X concept
- From: anton@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (Anton Ertl)
- Date: Wed, 20 Aug 2008 18:14:10 GMT
Temoto <temotor@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
On Aug 18, 6:50=A0pm, Joe Pfeiffer <pfeif...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:....
Temoto <temo...@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
Why X should use network subsystem? Please, comment here.
There is crossplatform VNC. I've heard that its protocol is much more
network friendly than one of X.
What do you mean with "network friendly"? That I have to buy a
higher-bandwidth network connection for more money from my network
Anyway, X worked nicely across my cable connection ten years ago when
I had 300Kb/s downstream and 64Kb/s upstream, and it works nicely
nowadays (16384Kb/s downstream, 1024Kb/s upstream).
Anyway, you're limited to screen and keyboard/mouse. There is no
remote sound and printers in X. Those are equally part of user
interface along with screen and keyboard.
So you are proposing to extend the X protocol with sound and printing?
Good idea. Another thing that's close to the user that would be nice
to have would be support for removable storage (nowadays mostly USB
M. Anton Ertl Some things have to be seen to be believed
anton@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Most things have to be believed to be seen
- Prev by Date: Re: Obsoleteness of X concept
- Next by Date: Re: Obsoleteness of X concept
- Previous by thread: Re: Obsoleteness of X concept
- Next by thread: Re: Obsoleteness of X concept