Path: utzoo!mnetor!tmsoft!torsqnt!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!usc!snorkelwacker!bloom-beacon!SABER.COM!jimf
From: jimf@SABER.COM
Newsgroups: comp.windows.x
Subject: Re: Why do so many "great" people dislike X?
Message-ID: <9009041354.AA03267@armory>
Date: 4 Sep 90 13:54:33 GMT
Sender: daemon@athena.mit.edu (Mr Background)
Organization: The Internet
Lines: 36

|	some of the people I respect the best in the whole wide
|	world; all think X is brain-dead.  Do you have any ideas on
|	why?

`Brain-dead' wouldn't be my word but some areas of its rendering model
are rather naive (although most are better than the Suntools/SunView
model).

It's worst failing is probably its dependency on the pixel as the base
unit.  This makes it very difficult to move between monitors of
differing aspect ratios or densities (ie not everything is a Sun).
Some other portions of its design make it very difficult to write
graphics-intensive applications, particularly those applications which
deal with shapes as objects with some attributes (the X polygon
rendering model describes two different shapes if filled versus
unfilled, for instance).  Lastly, the window manager concept makes
implementation and documentation of complex programs much more
difficult than it needs to be.  Before ICCCM it was nearly impossible.

It is unfortunate that the X designers didn't look more closely at
existing environments before implementing X, but even as-is X is a
workable system which is improving.  The extension mechanism will aid
in this process.

On the up side, X proved that a networked window system can work
pretty well (NeWS failed in that respect although it is a better
system), and helped establish an industry standard that was badly
needed.  When it comes right down to it I'd rather have a naive system
that's consistent across most machines than a fantastic one that
exists on only one, at least from a marketing point of view.

Happy hacking,

jim frost
saber software
jimf@saber.com