[Author Prev][Author Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Author Index][Thread Index]

Re: gEDA-user: X server support - was Feh!



On Tuesday 01 March 2005 12:17 am, Alex Perry wrote:

> There seems to be a common attitude among casual Linux users that the
> X server against on which an application is drawing is located on the
> same system image as the one which is running the application process.

This is an interesting statement. FWIW, I run IBM AIX, Linux and various
flavors dejur of MS windows in my business. As is obvious, I do not have a
"One OS fits all" mentality - I can't afford a mentality of this nature. There 
are specific reasons we run multiple OS's that are related to what we do. 
With that said,  each of these systems has strong points and weaknesses and 
we leverage the strong points on all these systems. Anyway, back to your 
statement. It is possible to say what you said changing the name of the OS and 
in all cases it is as true as your original statement regarding Linux:

1.)  There seems to be a common attitude among casual IBM AIX users that the
X server against on which an application is drawing is located on the
same system image as the one which is running the application process.

2.) There seems to be a common attitude among casual SUN Solaris users that 
the X server against on which an application is drawing is located on the
same system image as the one which is running the application process.

3.) There seems to be a common attitude among casual HP Tru64 users that the
X server against on which an application is drawing is located on the
same system image as the one which is running the application process.

4.) There seems to be a common attitude among casual Intergraph CLIX  users 
that the X server against on which an application is drawing is located on 
the same system image as the one which is running the application process.

> While convenient, such an assumption ensures that the application will
> suffer from all the same deployment nightmares as a Windows-only app.
> In consequence, it will be severely disadvantaged in commercial use.

Again, the same 4 arguments that I used apply to your statement regarding
convince and the danger of assuming anything. So, my question is, exactly what 
is your point? I'm not trying to be rude or flame bate you - I just don't 
understand your logic. It seems to me this is a common weakness that
does not have boundaries and is OS independent.


Best regards


Marvin

Attachment: pgpgY9lrMrKze.pgp
Description: PGP signature