Forgot your password?

Comment: some bladder and bowel sensation and sexual functi (Score 4, Insightful) 153

by morgauxo (#48198657) Attached to: Cell Transplant Allows Paralyzed Man To Walk

He has also recovered some bladder and bowel sensation and sexual function.

I'm happy to not be paralyzed and certainly hope to stay that way. But, if I was... I think these functions might be even more important to me then getting my legs back. Don't get me wrong, not being able to stand or walk would really suck. But.. a person with no leg function might get along in a wheel chair. Shitting oneself and not being able to enjoy sex... there just isn't a chair for that.

Comment: Re:I still don't see what's wrong with X (Score 1) 224

by morgauxo (#48190913) Attached to: Lead Mir Developer: 'Mir More Relevant Than Wayland In Two Years'

>>And it sucks for that your use case tramples their use case. These things are symmetrical. There are choices. Some are helped and some are harmed.


  First, I want to see everyon'e use case accounted for. If it is possible to implement a VNC type solution then certainly it is possible to implement transparency. All I want is to flick the power switch and get a login screen. It's always worked that way. I don't believe that the only way to provide this is to break someone else's use case. But.. someone else wants to come break my use case because they don' t like how it works internally. If supporting the X protocol means someone else's video doesn't play right then fine, don't support the X protocol. (makes no sense to me, I can play videos all day long with seeing tearing, what ever the hell that is). Just make sure it still has the possibllity to do somethign that works like an X terminal but uses RDP or VNC or whatever protocol makes you happy.

>>They could say the same thing to you. If you want 1990 Unix why not use a 1990 Unix?

First, I don't want to use 1990 applications.
Second, because I don't. I want to use 2014 Linux.

>>You aren't. But you are of the 3 main cases (local, LAN, WAN) the least common.
So? The least common automatically gets no support? Somebody always must be descriminated against? Where is the logic in that? All three should work! I'm not asking just for myself, I'm sure there are many others using LAN support. So what if it's the least common. It's still common enough to be important!

>There are tiling compositors for Wayland since 2012. The algorithms for tiling are standard programming exercises there are easy to implement so they should be in the major compositors once larger issues get resolved.
Well... I'm surprised but happy to hear that at least.

Comment: Why chose a gender? (Score 1) 389

by morgauxo (#48190789) Attached to: NASA's HI-SEAS Project Results Suggests a Women-Only Mars Crew

I don't think there is any problem with them chosing astronauts based on things like weight, volume and calorie needs. If that means they end up with an all female or mostly female crew then so be it. But why even make the connection that this means female? It just invites an opportunity to pass up some worthy, unusually petite male that could have done as well. Why not just leave things like gender and race out of it, pick them based on their pertinent qualifications and attributes as individuals. Oh.. speaking of race.. how about Pygmies? I would think they would be ideal candidates based on this criteria, not that they should automatically discount people with dwarfism of other races.

Comment: Comparison (Score 1) 389

by morgauxo (#48190723) Attached to: NASA's HI-SEAS Project Results Suggests a Women-Only Mars Crew

"During one week, the most metabolically active male burned an average of 3,450 calories per day, while the least metabolically active female expended 1,475 calories per day."

Why are they comparing the most to the least? That doesn't really say anything does it. The fastest snail moves slowly. The slowest car doesn't move at all. Surely we should do all of our transportation by snail!

Comment: Re:I still don't see what's wrong with X (Score 1) 224

by morgauxo (#48189467) Attached to: Lead Mir Developer: 'Mir More Relevant Than Wayland In Two Years'

>>Your specific case, of two machines in your home will be worse with Wayland. Your either going to have to boost the other machine up to being a full desktop or accept an experience which won't be much different from what you would have over a WAN.

So somebody else's problem with X11 means that my own use case gets trampled? That really sucks. And yes, that is exactly what a software regression is. I'm sure I'm not alone here in using network transparency. This kind of functionality is the whole reason I switched to Linux years ago anyway! If you want Windows Remote Desktop why not just use Windows?

>>Ratpoison is an X11 Windows Manager.
>> But if you like X11 Window managers Enlightenment has ported over to being a Wayland compositor.

I don't really care about the lightweight part of it. Well.. actually since switching to it I have come to appreciate how much better my computer runs. Maybe I do care. I'm not set in my ways about that like I am no network transparency though. Up until a bit less than a year ago though I used KDE4 and had used KDE almost exclusively since the mid 90s.

What I do really really care about in Ratpoison is the tiling I like. If Enlightenment can do that it is good news to me. I actually got pretty annoyed when KDE started switching away from Konqueror because being able to split the window and display multiple web pages, file systems and a terminal fit well with how I work. It's like having windows that never get in each other's way and it's an efficient use of screen space.

After a bit of grumbling I realized that the only reason I was so attached to Konqueror was that I prefer tiles over Windows. I did a quick search for tiling window managers and have used Ratpoison ever since. The quickening of my system due to it's low overhead was just a happy side effect.

Can tiling be done with Wayland? I'm sure it requires a new compositor or something. I don't expect to see tiling on Wayland before a while after Wayland is default for the major distributions. The maker of Ratpoison is still active on StumpWM so I am kind of hoping he will do it. If not.. maybe I will have to. I figure I have some years to learn how before I really need it.

I can appreciate that Tiling Window Managers are very niche so I might have to roll my own. Network transparency though... that's much more of a core feature.

That being said I wish everyone would try a tiling Window manager. Maybe not a keyboard based one like Ratpoison with it's steep learning curve. Maybe a tiling mode could be added to something more mainstream. It really is nice for certain use cases. With more users I expect there would be more development.

Comment: Re:I still don't see what's wrong with X (Score 1) 224

by morgauxo (#48188735) Attached to: Lead Mir Developer: 'Mir More Relevant Than Wayland In Two Years'

"something like LTSP won't work"
See, that's my point. Wayland is taking away something that was core to X11. Wayland is a regression.

"Otherwise you can use something like VNC (which you said you liked)."
Yes, I like VNC. I like hammers too. I use them on nails but I still need a screwdriver for screws. I use VNC to connect to my home computer from my cellphone (w/ lapdock) or occasionally from other people's computers. It is the right tool for that job. I also have an X terminal in my workshop. It is the right tool for that job. VNC is not!

" And the reason for that is because you and everyone else who does X11 in 2014 are sitting at a smart client using it as if it were a dumb client."

No. We are using hardware that is technically capable of being a smart client. That is not the same at all! I for one chose to keep my terminal dumb for some good reasons. First, I don't want to maintain another desktop. I've been at this a while, I've determined my own preferences. My desktop is very customised. I don't want a second desktop to babysit. Also, my terminal hardware isn't THAT capable. It's a little proprietary small form factor PC I bought at a ham fest that probably last lived as a cash register somewhere. It was cheap, $25. It doesn't use much electricity. It is small. And yet... used as it is.. it is FAST!. For what it is it is PERFECT!

Also, a full desktop install would need more updates to keep it secure. Did I say I do not want to babysit this thing? AND I installed a CF card for a hard drive. All that extra writing to update a full desktop OS would use up the write cycles much quicker.

>>So for example if you are running KDE5 (or 6 or whatever) remotely
I'm using Ratpoison. I like frames.

Comment: Re:I still don't see what's wrong with X (Score 1) 224

by morgauxo (#48188601) Attached to: Lead Mir Developer: 'Mir More Relevant Than Wayland In Two Years'

>> So your X11 applications will be find.[sic]

I don't think you are getting it. I'm not worried about not being able to run my X11 applications. Well.. at least not the versions of them I am running today. I am worried about future applications and future versions of today's applications not supporting X11 and Wayland not supporting remote access.*(see next response for what I mean about remote desktop).

When I say "so what I do now" I don't mean with the exact same versions of the exact same software. I'm surely not about to go write papers in DOS Wordperfect while researching them in Spry Mosaic today!

>> That's super easy. You like VNC, RealVNC already supports Wayland. A VNC is merged into the Wayland. That full desktop experience is getting better with the RDP.

Ok, that's a good thing. Personally I use VNC today when I connect from away from home. I use an Android VNC client. I ALSO use a remote X terminal in a different room of my house from where my Desktop resides. That is not the same thing as what VNC provides!

VNC is accessed through a client program running on some other device which probably has it's own full operating system and set of installed applications. I guess you could do a barebones install of an OS and only install VNC client but it's still just going to "feel" like an application running on a multi-purpose computer. You still have to open it, log in, full screen it, etc...

An X-terminal can be a truly cut down device with little more than a kernel and X. It can be configured to connect to the server's display manager and provide a login screen. It looks and feels like you are really there. Boot time is super fast because all you are loading is a kernel plus X.

I don't see that kind of ability in VNC. With VNC you usually have to connect first via SSH, log in as the user you want to access the machine as, start the vnc server, then connect through the vnc client. Or.. you can leave a VNC session running all the time. That session is still logged in as that one user. I have tried to get a VNC server to start XDM but it didn't work. I don' t think there is any way to get to a login screen via VNC.

Check out the Linux Terminal Server Project Can something like that be implemented in Wayland?

It isn't an issue of which method should Wayland implement. If it is to replace X then it needs to implement all of them!

>>>> On my X terminal there is no noticeable performance hit at all!
>>I doubt that if you are on a WAN.

Nope. I never specified that I was. I use VNC over the WAN. I use X over my LAN. I have a dedicated X terminal in my garage workshop. I very much apreciate the fact that it appears to be all the same as my main desktop but is actually completely barebones Debian plus X and very very little maintenance. Boot time is fast too, and I don't even need recent hardware.

If you still don't get how that is different from VNC then go check out the Linux Terminal Server Project at

From time to time I do play with X forwarding over the internet. When I had openvpn on my router it actually wasn't too bad. I did think about giving up VNC! That router died and I haven't been able to get openvpn to work on any of my routers since. Tunneling X through ssh is pretty bad most of the time though not entirely useless in a pinch.

>> Open up some graphics remotely and start rapidly shifting the location of your terminal and over the graphics forcing redraws.
There IS more to computers than just watching videos. It would be nice I suppose to be able to do that remotely. I don't want to trade the capabilites I already have to get that though. I could also just put my video files behind a streaming server! Hell, if it was just about running today's X11 applications I could do that by just not upgrading anything at least until the last piece of compatible hardware disappears off the face of the planet.

>>>> Unless Wayland is somehow going to get us remote audio too
>>X11 already has that. Wayland has enhanced video so that gets better.
By X11 having that do you mean PulseAudio? I could never get that working. Sadly, my X terminal is currently silent. I would very much welcome a Wayland that gets me a remote login terminal that works as I described and includes audio! Making everything like VNC or Windows Remote Desktop doesn't cut it though. I want a terminal that is basically a dedicated second head to the main machine.

Comment: Re:I still don't see what's wrong with X (Score 1) 224

by morgauxo (#48188249) Attached to: Lead Mir Developer: 'Mir More Relevant Than Wayland In Two Years'

"For Tizen applications (smart watches, appliance terminals..) it already is in use."

Since aboout 1998, when I first started using Linux and discovered how cool X's network transparency was I have been eagerly awaiting the day when I could remotely display my desktop's applications on a portable pocket sized device. Smartwatches would be even better! Now that such devices finally have both the power and connectivity they are using Wayland!

No, don' t try to tell me that X is too bloated to run on an embedded device. I used to use it on a Sharp Zaurus! That was a PDA from 14 years ago! It was way less powerful than today's devices, the only reason I gave it up is that not being a cellphone it had no connectivity if you left your wifi bubble.

" Wayland runs X11 now."

So what? X11 under Wayland still isn't going to support an application that doesn't run on X11. You go on to say that yourself! That means that sooner or later I and every other Linux user will have to switch! The only thing left for disagreement is when.

Also, X as a Wayland client might be useful for running an individual application remotely. I like to run the whole desktop remotely, from xdm to the window manager. The whole point for me is that the X terminal is as dumb as can be and as a user I don't really even have to know which computer I am sitting at. It's basically like the Linux Terminal Server Project only I never bothered to set up a network boot image. I just use a CF card to boot the terminal.

How will something like LTSP exist with Wayland?

Comment: Re:I still don't see what's wrong with X (Score 1) 224

by morgauxo (#48186121) Attached to: Lead Mir Developer: 'Mir More Relevant Than Wayland In Two Years'

You've watched Linux evolve for 20 years? I've only watched it about 15 years. Maybe you know something that I don't. From what I have seen lately Linux seems to be evolving in a way that is very strange compared to how it did in the past. (See systemd for another great example)

The thing about Wayland is that it suddenly got a whole lot of press and looked like it was going to take over and replace X as the default display server in popular distros. Didn't Ubuntu even anounce they were switching in their then next version a while back, before they scrapped that idea and started working on MIR that is. But anyway.. all this noise about it replacing X began before anyone was working on remote access, when the Wayland developers were stating it wouldn't even be a part of Wayland. That seems like a pretty core feature of X and a real part of what makes Li/Unix more powerful than it's competitors. Would there be this much hype over a new web browser if the css support hadn't even been written yet? If the authors anounced they weren't even interested in CSS and stated someone else could add it in but they weren't even sure how that would be done? If you check the FAQ for Wayland it still says remote access will not be a part of Wayland.

Now to be fair, the FAQ doesn't say there will be no remote access, just that it isn't part of Wayland. I remember for a while (about the time all this Wayland hype seemed to be at it's loudest) there were people suggesting it be developed at the toolkit level. REALLY! THE TOOLKIT LEVEL! So there would be the QT method of doing remote access, the GTK method, etc... I guess displaying an actual remote desktop would be out.. how would you display a remote QT application on the same desktop as a GTK one? They must have been imagining only individual apps being displayed remotely.

How about obscure applications using obscure toolits or ones using no toolkits at all. Would they all implement their own remote access?

I just can't understand why a project can be seriously discussed as an imminent replacement of such a core part of most Linux distros while it is still missing core functionality. And.. seeing how projects with so much controversy and so many people against them keep getting made to be the new defaults of popular Linux distros (for example systemd, pulseaudio) I don't trust the distros anymore to wait until Wayland is actually ready. Nor do I really trust them to include the necessary patches to enable this functionality if it is available unless it is an official part of Wayland upstream. It just seems like a different group of people with their own agenda are in charge of Linux distributions now. Part of that agenda seems to be removing functionality that previous users really apreciated!

Comment: Re:I still don't see what's wrong with X (Score 1) 224

by morgauxo (#48185867) Attached to: Lead Mir Developer: 'Mir More Relevant Than Wayland In Two Years'

Meanwhile all the various editorials make it sound like Wayland's replacement of X is right around the corner.
I know X will still be around for a while but chosing the non-default option on something that fundamental to a distro will probably suck.

The FAQ on the Wayland website really needs to be updated to reasure people that it is being worked on.

Comment: Re:I still don't see what's wrong with X (Score 1) 224

by morgauxo (#48185825) Attached to: Lead Mir Developer: 'Mir More Relevant Than Wayland In Two Years'

>> Well if you look above the question was about developers not users. But sure I'll handle the users issues.

No, if you look farther up you will see my rant about the fact that Wayland supporters seem to be uninterested or incapable of explaining how Wayland will work for users. And then that somehow was replied to that with yet more talk about Wayland internals! WTF?

>>Yes. Wayland already runs X11

Yes, on the rare occasion that a Wayland supporter responds to the remote access question with a user-understandable answer it is to say "you can just run X on it". So what?!?! What I (and I think other people who are concerned about having remote display) am interested in is knowing I will be able to keep doing what I do now in the future but still with future, upgraded tools. For example, 10 years from now I am not going to want to run a 8 year old web browser because 2 years from now the last ever version to support X is released. You can increase/decrease those numbers as much as you want to make it fit your guess of reality. Also, even if main, important tools are available for X forever, surely there will be some developers that chose to only support X. How do we run those applications remotely? Will we get a Wayland server that runs as an X client?

>>Nope (assuming what I do now is about remote use). You'll have better in most cases, but not the same.
Umm... either I can run remote or not. Wether it is "better" or not is orthogonal to the question!

I want something where I can get a remote login and once loged in I see the remote desktop as though it were local. (Like XDMCP today). I also want the ability to run a service which allows me to connect from various remote devices to a persistant session. (Like VNC today). I rarely display an individual application remotely but I bet someone does. That ability should exist too or it's a regression.

What protocols, libraries, etc.. make this happen is important but completely uninteresting and unhelpful from a user perspective.

Honestly, from my own anecdotal experience there is no "BETTER". It just works today! I don't see any lag or have any problems with it! On my X terminal there is no noticeable performance hit at all! Change what you want internally, how do you make it "better"? Unless Wayland is somehow going to get us remote audio too... I'm thinking that's a PulseAudio issue though, not a Wayland issue.

Comment: Re:I still don't see what's wrong with X (Score 1) 224

by morgauxo (#48185691) Attached to: Lead Mir Developer: 'Mir More Relevant Than Wayland In Two Years'

Huh, that IS interesting! Maybe it's about time that they update their own website then.

Is Wayland network transparent / does it support remote rendering?

No, that is outside the scope of Wayland. To support remote rendering you need to define a rendering API, which is something I've been very careful to avoid doing. The reason Wayland is so simple and feasible at all is that I'm sidestepping this big task and pushing it to the clients. It's an interesting challenge, a very big task and it's hard to get right, but essentially orthogonal to what Wayland tries to achieve.

This doesn't mean that remote rendering won't be possible with Wayland, it just means that you will have to put a remote rendering server on top of Wayland. One such server could be the server, but other options include an RDP server, a VNC server or somebody could even invent their own new remote rendering model. Which is a feature when you think about it; layering on top of Wayland has very little overhead, but the other types of remote rendering servers no longer requires, and experimenting with new protocols is easier.

It is also possible to put a remoting protocol into a wayland compositor, either a standalone remoting compositor or as a part of a full desktop compositor. This will let us forward native Wayland applications. The standalone compositor could let you log into a server and run an application back on your desktop. Building the forwarding into the desktop compositor could let you export or share a window on the fly with a remote wayland compositor, for example, a friend's desktop.

Comment: Re:I still don't see what's wrong with X (Score 1) 224

by morgauxo (#48178841) Attached to: Lead Mir Developer: 'Mir More Relevant Than Wayland In Two Years'

As an application programmer I don't care. I don't want to implement remote display in individual applications and I am not going to.

As a user I want my remote display. I've been to the Wayland website. I've read the FAQ. I don't see ANYTHING that gives me the idea that I will be able to keep using remote login sessions when Wayland has replaced X.

Comment: Re:I still don't see what's wrong with X (Score 1) 224

by morgauxo (#48178819) Attached to: Lead Mir Developer: 'Mir More Relevant Than Wayland In Two Years'

Who cares? That seems to be all that Wayland supporters can talk about.. how things should work internally. Users don't care! We care THAT it works! For the user, correct questions to be answering are:

Will I be able to do what I do now when my favorite distro switches to Wayland?

Will I be able to do what I do now when my favorite apps stop supporting X?

Will I be able to do what I do now when new apps come out that I want to use and have no legacy support for X?

These are kinds of questions that matter to users. The correct answers are either Yes or No. They do not involve compositors, APIs, protocol names, etc...

Shortly after these questions are answered comes the next one.

Can I just get ahead of the curve and do it using Wayland now?

If yes then the correct answer is a manual. Something the user can read that says install X, Y and Z. Edit config files 1, 2 and 3. Or run ... configuration utility, etc... Actual information one can use to get what they are after, not treatises on which network protocol is better.

The rule on staying alive as a program manager is to give 'em a number or give 'em a date, but never give 'em both at once.