Speakith the X touting fool (Score 1)

My, aren't we the agreeable one.

> last time I looked windows was
> x86 only, so was BeOS,

My Matthew says that although BeOS was also on Apple hardware until version 4 but with version 5 it was on x86 only. However BeOS has gone elsewhere since to several Internet Appliances under the name of BeIA (a different name - 90% of the same BeOS code). The moral of the story is BeOS is portable.

Now my Matthew has a gripe with you about your defense of X. It's quite obvious to him that you haven't looked into what X does and what it could do better. Do tell the community what you have programmed before... please!

X, by the nature of it's protocol, doesn't have many primitives that have to be worked around by abstraction layers. It can't map a polygon region to another.

The input device handling on X leaves much to be desired. In fact, the X server cannot instruct the client not to bother sending the X/Y mouse coordinates if it doesn't matter to the application. Some applications (like a flight simulator) require that all mouse movement be sent to the application. Others need only mouse clicks. But lets bog down the network anyway.

There's no nature of drag-n-drop (or even a decent cut and paste). Which I'm sure won't bother many people as who wants to drag from one application to another. But dragging within an application through toolkits would be useful. Imagine draging attributes to a email.

X's extensions are termainlly broken, too... honey.

My I'm starting to like this computer lark. There's so many loud people who haven't programmed the mess that is XLib and haven't seen how it could be better - yet they still marvel over X and it's fantastic remote display!

I could design a better remote display protocol than X's. There are many better protocols about already.

OK, that's all. X is awful. And please tell of your programming experience in X - I'm fascinated.

-- Eat your greens or I'll hit you!