Why's XGL so good?

[The Soundophiliac]

How come Windows Vista's Aero requires new, expensive hardware while XGL works perfectly (except for a high cpu load with video playback) with my old ati 9700? It's probably not true but I have a feeling that my desktop is actually quicker when using the nice effects that come with compiz. Also I think that compiz is going to be way cooler when it's development progresses.

XGL is still in development and so is Aero but it doesn't seem realistic that Microsoft would suddenly re-engineer Aero and so lower Vista's hardware requirements. My point is, is Microsoft really that bad at writing this kind (and of course other kinds) of software? Or is the open source community just that much more powerful?

[GeneralZod]

How come Windows Vista's Aero requires new, expensive hardware while XGL works perfectly (except for a high cpu load with video playback) with my old ati 9700?


Really, we'll have to wait until it comes out to know for sure.



It's probably not true but I have a feeling that my desktop is actually quicker when using the nice effects that come with compiz


I usually take all statements of "UI X is faster than UI Y" with a pinch of salt, but this is actually completely feasible - fast blitting, etc, are what graphics cards excel at, so it's actually quite likely that shifting the rendering from the CPU to hardware specifically designed for faster rendering would give an increase in speed :)



Also I think that compiz is going to be way cooler when it's development progresses.


Agreed :)



XGL is still in development and so is Aero but it doesn't seem realistic that Microsoft would suddenly re-engineer Aero and so lower Vista's hardware requirements. My point is, is Microsoft really that bad at writing this kind (and of course other kinds) of software? Or is the open source community just that much more powerful?

Again, we'll need to see how well the final release does run, and how evenly matched in terms of capabilities Aero and XGL/Compiz are before making any judgements.

[The Soundophiliac]

Really, we'll have to wait until it comes out to know for sure.


Yeah, I guess it would even be good marketing to first lower the expectations by saying that Aero will require a lot of power. Then they could say that "we're just that good that we made it run on old hardware".

[Dr. Nick]

Yeah, I guess it would even be good marketing to first lower the expectations by saying that Aero will require a lot of power. Then they could say that "we're just that good that we made it run on old hardware".
Thats a possibility, I think part of it is that xgl/compiz was made by people who truly cared and the open source aspect allows better feedback from users. Also open source applications generally seem to shoot for widest compatability.

Think of this.
Vista(aero) has only been seen by microsoft employees and some beta testers on a limited amount of hardware setups. Also vista shipping on new pc's will have good video cards to start from, and people who can meet the other system reqs for vista will most likely have/ or can get a good video card to run it.

Since vista "cant" run on a 400mhz chip their isnt a "need" to make aero work on the generation of video cards used then.

Look around here at all the wide array of computer setups and some of the speed differences. Most all of them runnig linux

[GoA]

How come Windows Vista's Aero requires new, expensive hardware while XGL works perfectly (except for a high cpu load with video playback) with my old ati 9700? It's probably not true but I have a feeling that my desktop is actually quicker when using the nice effects that come with compiz. Also I think that compiz is going to be way cooler when it's development progresses.

XGL is still in development and so is Aero but it doesn't seem realistic that Microsoft would suddenly re-engineer Aero and so lower Vista's hardware requirements. My point is, is Microsoft really that bad at writing this kind (and of course other kinds) of software? Or is the open source community just that much more powerful?


I don't think they are bad at making code. The platform is just so different and we don't have a clue how's Microsoft has done it. We can problay judge it better when Aero and XGL are working properly.

EDIT: Btw, have any of you tested IE 7, media player 11 beta, messenger live beta? I'm currently using them in my windows system and wow, I'm impressed. So much better looking than firefox, gaim and totem.

[briancurtin]

So much better looking than firefox, gaim and totem.
thats probably because totem looks like comlete *** compared to anything. pretty much the same with gaim, but i like the look and feel of gaim personally since it really stays out of your way and only presents what you need

[The Soundophiliac]

Now I realize that it was the small anti-microsoft troll in me that woke up. It was childish to assume that Microsoft just has that bad people working for them. I get the feeling they've improved a lot lately.

It's probably not a matter of stupidity. Perhaps it is a matter of financial gain and it might be a matter of impossibility or too much trouble for Microsoft.

[nalmeth]

EDIT: Btw, have any of you tested IE 7, media player 11 beta, messenger live beta? I'm currently using them in my windows system and wow, I'm impressed. So much better looking than firefox, gaim and totem.

Yeah, so they have tabbed browsing. What a development.
Also, totem (IMHO) is not the windows media player equivalent. It's merely a video player, that can play music. :D
I must declare that when I used windows, I really did like windows media player. It did everything I needed it to, and despite being kind of slow and bloated, had cool vizualizations, CD-burning + ripping, and I liked it's layout and playlist handling.
That was until I found amarok, and linux.
I happen to despise online instant messaging as a form of communication, but I'm sure messenger live is pretty slick/whatever. It drives me crazy knowing how many people will be locked into windows for another 5 years because of this crap.

[airtonix]

EDIT: Btw, have any of you tested IE 7, media player 11 beta, messenger live beta? I'm currently using them in my windows system and wow, I'm impressed. So much better looking than firefox, gaim and totem.

probably....but if Goldstien had a software company....would you buy his products....or more simply if george bush or henry kissenger controlled microsoft's coding directions would you run windows?

its the reason why i choose to run the kind of software that is allowed to be audited by the common man (oh no a mere commoner!!! there goes the neighbourhood). not by some elitist money hording empiracal nuclear madman.

[airtonix]

woops made a duplicate.....

[GoA]

probably....but if Goldstien had a software company....would you buy his products....or more simply if george bush or henry kissenger controlled microsoft's coding directions would you run windows?

its the reason why i choose to run the kind of software that is allowed to be audited by the common man (oh no a mere commoner!!! there goes the neighbourhood). not by some elitist money hording empiracal nuclear madman.

I don't care about the price of software (piratism) or does it have backdoors etc. But what I do care is the security. I can secure my Windows easily, but still, the fact that I have to do it, pisses me of. That's why currently I'm using linux as main system. No other reason actually. :)

[Lord Illidan]

I think the best thing to do is wait for the final MS product.

MS Trolling is not the right thing to do. My experience with MS is that when they do something good, they do it really good, otherwise they mess it up. Office belongs in the real good category (imho), IE in the messed up, and Aero... we don't really know yet, don't we?

Have they solved the games problem in XGL? If not, then I won't try it again.

[mcduck]

Have they solved the games problem in XGL? If not, then I won't try it again.
what problem with games? They run just fine, and if they don't, you can always run them on a separate X session.