[Xorg] A possible upgrade path for X (was Re: anti-x11 response)

[Andy Sy]

Regardless of how many arguments are given against X, I believe
there is one major reason that you cannot really rebut against
and that is backwards compatibility.  There are just so many useful
apps written in X that indeed, there would be more to lose than
to gain by not using it anymore.

However, thanks to X's network-transparent design, achieving
backwards compatibility is conceptually straightforward.  You just
have to implement an X server running on any windowing system,
whether Aqua or Win32 or whatever and you've got your backwards
compatibility.

So if it is deemed that X's architecture is so outdated (certainly
not a conclusion that everyone shares) that it can't be properly
fixed / retrofitted, there is still a way to salvage all the old
X programs.

Two approaches come to mind:

1) Build a completely new windowing system from the ground up,
    but implement an X server running on top of it.

2) Invent a server which uses an over-the-wire protocol that's
    transparently backwards compatible with old X clients but can
    be negotiated to switch to using a modern, streamlined one when
    servicing newer clients.  (i.e. a kind of backwards-compatibility
    through encapsulation-of-older-subsystems approach which Microsoft
    has proven works amazingly well in the case of Windows XP running
    Win16 and DOS apps)


Sean Middleditch wrote:

> Hi all,
> 
>  I was wondering if there are any official or semi-official well-written
> rebuttals to things like Fresco's "Fresco vs X11" page
> (http://wiki.fresco.org/FrescoVsX) or the Y-Windows explanation of why
> X11 is out-dated?  I'm just thinking it'd be nice to have the URL of a
> good write-up to point people to when trying to explain X11 to people
> that've been brainwashed and believe the misinformation or outright lies
> certain other projects try to spread.
> 
>  Thanks,


-- 
reply to: a n d y @ n e t f x p h . c o m