4 ms·

Really, and this is an OK choice, but is a choice all the same: What happened is others settled on a subset of multi user graphical computing. That is not rep

Really, and this is an OK choice, but is a choice all the same: What happened is others settled on a subset of multi user graphical computing. That is not replacing X. It is something different, less. Maybe less is more too. I have an open mind. However that goes, X nailed multi user graphical computing. Pretty much any crazy thing you can think of can be done on X. Want to make a computer that several people use locally, each with their own screen, keyboard, mouse? X can do that, and permit those users to view and interact with any combination of each others display data. One says, hey can you sort this for me? Another says, "sure", and a window pops up on their screen... Now, replicate that same setup, each user has their own powerful computer, maybe with a common, shared display among them, like a wall display or something. No problem. X does that too, and chances are only the sysadmin differs. The apps will have no clue. It may be that we just do not work that way, or maybe not enough know how, but let's be clear here. X is not being replaced. A subset at best is being put forward. I think that means we just are not really doing multi user graphical computing. And that is OK.

tropo 7y ago
X has never supported reliable screen locking. If the screen locker program crashes or is killed because the OS ran out of memory, the X server is unprotected. It's an unpleasant feeling to come back to an unlocked screen in a shared building.
battery_cowboy 7y ago
Wow, can you tell me where I can find out about how to do those things, like: > Want to make a computer that several people use locally, each with their own screen, keyboard, mouse? X can do that, and permit those users to view and interact with any combination of each others display data. > One says, hey can you sort this for me? Another says, "sure", and a window pops up on their screen... Is there literature or something about setting up complex things like this in X? I'd be interested in learning more.
- ddingus 7y ago
  The term for multiple displays is "Dual or multi-head" The term for multiple, independent users is "Multiseat" Those should get you somewhere near the entrance to the rabbit hole. Enjoy your journey. The view and interact part, when I explored this stuff, is very insecure by today's standards. Can be fun though. :D
perl4ever 7y ago
"That is not replacing X. It is something different, less." Like UNIX vs Multics?
- ddingus 7y ago
  Maybe. Seems a similar kind of thing. I only have a fleeting grasp of Multics.

tropo 7y ago

X has never supported reliable screen locking. If the screen locker program crashes or is killed because the OS ran out of memory, the X server is unprotected. It's an unpleasant feeling to come back to an unlocked screen in a shared building.

battery_cowboy 7y ago

Wow, can you tell me where I can find out about how to do those things, like: > Want to make a computer that several people use locally, each with their own screen, keyboard, mouse? X can do that, and permit those users to view and interact with any combination of each others display data. > One says, hey can you sort this for me? Another says, "sure", and a window pops up on their screen... Is there literature or something about setting up complex things like this in X? I'd be interested in learning more.

ddingus 7y ago
The term for multiple displays is "Dual or multi-head" The term for multiple, independent users is "Multiseat" Those should get you somewhere near the entrance to the rabbit hole. Enjoy your journey. The view and interact part, when I explored this stuff, is very insecure by today's standards. Can be fun though. :D

perl4ever 7y ago

"That is not replacing X. It is something different, less." Like UNIX vs Multics?

ddingus 7y ago
Maybe. Seems a similar kind of thing. I only have a fleeting grasp of Multics.