4 ms·
Yes somewhat, but if I understand X11 is closer to a 'thin client' where X11 only handles drawing and moving windows on the display and interacting with a mouse
by mofosyne 3y ago
Yes somewhat, but if I understand X11 is closer to a 'thin client' where X11 only handles drawing and moving windows on the display and interacting with a mouse, keyboard or touchscreen. This is opposite to how most a typical web browser experience works, which much of the logic happening on the client side (e.g. UI elements)
- pgeorgi 3y agoSo something like NeWS
- DonHopkins 3y agoExactly, like I've been saying for years! https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38830583 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38830583 That would be a huge leap backwards. Something more like NeWS would make much more sense, since you have a scripting language in the browser that solves the terrible design flaws of X11 and Wayland. We've come so far in the direction of NeWS by adding another layer, the web browser. Why add another third layer to move back in the opposite direction, when you could REMOVE X-Windows or Wayland and just have the browser that you need in the first place, running directly on the hardware, without the useless obsolete layer underneath. I've written about this frequently and extensively (also extensibly), over more than 10 years on HN, and a lot longer than that elsewhere. But some people seem to have a mental block against understanding what the obvious advantages and efficiencies are, just don't get it, and never will, but actually want to move backwards towards X-Windows again. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38710127 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38710127