[Openicc] XICC specification draft

[Craig Ringer]

On Fri, 2005-06-24 at 10:15 -0500, Bob Friesenhahn wrote:
> On Fri, 24 Jun 2005, Craig Ringer wrote:
> >
> > Note: I use X11 thin clients at work, so I have a bit of a vested
> > interest in this. However, my view is that remote X11 is not just a
> > technical curiosity, and I suspect it'll be seeing increasing amounts of
> > use again now that thin clients are coming back "into fashion".
> 
> X11 is remote by definition.  It is a client-server system.  Anyone 
> who thinks differently should probably be using Microsoft Windows.

Agreed, on both points. Or Mac OS X - where they could've extended and
enhanced X11, but instead chose to make a whole new GUI that totally
omits consideration of the network (*grumble*).

> Remote X11 is hardly a "curiosity".  My daily work environment 
> includes tens of windows for applications running on other systems.  I 
> am not using a "thin" client.

I use it regularly for that, too. Even at home, I use my poor little
gutless laptop to run more demanding apps from my desktop.

> As Linux evolves, I see more and more X11 programs which behave poorly 
> (i.e. run slowly, refuse to run) if they are not displayed on the 
> "console".

This really worries me. That's part of the reason I regularly test
Scribus over remote X11 (it's slow, but not unreasonably slow compared
to local performance, and it does work properly).

> At least one original X11 inventor is on this list.  Let us assure 
> that his efforts have not been in vain.  Preserve the client 
> client-server model and only look for local performance enhancements 
> once networked client-server is working well.

Absolutely. That's why I raised that point in the first place.

--
Craig Ringer