| 1 |
b.n. wrote: |
| 2 |
> Richard Fish ha scritto: |
| 3 |
>> Yeah, I'm not a fan of Xgl either, but I am of AIGLX, and I was under |
| 4 |
>> the impression that the open source radeon driver had good support for |
| 5 |
>> AIGLX. I'm using nvidia, so I had to wait for the 9xxx driver release |
| 6 |
>> before I could use it... :-( |
| 7 |
> |
| 8 |
> I was under the impression AIGLX was dying in favour of Xgl. Well, I'll |
| 9 |
> do my research :) |
| 10 |
> |
| 11 |
Quite the other way around, as far as I've been able to tell. Xgl got |
| 12 |
greater publicity, yes, but AIGLX is the one that will eventually be the |
| 13 |
"official" solution - it's already present in Portage's xorg-server in |
| 14 |
some form. |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
By the way, the latest beta drivers from nVidia provide the OpenGL |
| 17 |
extension that Compiz and Beryl use, so you don't even need AIGLX nor |
| 18 |
Xgl, and DRI can remain enabled (wobbly quake3! ^_^). My laptop at the |
| 19 |
moment has no overlays at all - xorg-server from ~x86, compiz from ~x86, |
| 20 |
and nvidia-drivers in package.unmask - and it's all working very nicely. |
| 21 |
:) Hopefully other driver devs will follow suit. |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
>> I find the task switcher that displays live images of the windows, and |
| 24 |
>> the scale effect (move the cursor to a corner of the screen and all |
| 25 |
>> windows shrink and tile on the screen, and then you click on the one |
| 26 |
>> you want to switch to) to be the most useful, |
| 27 |
> |
| 28 |
> Yes, an Exposè-like thing would be really useful. Is it *fast*? |
| 29 |
> |
| 30 |
Yes. I tried compiz+AIGLX on my old Celeron 1.5GHz with integrated |
| 31 |
motherboard video (eeew!) just for kicks and it ran fairly smoothly - |
| 32 |
modest framerate, but definitely usable. If you mean literally fast, |
| 33 |
then also yes - all of the animations happen within half a second or so |
| 34 |
(not that I've measured ;)). There's a key shortcut, too, if you want |
| 35 |
to see jiggly windows in slow-mo. (shift-f10 is the default, I believe? |
| 36 |
Someone help me out on that one.) |
| 37 |
|
| 38 |
>> although I could watch |
| 39 |
>> my windows wobble and jiggle all day! |
| 40 |
> |
| 41 |
> lol! |
| 42 |
> |
| 43 |
That is awfully cute. :) My favorite feature is the window scaler. Oh, |
| 44 |
and the way the rest of the desktop sort of drops into the background |
| 45 |
while Alt-Tabbing - it's subtle but cool. |
| 46 |
|
| 47 |
>> For simple things like shadows and transparency, that could be done |
| 48 |
>> independently of the window manager. But for more complicated |
| 49 |
>> effects, like the task switcher, or being able to animate window |
| 50 |
>> operations, or flash windows that want attention, or the desktop cube |
| 51 |
>> thingy, you need tighter integration with the window manager. |
| 52 |
> |
| 53 |
> Sigh. I see. I wonder if/when common WMs/DEs will support these things |
| 54 |
> out of the box (KDE, XFCE and Fluxbox are my favourites :) ) |
| 55 |
> |
| 56 |
It depends on how important the WM is to the whole thing, you see. |
| 57 |
Compiz and its fork, Beryl, work very well with Gnome and KDE because |
| 58 |
the window manager isn't very important to them - it does very little |
| 59 |
besides manage windows, while (in Gnome for example) gnome-session and |
| 60 |
Nautilus do a lot of work as well. There's even a separate program that |
| 61 |
handles window decorations (gnome-window-decorator in Gnome, kwin I |
| 62 |
think in KDE). On the other hand, with Fluxbox, Openbox, and similar, |
| 63 |
the WM is all there is, so it's a big deal to change it. You can't have |
| 64 |
"Compiz integration in Fluxbox", since they both do the same thing, and |
| 65 |
will refuse to run at the same time. I have, however, heard rumours of |
| 66 |
an Openbox clone with some Compiz code spliced into it in initial |
| 67 |
development... :D |
| 68 |
|
| 69 |
> m. |
| 70 |
|
| 71 |
Ryan |
| 72 |
|
| 73 |
|
| 74 |
-- |
| 75 |
gentoo-user@g.o mailing list |
Archives