My reco is "decaf"



The highly excitable "T" writes:



"WTF? I can't believe you just compared Windows XP to THE defacto standard in windowing technology, X-Windows-- especially when the root of your rant

only applies to the fat-ass bloated Linux window managers that the uneducated miscreants of the linux world now associate with 'X-Windows.' So, here's a quick history lesson for you and your Windows XP Fan-Boy minions:



In 1984 the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) formed Project Athena. The goal was to take the existing assortment of incompatible workstations from different vendors and develop a network of graphical workstations that could be used as teaching aids. The solution was a network that could run local applications while being able to call on remote resources. They thus created the first operating environment that was truly hardware and vendor independent - the X Window System. Over the subsequent 20 years, the X Consortium, along with MILLIONS of open source developers and commercial partners, built X-Windows into a highly streamlined, fast and extensible windowing environment.



They did such a good job, in fact, that it has become the basis for almost ALL modern windowing systems to date. Starting back in the late 80's with Sun Microsystems and Silicon Graphics, Inc, X-Windows STILL holds the record for most user interfaces in-use, in existence-- and that doesn't even count all the Microsoft Windows versions which clearly stole the X-Windows architecture and technology back in 1992 with the release of Windows NT. Oh and, FAN-BOY, I forgot to mention that all the highly-acclaimed Apple computing interfaces since 1988, including the much-loved Next Operating System (now the basis for OS X) are 100% genuine X-Windows engines underneath the covers. What system do all the graphical

power houses use again?



So next time you go on a performance rant, do a little research, and at least verify that you are ranting on comparable products. Your comparison was similar saying "my Ferrari F-60 Enzo, while towing a 46-foot tractor trailer, just doesn't have the power to match my Nissan-Z wanna-be stripped down Infinity Sedan..." Yeah, well, Duh! Lose the bloat and try that test again, and I think you will be unpleasantly surprised, and embarrassed, by the results. Oh, and if you need some help reconfiguring your test, let me know-- I have an 8 year old nephew who frees up about 3 o-clock everday, and I'm sure he would be happy to set you up."



Let's see, where do I begin? I believe I was contrasting Visual Studio with the equivalent Linux representatives (say, Visual Slickedit under Gnome or KDE). Obviously, Gnome and KDE are the two leading X-based GUI's for **ix world. At some point, blame for poor performance must fall in either of the higher level layers (say, Gnome) or the lower level Windowing engine (X). Or perhaps a combination of the high- and low-levels.



Bottom line is that my original rant still stands: where is the X-based IDE that will handle my incessant, rapid-fire [Alt] keystrokes without choking the menuing system?



Corollary: if Gnome and KDE couldn't get X right... who can? Who will? And, if those guys couldn't get it right (remember, they're "fat-ass bloated... window managers"), what does that say about X itself?



And another minor rant regarding RedHat keyboard handling: why can't Gnome or KDE handle the numeric keypad in a standardized way? It seems that handling of the rightside keypad -- in navigation mode -- is left to the application. Huh? SlickEdit takes care of numeric keypad navigation (say, PgUp, PgDn) while most other apps ignore it. For someone who changes machines a lot and relies heavily upon that keypad -- this is a pretty serious annoyance.