Re: SDL vs GGI

[Brett_A._Letner@NOTES.UP.COM]

>> From all the other Linux users I talk to, I'd say you were in a minority
>> of about 1.
Of all the OS users, those who use Linux are in the minority.

>> Why not?  I'd really like to hear your reasons.
>> With RAM down to <$1 per MiB, it surely can't be that.  It can't be
>> disk space at $1 per 100MiB. CPU time isn't too relevent - when X is
>> justsitting there, it consumes <0.1% of my CPU...
It is of absolutely no importance that X is only using a "small" amount of
RAM or a "tiny" bit of disk space.
What is important is that in my estimation X does not offer my anything.
Why should I run a program for the sake of running a program?
If you have some examples of how X will help me perform day to day tasks
more efficiently, then please share them.
(I'm not trying to be sarcastic here, I really want to know.  I've used X
and Windows, but after awhile I found that I could be more efficient by
keeping my hands on the keyboard and focusing on one task at a time.  I've
found windowing systems to be not much more than a pretty distraction.
Maybe Mac or Beos is better?)

>> and for 2D work, it gets
>> you a cleaner
>> more portable interface to the underlying accellerator
>> than SVGSlib does (IMHO).
I've never programmed in SVGAlib, so I can't comment.  However, I can
compare programming in Xlib and fbcon.  Let me tell you I found fbcon to be
much more straightforward, intuitive, and easy.  My (unaccelerated) code
also ran much, much, faster.
As for portability and acceleration, it is no contest.  Of course X wins in
both these categories.  This is a fringe benefit of being the "standard".
However, I have never been one to use a standard for the sake of using a
standard. (Reference Linux vs windows)
Hopefully, with time, fbcon will support as much acceleration as X does
(admittedly I'm pretty much in the dark here.  Can anyone on this list
compare and contrast the acceleration of X vs. fbcon?  Current, planned, or
otherwise?).

-Brett