Re: Applications Compatibility

[jordan <triplesquarednine gmail com>]

> I've had the opposite experience.  With compiz and multi-head (second
> display) acceleration usually got disabled and was at best hit-n-miss.

I have 2 displays and am running compiz 0.9.5 (with nvidia), no
problems at all - full hardware acceleration. Even with 0.8.6 running
2 displays, i didn't have any real issues.

> GNOME3 is now working with a second display [not in fail-over mode]
> which is much appreciated.  For me GNOME3's OpenGL based shell seems
> both faster and more robust than compiz + GNOME2.

and what sort of heavy-duty 3D applications are you actually using
with your setup?   You know, the kinds of applications that can turn
compositors on their head?  ie: gaming, transgaming, 3d animation,
etc...

faster? - it's not... you can't even reduce/increase the speed of your
effects with the click of a mouse. the defaults for transitions in
gnome-shell have slow timing - smooth yes, but slow moving from start
to finish time.... so what exactly are you basing this on??? -
possibly biased benchmarks made by developers, who clearly want people
to use Mutter/gnome-shell and not compiz? your own eyes?? (in which
case, you have no way of being able to tell the difference, as you
probably can't stress mutter, and test against compiz - frame for
frame).

more robust? - if that was true --> then in any and all circumstances
gnome-shell/mutter should have zero tearing, zero graphical errors, in
situations that would break compiz. If you had read my comments to
Allen, you would have noticed i gave examples as to where
gnome-shell/mutter was anything BUT robust. One trip to youtube and
watching gnome-shell reviews will show you that it isn't as robust as
you think. You've (im assuming) even saw my screenshots from Maya
(that i posted a month or so ago on the list). Compiz handles all this
stuff fine, gnome-shell/mutter does not.... I'm not saying it's not
going to get there, it probably will - but it ain't there yet.

Also, Mutter doesn't even have much to compare with Compiz. I haven't
seen mutter produce even a fraction of types of
transitions/plugins/GFX that compiz can. When Mutter starts doing more
complicated types of effects (like 3D, not just scale/zoom) we will
see how it performs then. until you can speed up the effects, and
there are more hardcore transitions/effetcs to equally compare - i
think it's pretty hard to compare mutter to anything but metacity, or
possibly cairo-compmgr.

fail-over mode..? lol.

fallback is what has kept gnome on my desktops (and many other users),
i would hardly associate that with "failure".  it potentially means,
down-the-line if gnome-shell gets to be more to my liking (or other
people who aren't using it with gnome3) ~ we won't have already moved
on to something like KDE, and completely ditched gnome! ~ that to me,
means fallback mode is a "success", and a good thing.

jordan