Enabling Compiz by default?

[Ioannis Nousias]

I couldn't agree more. MacOSX is the living proof that opengl 
compositing is functional and efficient.

If there was a "huge increase in power consumption" then a MacBook's 
battery would only last for an hour. A GPU is better in handling the GUI 
than a CPU is, even with current graphics cards that do little about 
power efficiency.

my 2cents.

Ioannis


PS: overloading your desktop by enabling extra fancy effects will of 
course result in higher power consumption. That's the user's choice to 
make. The defaults so offer the basic experience and emphasise in 
usability rather than bling.


Bernardo Innocenti wrote:
> On 08/09/2007 06:18 PM, Alan Cox wrote:
>
>> Compiz is too buggy to use - its still hopelessly broken with java menus
>> and you'd want to use one of the actually maintained compositing 
>> managers
>> instead.
>
> Which ones?
>
> Ubuntu Gutsy will have Compiz fusion by default.  And they're fixing
> bugs to reach this goal.  We could benefit from their work, or
> reinvent the wheel by going a different route.
>
> Also, nowadays compiz appears to be quite maintained:
>
> http://gitweb.freedesktop.org/?p=xorg/app/compiz.git;a=summary
>
>
>> - Do you know anyone who doesn't turn the effects off eventually ?
>
> Most people do that because of performance problems, bugs and
> annoying effects (wobbly, genie)
>
> Nobody turns off composition on MacOSX because it works seamlessly.
> We should strive to reach that degree of robustness and performance
> on Linux too, as we're already 5 years late.
>
>
>> - Do we care about the huge increase in power consumption ?
>
> Hmmm... I never thought it would be an issue once we remove
> various source inefficiency.
>
> A composited desktop shouldn't necessarily cause much more GPU
> or CPU activity than traditional graphics plus the needed
> hand-made double buffering hacks to hide flickering during
> repaints.
>