Talk:AIGLX

message: Started up the article, linked the Fedora Wiki. Someone might want to add some links, but all I can find are little snippets in blogs which are hardly relevant (and say nothing more than I've described in this article.) My work here is done, so someone else should start fixing all the things I've got wrong. :) LainOfIICHAN 16:22, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: What is the problem?
I'll state my case.  
I run Linux and have an ATI card.  The facts are quite accurate, there is no AIGLX support, the DRI API used is obsolete, it has been going on for over a year and there is no timelime for its introduction.  The development process of the driver has not addressed these fundemental issues.  Combined with numerous other flaws:
A Look at the State of ATI Linux Drivers (2005)
Posted by timothy on Sat Jul 30, '05 03:53 PM 
from the better-than-nothing dept. 
http://linux.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/07/30/197259
The State of ATI Drivers on GNU/Linux (2006)
Posted by timothy on Thu Jul 20, '06 11:22 AM
from the all-I-want-is-some-hot-3d-action dept. 
http://linux.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=06/07/20/1433230
...and end-user feedback of the development process:
Insight Into AMD's Linux Driver Development (2007)
Posted by CmdrTaco on Monday June 04, @12:07PM
from the they-should-all-wear-hats-while-they-code- dept. 
http://linux.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/06/04/1532215&from=rss
It is quite clear that there is a serious problem with the skillsets available to ATI.  It is not something that has happened recently, nor is it something that is new.
Therefore, I do not feel that there is anything wrong with the point of view, it is an expression of the facts.  It just happens to be that the facts paint ATI in a bad light.
Whoever made the dispute would like me to change the facts of reality, not my personal opinion.
:I also feel that this article needs to be updated, the url above shows the exact responsiveness of AMD to ATI's lack of Linux support. I think the opinion expressed is bias at this point, and not ALL FACTS have been taken into account. 66.41.10.101 15:10, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: a) Whose case? Please sign comments with ~~~~. b) Wikipedia is not a place for people to present cases, it's an encyclopedia, and all material must be sourced.  Contributors are editors, not originators, but this material smacks of original research, which is not allowed.  See WP:OR. Talk about what is fundamental to next-generation Linux distributions is editorializing, and doesn't belong in this article.  It certainly doesn't belong in a section about ATI, as it has nothing to do with them or their drivers, other to increase the negative impression of them (I'm not saying it isn't richly deserved; it just isn't encyclopedic). -- Jibal 22:10, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  ATI NPOV Dispute 

message: I'm planning a nice color graph on the AIGLX - links between protocols, directions of communication, languages, etc. Be free to suggest your additions. The 1st draft: 
  User program  
      |
  X server
      | 
  Graphic card
Konstantin Kosachev (talk) 16:23, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Graph

message: I think this article has a couple good screenshots (and descriptions) of the problem AIGLX fixes: http://smspillaz.wordpress.com/2010/05/21/beware-the-benchmarks/.  The author is Sam Spilsbury, primary compiz developer.  —Darxus (talk) 06:35, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Screenshots 

message: I took the liberty of removing sections that, although useful 4-5 years ago, are misleading and unmaintainable here in "the future". Assistance documenting AIGLX from a historical perspective would be greatly appreciated. I'll leave the tags for someone else to remove. Thanks! Krushia (talk) 00:03, 20 September 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I got the impression that AIGLX was a current thing from reading the article. Thankfully there is a "needs updating" tag on the top of the article, but I initially missed it. I'll do some editing on other articles to make it clear that this is legacy technology. 104.228.101.152 (talk) 17:22, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  It is now 2012 

message: If you are intimately familiar with this subject and are aware of examples of non-trivial coverage from reliable third party publications, could you please add them to the article?  I'm not having any luck. AMFMUHFVHF90922 (talk) 18:50, 28 April 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Reliable media coverage

message: AIGLX replaced Xgl, which was a display server. Therefore, AIGLX should be a display server too, I guess. Am I wrong? If not, then it should be part of :Category:Display servers.
The term "project" at the beginning of the article is too generic. Should be more specific: library, API, display server or something like that.
The product's wiki is not exactly helping in understanding what kind of product it is exactly. It uses the term "technology", which is also too generic. —  Ark25  (talk) 02:56, 24 September 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  AIGLX is a display server?