2018 won't be the year of Linux on desktop and it's @boomzilla's fault
-
@blakeyrat The whole point of Wayland was to get rid of graphics primitives and leave that to the toolkits. So app developers will just do what the toolkit does. The problem is that there are two different toolkits in Linux, and there is a ton of API that Wayland the developers refuse to implement and leave it to the desktop environments to implement so it will be pure chaos.
-
@magnusmaster Right; but that's only PART of the problem. The other part is that it doesn't improve the remote-control bit of the problem even slightly-- Linux applications running a GUI over the network still have to send pixel-by-pixel. They still don't have features Windows has had for ages, like OpenGL pass-through. It's ridiculous.
-
@blakeyrat said in 2018 won't be the year of Linux on desktop and it's @boomzilla's fault:
@magnusmaster Right; but that's only PART of the problem. The other part is that it doesn't improve the remote-control bit of the problem even slightly-- Linux applications running a GUI over the network still have to send pixel-by-pixel. They still don't have features Windows has had for ages, like OpenGL pass-through. It's ridiculous.
Wayland doesn't even have a remote control API, or an API to take screenshots, or an API to place your windows where you want. It's basically a display server for embedded devices that everyone is trying to build on top to get something that can eventually replace X, but everyone will implement its own API, And a lot of the API will not be standarized mainly because of GNOME.
-
@magnusmaster
So what is the benefit of wayland then?
-
@adynathos said in 2018 won't be the year of Linux on desktop and it's @boomzilla's fault:
So what is the benefit of wayland then?
That it's not X, with all its outdated cruft and hundreds of protocol extensions. That's it.
-
@asdf said in 2018 won't be the year of Linux on desktop and it's @boomzilla's fault:
@adynathos said in 2018 won't be the year of Linux on desktop and it's @boomzilla's fault:
So what is the benefit of wayland then?
That it's not X, with all its outdated cruft and hundreds of protocol extensions. That's it.
Also, once proper sandboxing is implementing, to prevent keylogging which is currently trivial under X, proper screen locking and DPI scaling.
-
@magnusmaster
Yeah, the fact that it's extremely hard to implement screen locking correctly on top of X is ridiculous.
-
@asdf The fact that X completely ignores user permissions is even more ridiculous. Linux is supposed to be "the secure OS", right? But any GUI app can read the contents of any other, regardless of which user it's running under. Whaaa?
The DPI scaling doesn't make sense, since AFAIK Wayland expressly does not do that, it offloads that work to the application.
-
@blakeyrat said in 2018 won't be the year of Linux on desktop and it's @boomzilla's fault:
@asdf The fact that X completely ignores user permissions is even more ridiculous. Linux is supposed to be "the secure OS", right? But any GUI app can read the contents of any other, regardless of which user it's running under. Whaaa?
X has always been a wart when it comes to security. I mean, on most (all?) distributions, it still runs as root.
The DPI scaling doesn't make sense, since AFAIK Wayland expressly does not do that, it offloads that work to the application.
But at least Wayland doesn't prevent them from implementing it correctly. AFAIK, there are fundamental problems with having different scaling factors on different monitors in X.
And, from what I've read on the Nvidia Wayland discussion, they seem to be making sure that the Wayland protocol exposes all relevant information to the application for toolkits to be able to implement this correctly.
-
@blakeyrat said in 2018 won't be the year of Linux on desktop and it's @boomzilla's fault:
@gurth said in 2018 won't be the year of Linux on desktop and it's @boomzilla's fault:
One is that they probably think it’ll help people to switch if the UI looks just like the one they’re used to
Do they have any evidence to back that up?
Let’s say I doubt it.
I can’t speak for anyone else, but my decision to use Linux wasn’t based on what the UI looked like. Rather, after making the switch I spent some time trying out different window managers/desktop environments to see which one I preferred. I initially went with KDE, to a fair extent because of the familiar look (having come from Win98), but I soon got rid of it exactly because it seemed to be trying to be more Windows than Windows — in mostly negative ways, that is. (For the record: I eventually settled on WindowMaker — a NeXTSTEP clone — despite never having even heard of NeXTSTEP at the time. So I guess that is some evidence that people might not use a UI even if it looks familiar.)
macOS has probably the weirdest and most unique behaviors of all current OSes.
And one I prefer over Windows’. Took me no time at all to adjust to it.
Which makes sense, since the designers responsible for the macOS and Windows look make tons of money. Just creating the font that gives Microsoft's "fluent design" its distinctive look probably cost more than Gnome's budget for the last 3 years.
To be fair, I would think that’s also simply because they can afford it. Microsoft and Apple could have simply used an existing typeface rather than have a completely new one designed for their respective OSes, but they’ve got the money to pay for as many custom ones as they like, so why not? If you own a market stall in a small town you may have a hand-painted sign in front of it, while if you own shops in a hundred towns you get custom signs printed.
-
@kt_ said in 2018 won't be the year of Linux on desktop and it's @boomzilla's fault:
there are no use cases for a non-dev user where Linux could be seen as better than either Windows or MacOS.
And that's probably why Linux will never be more mainstream. As a random joe-or-jane user, why would you want to use one OS or another? Does Linux have more applications than other OS? No. Is it cheaper? Well, in theory yes (it's free!) but in practice Microsoft makes sure that OEM versions are as cheap as possible and for MacOS it's part of the device that you buy, so the price of the OS is transparent.
So what's left? Yes, there is a tiny minority who'll care more about being able to customize everything than actually use their computer. There is also another tiny minority that will favour openness above everything else. But for the huge majority of people who just buy whatever laptop sits in their local electronics shop?
Actually, this even goes further (I think): people care so little that they never buy a specific OS specially for the OS. They buy a Mac because whatever reason (they like the design, they're brain-dead, whatever you like). They buy a random laptop and it comes with Windows, so they buy Windows. But have you really ever seen, outside of the tech community, someone saying that they really really want to buy Windows or MacOS? They might want an Acer or an Apple (or a Samsung or a Nokia or whatever for phones), but the OS is just a convenience step.
-
@remi said in 2018 won't be the year of Linux on desktop and it's @boomzilla's fault:
They might want an Acer or an Apple (or a Samsung or a Nokia or whatever for phones), but the OS is just a convenience step.
With phones specifically, Samsung are working hard to make the brand about them, hiding the fact that it's Android as much as possible. I've been asked before if I have a charger for a Samsung
-
@jaloopa said in 2018 won't be the year of Linux on desktop and it's @boomzilla's fault:
Samsung are working hard to make the brand about them, hiding the fact that it's Android as much as possible.
Maybe they plan to move to Tizen :D
Now I remember that Samsung came to my uni and offered internships to work on Tizen, I pity the ones who fell for that trap.
-
@adynathos said in 2018 won't be the year of Linux on desktop and it's @boomzilla's fault:
Maybe they plan to move to Tizen
That's probably part of it. Make the OS transparent so the general public won't care if the underlying tech changes.
Of course, unless they include the ability to run Android apps, many people would be annoyed if they bought a new Samsung that suddenly didn't run Candy Run or whatever
-
@jaloopa said in 2018 won't be the year of Linux on desktop and it's @boomzilla's fault:
Of course, unless they include the ability to run Android apps, many people would be annoyed if they bought a new Samsung that suddenly didn't run Candy Run or whatever
Which is actually probably the only reason most people may care about the OS. They might refuse to buy something where their favourite app does not run (or where they believe there will be less choice), but it's not really the OS that they pick, more the app catalog.
-
@remi said in 2018 won't be the year of Linux on desktop and it's @boomzilla's fault:
Which is actually probably the only reason most people may care about the OS. They might refuse to buy something where their favourite app does not run (or where they believe there will be less choice), but it's not really the OS that they pick, more the app catalog.
Pretty good hypothesis, seeing as it's similar for consoles. I don't buy an X-Box because it's an X-Box, I buy it because it plays my favourite games (and I like achievements). Nowhere is this more phenomenon more apparent than with the Nintendo consoles.
-
Even though I have a wish of being able to drop Windows completely and just run Linux for everything, that will probably never happen for several reasons. Technically I could use Wine, but that's also a bit hit-and-miss where stuff may break for whatever reason, as well as being a bit behind on some Windows features. So for now I'll just keep dual-booting and switch for whatever I need at the moment. Linux for as much as possible, Windows for the rest (mainly gaming, but possibly adding Adobe to it too).
Although I do like MacBooks and have actually started considering getting a new one to replace my old and broken MacBook Air. May even step up to a MacBook Pro this time. For all the ridiculing Apple get I find their laptops solid and winning on being both powerful and portable, which is a key factor in me choosing a laptop. Also, macOS runs pretty much all the stuff I could want on a laptop without being Windows, so there's that too!
-
@atazhaia said in 2018 won't be the year of Linux on desktop and it's @boomzilla's fault:
macOS runs pretty much all the stuff I could want on a laptop without being Windows
But what do you gain by replacing Windows with Mac?
Linux is free/customizable, Windows is mainstream, Mac is neither?
-
@adynathos said in 2018 won't be the year of Linux on desktop and it's @boomzilla's fault:
But what do you gain by replacing Windows with Mac?
It's Not Windows. That's literally all that matters to a particular subset of people
-
@adynathos Because Windows annoys me a lot nowadays with all the shit they're cramming into Windows 10. macOS still allows full control of updates, unless I explicitly turn on the option to automatically install updates, so I wont get surprised by lengthy updates when I open the laptop. Also, no advertisements in the OS or automatic installs of "recommended" apps from the App Store.
The OS is supposed to make it easier to
playwork on the computer, not make it harder. Windows strongly falls into the latter nowadays.
-
@blakeyrat said in 2018 won't be the year of Linux on desktop and it's @boomzilla's fault:
You need a 10-foot design
No you don't. More to the point, you can't get it in OSS, for all the reasons you've already laid out. Instead of trying to compete with the big companies on an axis where they were completely outclassed, gnome should have played to their strengths. Customizability was the only good thing about Linux desktop environments, and they were dumbasses for abandoning it.
-
@buddy said in 2018 won't be the year of Linux on desktop and it's @boomzilla's fault:
Instead of trying to compete with the big companies on an axis where they were completely outclassed
So, you're saying that GNOME 3 was completely outclassed by Windows 8, design-wise?
-
@atazhaia said in 2018 won't be the year of Linux on desktop and it's @boomzilla's fault:
Even though I have a wish of being able to drop Windows completely and just run Linux for everything,
But why though?
-
@buddy said in 2018 won't be the year of Linux on desktop and it's @boomzilla's fault:
Customizability was the only good thing about Linux desktop environments, and they were dumbasses for abandoning it.
But they can't compete on that, either, because they don't have enough staff to QA it. I'd argue that if you care about quality software, that's FAR more expensive than creating a unique visual theme.
The real fundamental problem is that there's no money in the Linux ecosystem. You have hire people to get this shit done, and they can't afford to.
-
@blakeyrat I've wanted to be able to switch to just running the same OS on every computer I use. But that idea has been challenged lately I admit, and I do see the benefits of using all three (five if counting mobile) big ones regularly. I dunno if I will drop the wish of being able to just use Linux for all my needs, but looking at the direction things are heading I may just embrace the idea of using them all in combination.
-
@atazhaia said in 2018 won't be the year of Linux on desktop and it's @boomzilla's fault:
I've wanted to be able to switch to just running the same OS on every computer I use.
But why? That's just pushing the question one step further along.
Does it appeal to some kind of artistic sensibility you have to have all your computers running "the same OS"? Does it apply to stuff like the computer running in your car? (Those are generally QNX, I believe, although I know Tesla uses Android for that.)
-
@blakeyrat I've wanted to be able to switch to just running the same OS on every personal computer I use. For consistency and having the same look and feel across devices. I would also say for using the same programs on all, but I can replace most defaults with cross-platform ones anyway, so that's not so much of a point.
But to expand on what I said, lately I've felt the idea challenged because even if in an ideal world I'd be able to just use one OS, I wont be able to do that in reality. I could switch to only using Linux now and not lose a whole lot of stuff, as all my work can be done on Linux and I can even use it for gaming perfectly fine. And as much as I dislike using it, if I want to do my work and hobbies to the best of my ability I will have to keep using Windows. And to that I also see the value of macOS to help me in both.
My colleague whoever who REALLY hates Windows recently managed to switch to an all Linux setup, after I finally managed to convince him to just use the mobile app instead of the one program he needed Windows for. So if you think I'm being negative about Windows, try talking to him!
-
@atazhaia said in 2018 won't be the year of Linux on desktop and it's @boomzilla's fault:
I've wanted to be able to switch to just running the same OS on every personal computer I use. For consistency and having the same look and feel across devices.
Ok well that's an actual reason, but you want your 7" cellphone with a touchscreen to behave the same way as your dual 30" computer monitors with a keyboard/mouse/Xbox controller? You... you do?
@atazhaia said in 2018 won't be the year of Linux on desktop and it's @boomzilla's fault:
So if you think I'm being negative about Windows, try talking to him!
I don't give a shit if people hate Microsoft, I just want people to have actual reasons for it that are more inward-looking than "well a bunch of guys on Hacker News told me I should."
-
@blakeyrat said in 2018 won't be the year of Linux on desktop and it's @boomzilla's fault:
Linux applications running a GUI over the network still have to send pixel-by-pixel.
You have no clue how X Window System works
-
@timebandit said in 2018 won't be the year of Linux on desktop and it's @boomzilla's fault:
You have no clue how X Window System works
I wasn't talking about X, I was talking about Wayland.
If you are aware of Wayland having graphics primitives, please clue me in. AFAIK, it's just pixel-by-pixel. Even for font rendering.
-
@blakeyrat The wonderful thing about computers is that an OS don't have to be tied to a single UI and behavior, but can use different depending on the device, display and input method. Or even based off user preference! Although because of various reasons it's not very practical to have the same entire OS stack running on any computer so I admit a specialized install and configuration would have to be used regardless, even if the end result is pretty much an entirely different OS (desktop Linux vs Android for example).
And I never said my colleague hated Microsoft. He just hates Windows, but if perfectly happy using select MS products like Outlook and C#.
-
@atazhaia I suppose that's true, but if your mobile phone behaves differently from your desktop, why does it matter that it's the same OS?
I mean Apple made some noise about that a couple years back. "iOS and macOS are the exact same OS!" But I don't see the point, personally.
@atazhaia said in 2018 won't be the year of Linux on desktop and it's @boomzilla's fault:
And I never said my colleague hated Microsoft. He just hates Windows, but if perfectly happy using select MS products like Outlook and C#.
Well I think he'll find that the grass is always greener.
-
@remi said in 2018 won't be the year of Linux on desktop and it's @boomzilla's fault:
But have you really ever seen, outside of the tech community, someone saying that they really really want to buy Windows or MacOS? They might want an Acer or an Apple (or a Samsung or a Nokia or whatever for phones), but the OS is just a convenience step.
My guess is that a large number of long-term Apple users — which which I mean the ones who’ve used Apple computers since before they became fashion accessories — buy the machine principally for the OS, even if they might not articulate it that way. The ones who buy Apple for the same reason people buy Gucci handbags, they probably couldn’t care less what OS is on it.
Another group are probably people who know what apps they want to use, and won’t buy an OS that can’t, but otherwise don’t care.
@adynathos said in 2018 won't be the year of Linux on desktop and it's @boomzilla's fault:
But what do you gain by replacing Windows with Mac?
Linux is free/customizable, Windows is mainstream, Mac is neither?An OS that, for some people, is easier to get along with. Others disagree, but at least they all have a choice. Even if it’s the wrong one ;)
-
@gurth said in 2018 won't be the year of Linux on desktop and it's @boomzilla's fault:
My guess is that a large number of long-term Apple users — which which I mean the ones who’ve used Apple computers since before they became fashion accessories — buy the machine principally for the OS,
I stopped buying it because the OS got exactly as shitty as Windows.
But, given, I'm in the minority.
-
@blakeyrat said in 2018 won't be the year of Linux on desktop and it's @boomzilla's fault:
I stopped buying it because the OS got exactly as shitty as Windows.
I have this feeling that if I had been a classic MacOS user back in the day, I might agree with you. Having gone (various stuff) → DOS → Windows → Linux → Mac, though, I find macOS far less shitty than Windows. But like I said, the great thing is we have the choice.
-
@adynathos said in 2018 won't be the year of Linux on desktop and it's @boomzilla's fault:
But what do you gain by replacing Windows with Mac?
Linux is free/customizable, Windows is mainstream, Mac is neither?I can't speak for anyone else but I like OSX because it's great for casual use, maybe even better than Windows, and it also gives you unixy power-user features.
-
@blakeyrat said in 2018 won't be the year of Linux on desktop and it's @boomzilla's fault:
people have been switching to macOS in droves from both Windows and Linux
[citation needed]
-
@asdf said in 2018 won't be the year of Linux on desktop and it's @boomzilla's fault:
That it's not X, with all its outdated cruft and hundreds of protocol extensions. That's it.
How has it taken this long to get rid of X, which everyone has known was horrible for decades?
-
@remi said in 2018 won't be the year of Linux on desktop and it's @boomzilla's fault:
@kt_ said in 2018 won't be the year of Linux on desktop and it's @boomzilla's fault:
there are no use cases for a non-dev user where Linux could be seen as better than either Windows or MacOS.
And that's probably why Linux will never be more mainstream. As a random joe-or-jane user, why would you want to use one OS or another? Does Linux have more applications than other OS? No. Is it cheaper? Well, in theory yes (it's free!) but in practice Microsoft makes sure that OEM versions are as cheap as possible and for MacOS it's part of the device that you buy, so the price of the OS is transparent.
You could install it on this old machine your mom uses to browse the web, but then this Xfce-based Ubuntu would crash in the least convenient time and you'd have to come and fix it.
So what's left? Yes, there is a tiny minority who'll care more about being able to customize everything than actually use their computer. There is also another tiny minority that will favour openness above everything else. But for the huge majority of people who just buy whatever laptop sits in their local electronics shop?
The start is to make it stable and easy to use enough that these CS students will keep it installed after they leave uni. The second step is to make Raspbian nice and stable enough so that you can create a Linux-based media center for your parents and not fear that something weird will happen.
Actually, this even goes further (I think): people care so little that they never buy a specific OS specially for the OS. They buy a Mac because whatever reason (they like the design, they're brain-dead, whatever you like). They buy a random laptop and it comes with Windows, so they buy Windows. But have you really ever seen, outside of the tech community, someone saying that they really really want to buy Windows or MacOS? They might want an Acer or an Apple (or a Samsung or a Nokia or whatever for phones), but the OS is just a convenience step.
I do agree with you, but I think that more people would be interested in Linux if they were able to get a few things right. If it was stable and easy-to-use, you might want to install it on your parents' PC they could still use, but which can't successfully run Windows. I have such a machine, I use it to play videos and sometimes browse the web. It can't work with W7/10, but it'll happily churn away under elementary OS.
My mom has a computer she likes and she doesn't want to buy a new one, but she'll need to soon, because the hardware is deteriorating and there's no Linux distro I'd feel comfortable providing her with.
Old hardware could be the first step into the normal Joe's world. Not a great first step, but a first step. With how things look now, it can only be a dev OS for the adventurous.
-
@masonwheeler said in 2018 won't be the year of Linux on desktop and it's @boomzilla's fault:
How has it taken this long to get rid of X, which everyone has known was horrible for decades?
It really all comes back to "they have no manpower."
That said, since Ubuntu has (had?) a rich sugar-daddy, it's hard to figure why they didn't make that their number one top priority back in 2012 or whenever they were founded.
-
@adynathos said in 2018 won't be the year of Linux on desktop and it's @boomzilla's fault:
@atazhaia said in 2018 won't be the year of Linux on desktop and it's @boomzilla's fault:
macOS runs pretty much all the stuff I could want on a laptop without being Windows
But what do you gain by replacing Windows with Mac?
Linux is free/customizable, Windows is mainstream, Mac is neither?I really don't get people asking questions like these. In what world are these good characteristics?
Linux is a nice dev OS and might to some appeal because it's free or customizable. It's also for someone about being niche and different.
Windows is the platform to get everything. It's the most popular and target OS. It's not about it being "mainstream", it's about it serving a real purpose.
Macs are great development machines (mostly webdev and Apple development, but still), elegant, easy and pleasurable to use, awesome for design work. They integrate extremely well with other Apple devices and services (iOS, Watch, iPod, Apple Music, Notes, Mail).
You have to be braindead to overlook that and go straight for "people who like Apple stuff are either braindead or sheeple or posers".
Seriously guys, I do expect more from you.
-
@kt_ said in 2018 won't be the year of Linux on desktop and it's @boomzilla's fault:
Seriously guys, I do expect more from you.
-
@blakeyrat said in 2018 won't be the year of Linux on desktop and it's @boomzilla's fault:
@atazhaia said in 2018 won't be the year of Linux on desktop and it's @boomzilla's fault:
Even though I have a wish of being able to drop Windows completely and just run Linux for everything,
But why though?
You asked me that question previously, I'll answer to this one.
TBH, I don't know. Probably partly because of the nostalgia. I liked playing with Linux desktops way back when. Probably because I've used them for development a bit and they can be really nice to use. Maybe a bit because it would be nice to have another player to disturb the duopoly?
But come to think of it, I'd probably sooner move to macOS than to Linux, if I were to make the switch.
-
@blakeyrat said in 2018 won't be the year of Linux on desktop and it's @boomzilla's fault:
@masonwheeler said in 2018 won't be the year of Linux on desktop and it's @boomzilla's fault:
How has it taken this long to get rid of X, which everyone has known was horrible for decades?
It really all comes back to "they have no manpower."
That said, since Ubuntu has (had?) a rich sugar-daddy, it's hard to figure why they didn't make that their number one top priority back in 2012 or whenever they were founded.
I think it was like 2005 and I'm really not sure how they were able to have so many failed products. Come think of it, did they have a successful one? I mean, apart from the OS, that took the user-world by storm and probably servers too.
-
@kt_ said in 2018 won't be the year of Linux on desktop and it's @boomzilla's fault:
I think it was like 2005 and I'm really not sure how they were able to have so many failed products.
Well even in 2005, X11 was embarrassingly out-of-date. OS X was rendering on the GPU by then, and Windows was like a year away from it.
Like I said, I bet a big part of Ubuntu's problem was they hired people big in the open source community instead of hiring quality employees regardless of their open source status. It's a theory, but it sounds good to me so I'm going with it.
BTW, Google has similar problems making products actual human beings like and use, and probably due to the same or similar causes.
-
@blakeyrat said in 2018 won't be the year of Linux on desktop and it's @boomzilla's fault:
Like I said, I bet a big part of Ubuntu's problem was they hired people big in the open source community instead of hiring quality employees regardless of their open source status. It's a theory, but it sounds good to me so I'm going with it.
I don't want to destroy your great theory, but to my knowledge, this is actually completely wrong. Canonical was actually criticized for not paying the people who were already maintaining the projects they used - unlike Red Hat.
So: No, they're just incompetent.
-
@blakeyrat said in 2018 won't be the year of Linux on desktop and it's @boomzilla's fault:
Google has similar problems making products actual human beings like and use
Nobody like to use Google Search, Android, Gmail, Google Maps, Chrome, etc
FileUnder: That must be why Bing, WinPhone and Edge have so much market share.
-
@timebandit They have no market share because no one made apps for them. And you know that. Because there isn't another OS as easily usable as Windows 10 Mobile.
But of course, the TimeDASHBandit knows best.
-
@blakeyrat said in 2018 won't be the year of Linux on desktop and it's @boomzilla's fault:
The real fundamental problem is that there's no money in the Linux ecosystem. You have hire people to get this shit done, and they can't afford to.
Sure, but if those are the constraints you're working with, it's not a good idea to redesign your product very often. I can't believe I need to tell you this. Similarly, if you can't afford professional design work, extensive theming support is a reasonable way to allow people to do that work for you for free. Gnome had that, but decided to switch to a development model that breaks support for existing themes every three months.
-
@buddy said in 2018 won't be the year of Linux on desktop and it's @boomzilla's fault:
Sure, but if those are the constraints you're working with, it's not a good idea to redesign your product very often.
I agree, but the labor savings shouldn't be "let's not rewrite X11", they should be, "let's stop having 3 different incompatible packaging systems", or perhaps, "let's put a stable driver ABI in Linux so the kernel devs can be doing something more useful than constantly updating drivers for 8-year-old network cards".
It's a problem of not enough labor, but it's also a problem of utterly wasting the labor they do have on pointless tasks.
@buddy said in 2018 won't be the year of Linux on desktop and it's @boomzilla's fault:
Similarly, if you can't afford professional design work, extensive theming support is a reasonable way to allow people to do that work for you for free.
That's stupid.
Spend 500 hours of developer time making themes 100% configurable. Then at least another 500 hours QAing all the edge-cases you just created.
Or spend 100 hours of designer + developer time to create one nice theme that works out of the box.
I mean that's exactly what I'm talking about in the last paragraph. Using your labor in a dumb way.
X Window System core protocol - Wikipedia
