x in om2007.2
Michael 'Mickey' Lauer
mickey at openmoko.org
Sun Jul 27 16:02:21 CEST 2008
Am Sonntag 27 Juli 2008 14:54:37 schrieb andrzej zaborowski:
> 2008/7/27 Marcus Bauer <marcus.bauer at gmail.com>:
> > On Sun, 2008-07-27 at 13:26 +0200, Michael 'Mickey' Lauer wrote:
> >> Am Sonntag 27 Juli 2008 09:52:57 schrieb sparky mat:
> >> > kinda new here. i noticed that om2007.2 and asu are slower than qtopia
> >> > (the one from trolltech, not the x11 port). i presume its partly
> >> > because X is being used.
> >> It's less a problem of X and more a problem of Gtk+ taking ages to
> >> (re)draw things on the screen.
> > It is well known that you don't like GTK+ - fine. But just stop
> > spreading your FUD against GTK+:
> > a) GTK is quite snappy on the neo1973 (GTA01) thus the problem
> > is not GTK but the limited memory bandwith on the
> > Freerunner/GTA02 due to the glamo chip.
> I don't agree with that, it's the GTK that's not adapted to remote
> framebuffers - it could be much snappier on the glamo, but it could be
> much snappier on the GTA01 too if it did a little caching (on glamo
> side or locally) instead of redrawing stuff constantly - just in case
> something has been resized. Note that I don't dislike GTK+.
> I've been prompted to look at it when OM started to simplify themes by
> removing bitmaps - the bitmaps and gradients should really make no
> difference in UI speed, but they do.
> On the other hand I don't agree with Mickey that we shouldn't modify
I never said we should not modify Gtk+ at all (we're patching it in OE
anyways), I have no problems with changes under the hood that do not affect
I did not want to turn Openmoko into another Nokia though, as a) patching Gtk+
to add real features is pandora's box and b) we simply have no resources nor
expertise for doing that.
> It definitely needs to be taught to cache graphics or it won't
> be very successful on mobiles.
More information about the devel