Mac OS X uses a 3-D imaging system called "OpenGL" for 100% of the Quartz Extreme screen compositing engine, but it's more of a 2-D paradigm on the screen. Of course, Steve Jobs knows all about 3-D because the company he owned - Pixar - was a pioneer in the field and owns many basic patents in the field.
But Apple is not going to display windows floating in space like Beryl. The nausea-inducing Beryl user interface simply lacks good taste as a user interface. It looks like a cheesy sci-fi movie, and it does not make the user interface more productive or easier to use. The Mac OS X Expose feature is a much better way to navigate in multiple windows.
Ultimately, the biggest problem Beryl faces is that Linux lacks coherent, consistent standards for application design. It's just chaos on the screen. Linux is great for servers, but it's still lousy for desktop computer usage.
Exactly. Until 3D virtual reality helmets are commonplace, this type of interface makes no sense on a 2D screen. OS/X gets it right.
Not sure what demo you saw....that's not the way I see it.
^^^^^^^^^^^Mac OS X uses a 3-D imaging system called "OpenGL"^^^^^^^^^^^^
I'm aware of the system called "opengl", it's an "API" that is used not just on "macos", but also "linux".
^^^^^^^^for 100% of the Quartz Extreme screen compositing engine, but it's more of a 2-D paradigm on the screen.^^^^^^^^
Do you have a link on that?
^^^^^^^^^^^But Apple is not going to display windows floating in space like Beryl.^^^^^^^^^^^^^
That wasn't my point in asking the question.
They don't have to display windows like Beryl or for that matter Aero for it to be a full 3d interface.