Tried Pulse Audio Again--No Good For A11y

[Dan Williams]

On Tue, 2008-09-23 at 21:03 -0500, Les Mikesell wrote:
> Lennart Poettering wrote:
> > 
> >>> For example: you configure your gnome panel to include a clock
> >>> applet. Then you open another session and add a network monitor applet
> >>> to it. What do you expect from this? That both panels will always stay
> >>> perfectly in sync and the network monitor applet is transparently
> >>> added to the first session as well? When you log out from both, what
> >>> happens when you log in again, do you get the panel layout from the
> >>> first session or from the second session?
> >> How is this different than running 2 instances of vi?  If you edit the same 
> >> file at the same time you'll have a conflict.  That doesn't mean you should 
> >> cripple the system to the point where it can't run 2 instances of
> >> vi.
> > 
> > vi has static config files. They are only read on vi's startup. 
> > 
> > OTOH GNOME usually does instant-apply. I.e. what you configure is
> > immediately executed and saved for later.
> 
> I've always hated that.  I've had horrible things happen when I change 
> layouts on a large screen and the next login is on a small one.  Things 
> in general seem to resize better now so maybe it isn't as much of a 
> problem. Can you still make apps open with the borders you need to 
> resize them off the screen completely?
> 
> > You did not respond to my question what you'd think the proper
> > behaviour would be for gnome-panel. I'll take that as an
> > acknowledgment that you understand that the problem exists.
> 
> My idea of proper behavior is to not change defaults unless I specify 
> that I want defaults changed.  I suppose that doesn't mesh very well 
> with gnome concepts but just because I try something once on one monitor 
> does not mean I'll want it always or ever again.  And in the context of 
> multiple sessions for the same user, that would mean the last save wins 
> as you expect for other files.
> 
> >>> The question is: is it worth bothering at all with questions like the
> >>> panel question above? Since the feature is redundant we might simply
> >>> say: forget it, let's disable multiple logins and the problem is
> >>> gone. 
> >> Windows terminal services has gotten this more or less right since at least 
> >> windows 2000 server that included 2 licenses for administrative use.  If 
> >> they can do it with an interface that wasn't designed to be remote or 
> >> multiuser, it can't be that hard.
> > 
> > Are you sure you can log in twice on Win2k as exactly the same user id?
> 
> Yes, and you can be running the same apps in different-sized windows in 
> each.  You only get terminal services in the server products but it is 
> done surprisingly well - current versions take sound along for the ride too.

Are you sure?  I was just watching somebody try to use RDP to a Windows
Server 2008 box this weekend and it blanked out the first login and only
allowed the second login direct access.  I could be wrong and maybe he
configured it wrong, but I though Windows only allowed one _active_
login at a time, and suspended the other remote sessions.

Dan