The technical merits of Wayland are mostly irrelevant - eviltoast

In response to Wayland Breaks Your Bad Software

I say that the technical merits are irrelevant because I don’t believe that they’re a major factor any more in most people moving or not moving to Wayland.

With only a slight amount of generalization, none of these people will be moved by Wayland’s technical merits. The energetic people who could be persuaded by technical merits to go through switching desktop environments or in some cases replacing hardware (or accepting limited features) have mostly moved to Wayland already. The people who remain on X are there either because they don’t want to rebuild their desktop environment, they don’t want to do without features and performance they currently have, or their Linux distribution doesn’t think their desktop should switch to Wayland yet.

  • orangeboats@lemmy.world
    2·
    1 year ago

    You ably demonstrate your own inability to listen.

    Or was it you?

    I’m not sure how you hallucinated that Wayland got 4 years of design and 8 years of implementation.

    2012-2021, or to clarify “Late 2012 to early-mid 2021” seems to be 8-point-something years to me. I dunno, did mathematics change recently or something?

    With graphics programming relatively in its infancy X11 didn’t require 15 years to become usable

    I hope you do understand that graphics weren’t as complicated back then. Compositing of windows was not an idea (at least, not a widely spread one) in the 90s. Nor was sandboxing an idea back then. Or multidisplay (we hacked it onto X11 later through XRandR). Or HDR nowadays. Or HiDPI. Or touch input and gestures. We software rendered everything too, so DRI and friends weren’t thought of.

    In a way… you are actually insulting the kernel developers.