| ▲ | MBCook 7 hours ago |
| The major comitters and maintainers of X decided it was a lost cause and unfixable. Were they just supposed to keep working on the massive pile of hacks they felt needed abandoning? They did what they thought was best. You hate it. Fine. Do you think things would be better if they kept working on the unfixable mess? I trust them to know what was going on better than random commenters. |
|
| ▲ | PunchyHamster 7 hours ago | parent | next [-] |
| That is fine. X11 needed fresh start. But they also failed to learn any lessons from X, just assuming "if X11 did it it must've been a bad idea, let's do it differently". X11 did chalk many lines of abstractions in absolutely the right places, it's just the implementation was crufty in places, and just not designed for modern hardware in some other places, while wayland just tried to kick as much as possible to the WM side, making it so instead one place where those things need a bunch of code (the display system/its plugins), now every WM have to repeat that work and (more importantly) add incompatibilities because of that |
| |
| ▲ | JoshTriplett 6 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | > But they also failed to learn any lessons from X Why do you believe that the developers of X failed to learn lessons from X when developing the replacement of X? Perhaps they learned lessons from X and decided to build it differently as a result? | | |
| ▲ | MBCook 5 hours ago | parent [-] | | Which is exactly what they did, as I understand it. For example Wayland supports far more than just “generic computer screen”. I’ve heard it was designed to be able to handle systems either multiple very different displays. Like maybe a normal screen and an e-paper display. I remember reading an article that mentioned the mess of screens in current cars would actually fit Wayland well. Anyway, turns out computers really didn’t do that. We’re all still using one or more monitors that are mostly the same, with a couple of common aspect ratios. Maybe they’ll be proven right. Maybe it’ll just be some extra stuff in the code forever. Of course one of the ways you find out that you did something wrong was by doing it. So many comments online seem to just assume that the developers should’ve had the foresight to know everything they did that people don’t like or care about was wrong. I feel real sympathy for both the developers and people with serious accessibility issues it has been a problem for. But “beat up on Wayland” is practically a meme. An easy way to score points without looking at the big picture of how we got here. | | |
| ▲ | yjftsjthsd-h 17 minutes ago | parent [-] | | > For example Wayland supports far more than just “generic computer screen”. I’ve heard it was designed to be able to handle systems either multiple very different displays. Like maybe a normal screen and an e-paper display. The other common example is that wayland is well-suited to AR/VR 3D compositing, and X... isn't. > I remember reading an article that mentioned the mess of screens in current cars would actually fit Wayland well. It had better be well suited to cars, seeing as how it was significantly made for and by car companies. (I hear, at least; I'm told that it was significantly pushed forward precisely by companies developing automotive displays) |
|
| |
| ▲ | 000ooo000 6 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | >now every WM have to repeat that work wlroots? | | |
| ▲ | yjftsjthsd-h 27 minutes ago | parent | next [-] | | That helps, but you still have to - at a bare minimum - wire up all the functionality. My pet example is trying out a new wlroots compositor and discovering that it has no way to change keyboard layout because it doesn't use that code from the library yet. | |
| ▲ | hakfoo 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | wlroots is self-described as "about 60,000 lines of code you were going to write anyway." It's also a moving target and you'll probably have to retool when wlroots updates. That seems like a huge burden to carry around, considering that a minimal X11 window manager can be a few thousand lines of code and probably still compiles after 15 years. | |
| ▲ | wmf 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | wlroots came pretty late so there was a lot of code duplication between Weston/GNOME/KDE before that. |
|
|
|
| ▲ | Krssst 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Anecdotal evidence: when using X11 years ago I could never avoid screen tearing despite trying various options, except with one option that seemed to replace it with random frame drops. (to be fair that's probably related to my GPU, which is also the reason why I could not use wayland for so long) Wayland just fixed all that, making it at least usable for multimedia/gaming use with my GPU. |
|
| ▲ | fulafel 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Data point: On my current and previous work laptops (iGPU ThinkPads) I switched from the default Wayland back to X11 because of various bugs (hangs, stutters, resume failures), in X11 they don't happen, seems to work flawlessly. Sometimes it's worse to live in a mess that is being constantly fixed I guess. |
|
| ▲ | QuantumNoodle 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| I'm just lurking in the comments with popcorn, but if what you said is true and the maintainers of X decided it was a lost cause and unfixable, well that is the most informed opinion of them all. Nobody knows better then the maintainers. Sure, the replacement might have feature gaps initially but that is a transient issue. |
| |
| ▲ | yjftsjthsd-h 14 minutes ago | parent [-] | | > Sure, the replacement might have feature gaps initially but that is a transient issue. It has been 17 years. |
|
|
| ▲ | starky 6 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| This is true, and it is also true that the maintainers of Wayland have done a terrible job of developing the replacement. It is mostly good enough now to replace X11, but based on what I've seen reported about different features, they frequently let "perfect be the enemy of done" when it comes to implementing critical features. I mean, just look at the drama around remembering the position of a window, its absolutely ridiculous that after years they haven't picked a "good enough" direction and implemented it. |
|
| ▲ | naikrovek 6 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| The people behind Plan 9 did a much better job than was done with X11 and that was completely ignored as a path forward from what I can tell. It’s tiny, secure, graphics subsystem independent (it’ll work on just about anything with or without a GPU, I would expect, given the API is so damn simple) and already designed. Maybe it wouldn’t work, but I bet it would have. |
|
| ▲ | themafia 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| > They did what they thought was best. My problem with it is their proxy for "best" seemed to be "opposite of X11." This was not a solid engineering choice, and I think this post is trying to demonstrate, that had costs. I'd probably be completely fine with Wayland if it didn't have this obsession with military style desktop security. If it was as open as extensible as X11 by default then we all would have switched. X11 isn't pretty to write code for, but when it works, it works exceptionally well. Wayland seems to have made the wrong sacrifices where it mattered most. |
| |
| ▲ | MBCook 5 hours ago | parent [-] | | They were in a better position than anyone else to be able to make those calls. To whatever degree the choices didn’t work out, which I think is likely overstated, they learned something. But if they just threw everything away again, people would be pissed. Again. This all feels like so much Monday morning quarterbacking. | | |
| ▲ | themafia 4 hours ago | parent [-] | | > They were in a better position than anyone else to be able to make those calls. I don't trust blind appeals to authority. > But if they just threw everything away again No one suggested that. > This all feels like so much Monday morning quarterbacking. I don't like the system. I don't know what to tell you. I write a lot of X11 software. I don't really want to switch to writing Wayland software. The developers missed this point of view. The adoption rate is unusual. I'm offering an explanation. I understand people consider it hostile to Wayland but I can't understand why. If you want to solve the fundamental problem, then I have to admit, I'm part of that problem, for the reasons stated. You can ignore them, but you'll have to live with an exceedingly slow adoption, which as the article points out, may be so long that it is replaced nearly the time it is finished. Which would not be ironic considering that's exactly what is happening to X11. Again, I have nothing against leaving X11, but it should clearly be a hard sell to anyone who likes X11 to go to a platform that is actively hostile to some of it's well regarded core features. Open source has become fractious. It feels intentional. I say all these things because I honestly wish it was not. If none of this had happened we'd have a genuine alternative to the commercial offerings, and given some of their choices lately, we could have greatly capitalized on that. Que bono? |
|
|
|
| ▲ | jmclnx 6 hours ago | parent | prev [-] |
| I believe most of the original committers and maintainers of X are long gone, if still around they could very well be in their late 70s and 80s. I would agree if you said many of the Wayland Developers people started with Xfee86. But I think the 'complexity' of X has to do with the fact no one of this generation fully understand why X11 did things the way they did, so Wayland was started. That is OK, but here we are. I think the main issue is proprietary video companies did not to release their specs. I think if the Wayland people told the GPU Companies (like Nvidia) they will not support your hardware unless you release full specs, they would be further along. OpenBSD is getting along fine without companies like Nvidia, I wish Linux and Wayland would tell these companies their GPUs will never be supported until full documentation is provided. |
| |
| ▲ | simonask 6 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | I think you severely overestimate the amount of leverage the FOSS community has over companies like NVIDIA. | |
| ▲ | 0x1ceb00da 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | > I think the main issue is proprietary video companies did not to release their specs. I think if the Wayland people told the GPU Companies (like Nvidia) they will not support your hardware unless you release full specs, they would be further along Why? | |
| ▲ | yjftsjthsd-h 25 minutes ago | parent | prev [-] | | > I think if the Wayland people told the GPU Companies (like Nvidia) they will not support your hardware unless you release full specs, they would be further along. You realize nvidia managed to ship proprietary drivers for linux, right? They really don't need the support |
|