freedesktop.org
fight Big Tearing, stop using X fight Big Tearing, stop using X fight Big Tearing, stop using X a reminder from your friends on the fediverse. boost and tell your friends who still use X (why?????) that the future is here
all the cool X developers left a while ago. it's fundamentally not suited to today's requirements. but hey! the future is now!
Hikari@XOrgFoundation but what about the cool X features that Wayland can't do????
Like
Like
I don't know the X11 users must know something about it.
Like
Like
I don't know the X11 users must know something about it.
Martin Uecker@hikari @XOrgFoundation I just watched how a speaker that gave a presentation he was asked to also share on zoom had to switch back to X because it did not work on Wayland. Good that X still existed on his notebook. Also I use X everyday for remoting. I also like how the modular design allows innovation in window manager design.
Vilian@uecker @hikari @XOrgFoundation zoom support sharing in wayland now, what is the date of that apresentation?
@Vilian @hikari @XOrgFoundation May this year. But even if this is a transitional problem which can be solved by updating zoom, it misses the point. A lot of old software will never work with Wayland and even if Wayland proponents dismiss this as irrelevant, it causes great harm to many users for no good reason.
@uecker @hikari @XOrgFoundation there is already work arounds anyway, and xorg gonna still exist too, they can use, but xorg has fundamentals flaws that it wasn't possible to fix, and implement new things that wayland can, that why the transition was needed
@Vilian @hikari @XOrgFoundation Which fundamental flaw would make it impossible to extend the X protocol? X is a very generic protocol that has been extended over decades.
@uecker @Vilian @XOrgFoundation the fact it has extended over the decades is the fundamental flaw.
Its gotten to a point where maintaining it is annoying and not worth it, that's how convoluted the codebase has got. There is a reason why Wayland was built from the ground up instead of extending the X11 codebase.
Its gotten to a point where maintaining it is annoying and not worth it, that's how convoluted the codebase has got. There is a reason why Wayland was built from the ground up instead of extending the X11 codebase.
@hikari @Vilian @XOrgFoundation *worth* for whom? I can see that some developers have more fun rewriting everything from scratch instead of maintaining software. Fair enough. But then they should just say this. But the "impossible to maintain", "fundamentally flawed", "you do not need remoting anyway, believe me - and it is broken anyway" (while I use it almost daily) nonsense and gaslightinig as a justification for breaking features and compatibility has to stop.
@uecker @Vilian @XOrgFoundation anything good has had to break compatibility at one point, the kernel being an exception.
I know Wayland has rough edges, but I also think at the current state of X, developing newer features for Wayland is easier than X.
@hikari @Vilian @XOrgFoundation I added features to X myself (for my own use). I do not believe this for a second. Neither do I believe the break in compatibility is necessary at all.
@uecker @Vilian @XOrgFoundation if X11 was so easy to extend, why didn't it get proper VRR and support for Multi-Monitor setups?
I am not arguing that Wayland is better than X11, I am rather arguing that Wayland is easier to maintain, featureful, extendable than X.
@hikari @Vilian @XOrgFoundation I assume some programmers convinced their managers that rewriting everything from scratch is better and then or 15 years nothing was invested in X anymore.
@hikari @Vilian @XOrgFoundation But the cost of changing something is not usually the "convoluted code base" but maintaining compatibility with everything at the same time. Wayland breaks compatibility in a way which would have been considered unacceptable when incrementally improving X. But part of the community will still suffer from this. I assume this is why it comes with so much non-sense propaganda why this is inevitable.
@uecker @hikari @XOrgFoundation well, they are the same xorg maintainers, if you don't want then trying to improve things so you aren't gonna get xorg, nor-wayland, nor-shit, so yeah, even if it was for fun the entire rewriting, so what, they are the ones doing things for us
@hikari @Vilian @XOrgFoundation
Seems X supports VRR even with multi-monitors just fine:
https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/Variable_refresh_rate
Seems X supports VRR even with multi-monitors just fine:
https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/Variable_refresh_rate
@uecker @Vilian @XOrgFoundation On paper yeah, but I've seen lots of people complain that VRR and multi monitors (especially concerning different refresh rates) don't work for them.
Anyways I think we are not going to get anything good out of this, let's agree to disagree.
@uecker @hikari @XOrgFoundation well, the sane developers are the ones programming si yeah, better let them decide himselfs what is better, because without them you aren't getting anything
@uecker @hikari @XOrgFoundation btw it isn't about extensiability it's about the impossible things that xorg can't support, xorg is slow and has a tons of secutiry flaws and bad security designs, and yes it got extended, so extended that we can't fix the limitarions of xorg, as multimonitor for example, it isn't suited for today or future
Gecko@uecker @hikari @XOrgFoundation Weird. Also had a Zoom presentation a while back and it worked ootb with Zoom Flatpak on Wayland on Fedora 38.
Aria
Random Damage 🌻@hikari @XOrgFoundation last time I checked Wayland wasn't happy with remote displays, which is a Big Deal if you have graphical utilities that need to be run on remote servers.
But that might have changed since I looked.
@RandomDamage @XOrgFoundation yeah it still isn't, I think GNOME was working on something a few years ago but I haven't checked it
Amy (she/her/hers)