3 ms·
Well, it's an X server, in fact :-) It uses the parts of X server that were moved to the kernel in the last year or two (KMS, large part of graphic drivers). W
by thingie 16y ago
Well, it's an X server, in fact :-) It uses the parts of X server that were moved to the kernel in the last year or two (KMS, large part of graphic drivers). Wayland itself is very small, you can look into the source code to find anything you want to know, it's all there, easy to find.
That's the good thing, perhaps, breaking that large and ugly X thing into small parts that we can easily understand, check, improve. I'm very glad of this and it's a great improvement. But it's still just a part, this whole idea that Ubuntu is ditching X server is so frightening. It's not happening, instead, they are breaking X into small parts, improving them, not having to deal with the insanely large X stack at once. Finally cleaning that large outdated codebase and so on.
But. If you see it as 'we're getting rid of X11 completely, not coming back again', you are going to repeat every mistake made in the last 20 years. I'm afraid that's exactly what Shuttleworth and his minions are going to do :(
- loewenskind 16y agoNeither OSX nor Windows use X and both of them look much nicer. In my opinion the last 20 years of X were a mistake that should have been aborted a long time ago. Both Windows and OSX do remote desktop just fine for the minority who need it.
- sedachv 16y ago"Neither OSX nor Windows use X and both of them look much nicer." What does the graphics design of OSX and Windows have to do with how X is architected? Which effects provided by the OSX or Windows interface cannot be done by a compositing X window manager? "Both Windows and OSX do remote desktop just fine for the minority who need it." X network transparency has nothing to do with remote desktop - as a matter of fact X doesn't have that notion or any support for it. The X protocol is strictly for per-application event and drawing. There is a huge class of problems that X can solve where remote desktop would be useless.
- qjz 16y agoI guess I'm a minority of that minority, in that I love X for its ability to run single applications remotely over the network. Neither Windows nor OSX do this well (if at all). Frankly, I don't want a whole desktop when I can just run the desired application in its own window(s), well integrated with the platform I happen to be on at the moment. Currently, most Linux distributions support this out of the box, and it's easy enough to install Cygwin on Windows or XQuartz on OSX. Hopefully, this will still be possible under Wayland.