3 ms·

The distinction really really does matter, if your argument is "wayland is shit".

sokoloff 6y ago
That depends on if the precise argument is closer to "Wayland, as experienced by everyday users, is shit" or "Wayland, as a Platonic ideal, is shit." People, especially people trying to work done on their computers, usually mean the former.
- Spivak 6y ago
  Just say Mutter or Kwin are shit then. Saying Wayland is shit is like HTML is shit because you don't like Firefox.
  - Too 6y ago
    Most users don't know the difference, to either of those statements. For them "the internet is broken".
    - Spivak 6y ago
      I don’t disagree but in a forum of tech-savvy people I expect some level of preciseness. We shouldn’t be saying Wayland sucks when we’re talking about Mutter in the same way we shouldn’t say the internet crashed when we mean Chrome crashed. Unknowing users can freely associate Wayland with bad vibes due to how KDE and GNOME chose to brand their new compositors but we can do better.
    - dralley 6y ago
      Nobody complains about the W3C because their internet is broken.
  - troyvit 6y ago
    That doesn't work for users though. I've used KDE since the 20th century and it has been pretty reliable. Kwin hasn't been shit. Maybe it's best to say Kwin + Wayland is shit, or Mutter + Wayland is shit. But if Kwin & Mutter aren't quite shit when it was combined with X, but are shit when combined with Wayland, how does that shape perceptions of Wayland?
    - Spivak 6y ago
      “Kwin the X11 window manager” and “Kwin the Wayland compositor” are entirely different things that look similar on the surface. In an alternative universe there would be Kwin the X11 display server which would replace Xorg. I’m sure it would just be as big riddled and feature incomplete in the early years of its development.
  - drran 6y ago
    HTML was complete *it until CSS, flex box, grid, web components, etc. are invented, so users are escaped to Flash, ActiveX, and Java applets. It still smells, because I cannot load my own web components library or/and my own CSS for use on all sites, so every site MUST reinvent wheel. When Firefox for Linux used native GTK+ UI elements in web pages, with user theme applied, every web page looked like native applications. It was excellent. Then this feature was cut, because "every page must have the same look on every device/OS combination". F><k. Now every web application tries to reimplement the look of Gnome 2.x, and does it poorly.
  - zepto 6y ago
    If every browser was shit, people would say HTML is shit.

That depends on if the precise argument is closer to "Wayland, as experienced by everyday users, is shit" or "Wayland, as a Platonic ideal, is shit." People, especially people trying to work done on their computers, usually mean the former.

Spivak 6y ago
Just say Mutter or Kwin are shit then. Saying Wayland is shit is like HTML is shit because you don't like Firefox.
- Too 6y ago
  Most users don't know the difference, to either of those statements. For them "the internet is broken".
  - Spivak 6y ago
    I don’t disagree but in a forum of tech-savvy people I expect some level of preciseness. We shouldn’t be saying Wayland sucks when we’re talking about Mutter in the same way we shouldn’t say the internet crashed when we mean Chrome crashed. Unknowing users can freely associate Wayland with bad vibes due to how KDE and GNOME chose to brand their new compositors but we can do better.
  - dralley 6y ago
    Nobody complains about the W3C because their internet is broken.
- troyvit 6y ago
  That doesn't work for users though. I've used KDE since the 20th century and it has been pretty reliable. Kwin hasn't been shit. Maybe it's best to say Kwin + Wayland is shit, or Mutter + Wayland is shit. But if Kwin & Mutter aren't quite shit when it was combined with X, but are shit when combined with Wayland, how does that shape perceptions of Wayland?
  - Spivak 6y ago
    “Kwin the X11 window manager” and “Kwin the Wayland compositor” are entirely different things that look similar on the surface. In an alternative universe there would be Kwin the X11 display server which would replace Xorg. I’m sure it would just be as big riddled and feature incomplete in the early years of its development.
- drran 6y ago
  HTML was complete *it until CSS, flex box, grid, web components, etc. are invented, so users are escaped to Flash, ActiveX, and Java applets. It still smells, because I cannot load my own web components library or/and my own CSS for use on all sites, so every site MUST reinvent wheel. When Firefox for Linux used native GTK+ UI elements in web pages, with user theme applied, every web page looked like native applications. It was excellent. Then this feature was cut, because "every page must have the same look on every device/OS combination". F><k. Now every web application tries to reimplement the look of Gnome 2.x, and does it poorly.
- zepto 6y ago
  If every browser was shit, people would say HTML is shit.