> Wayland solves no issues I have Indeed, it's funny they would think it was meant to solve issues they had. The justification for it was never X11 doesn't wo

> Wayland solves no issues I have Indeed, it's funny they would think it was meant to solve issues they had. The justification for it was never X11 doesn't work. It was always "it's becoming impossible to work on". As it happens, Wayland does solve a problem I have. The HDMI port doesn't work under X11 on my Lenovo X1 2nd gen laptop. It does under Wayland. Granted, that's because no one wants to work on X11 any more, so new or unusual stuff doesn't get added. (The X1 gen2 is indeed unusual: the HDMI port comes off the Nvidia card rather than the intergrated graphics. The X1 gen3 fixes that nit.) Which brings us the full circle: Wayland may fix no issues he has now, but the X11 code base being so much of a pig will mean he has issues with it in the future. I've now moved to Wayland, and it was under sufferance. It's forced me to use Gnome3. The Gnome3 taskbar and I are not compatible ("what a complete waste of space" springs to mind), so I'm not that happy about it. Debian's alternatives system for selecting a Window Manager (now the compositor under Wayland) seems to be completely broken. But Wayland itself: a few paper cuts, touchpads not working after suspend and things like that - nothing serious. But my god it's fast, and amazingly remote X11 connections (ie, "ssh -X") still just work. And the code base is much smaller. People are comparing Wayland to systemd, to me it's not at all like systemd. Systemd was more complex, in lines of code literally 100's of times larger than then things it replaced, and never delivered on it's speed promises, and seeks to replace everything with Systemd. On all those metrics, Wayland is the reverse - it even encourages mutiple implementations.