5 ms·

I don't know how you can say it's "literally everyone" when at least one knowledgeable authority says otherwise, in addition to many other non-authority figures

I don't know how you can say it's "literally everyone" when at least one knowledgeable authority says otherwise, in addition to many other non-authority figures. I get the same feel from it as systemd and WebExtensions, where a more complicated and less capable product is forced on everyone and any arguments about its shortcomings are ignored, swept under the rug, or hand-waved.

bitwize 6y ago
Part of security entails being "more complicated and less capable"; and Wayland and WebExtensions have in common that they are both secure replacements for systems that have a near-nonexistent security posture. Being simple (as if X11 is simple) and letting you do arbitrary things with it are not the dominating concerns anymore. Security and being easy for new developers to support are arguably more important. Beyond that, X11 development is moribund and Wayland has the lion's share of developer mindshare. Software is considered deficient if it does not natively support Wayland, hence the push to get support into the stragglers like Emacs and Wine. Eventually, we'll reach a point where software devs will tire of maintaining an X back end and insist their users switch to Wayland or not use their software at all. Wayland and systemd won because their developers engaged with the wider community and successfully convinced them of the advantages. In other words, better marketing. It's an iron law that if you do not have good marketing, people will not adopt what you have to offer and you will fail.
- forgotmypw17 6y ago
  So, which one is it, better marketing or better technology? I couldn,t care less about my browser extension security model. On the other hand, not having native vertical tabs and keyboard accessibility in Firefox made it unusable for me. (No, doing it via JS injection into current page and the stupid sidebar doesn,t cut it.) The saving grace is that thanks to the miracle of FOSS, we have Devuan, Waterfox, and PaleMoon puttering along and new even better browsers to blow them away. I think the same will happen with X. There certainly seems to be a pattern of arrogant idiocy going on in the software world, however.

bitwize 6y ago

Part of security entails being "more complicated and less capable"; and Wayland and WebExtensions have in common that they are both secure replacements for systems that have a near-nonexistent security posture. Being simple (as if X11 is simple) and letting you do arbitrary things with it are not the dominating concerns anymore. Security and being easy for new developers to support are arguably more important. Beyond that, X11 development is moribund and Wayland has the lion's share of developer mindshare. Software is considered deficient if it does not natively support Wayland, hence the push to get support into the stragglers like Emacs and Wine. Eventually, we'll reach a point where software devs will tire of maintaining an X back end and insist their users switch to Wayland or not use their software at all. Wayland and systemd won because their developers engaged with the wider community and successfully convinced them of the advantages. In other words, better marketing. It's an iron law that if you do not have good marketing, people will not adopt what you have to offer and you will fail.

forgotmypw17 6y ago
So, which one is it, better marketing or better technology? I couldn,t care less about my browser extension security model. On the other hand, not having native vertical tabs and keyboard accessibility in Firefox made it unusable for me. (No, doing it via JS injection into current page and the stupid sidebar doesn,t cut it.) The saving grace is that thanks to the miracle of FOSS, we have Devuan, Waterfox, and PaleMoon puttering along and new even better browsers to blow them away. I think the same will happen with X. There certainly seems to be a pattern of arrogant idiocy going on in the software world, however.