4 ms·
> This is not true anymore even on X. Also, if you use GNOME or KDE, both of them has unified settings That's why I said Wayland and the modern desktop in gene
by rnhmjoj 6y ago
> This is not true anymore even on X. Also, if you use GNOME or KDE, both of them has unified settings
That's why I said Wayland and the modern desktop in general.
> So you are fine with X server takes care of most of the stuff, but not fine with wl_roots do the same thing?
You're kind of right: conceptually it's not much different, except that a wm is not a full-fledged server, but simply a client talking to the X server. If I'm sloppy and my wm dies, it's not going to take down the whole desktop with it, contrary to a Wayland compositor.
> A base graphics API based on drawing primitives like the original X, SVG or Cairo, rather than just bitmaps.
Of course, but the rendering happens on the client (with client-side fonts, images, etc.) instead of the server, which makes the protocol use a lot of bandwidth.
- sergeykish 6y agoJust think for a minute, entire industry abandoned xrdb and drawing primitives in X11 applications, even XOrg developers decided to ditch these features, they've started Wayland because they could not fix X11. Either you are unbelievably smarter or you know nothing.
- rnhmjoj 6y agoMaybe I know nothing, but it quite common that the technically superior solution don't get a lot of adoption and eventually dies.
- nialv7 6y ago> which makes the protocol use a lot of bandwidth. not true in most of the use cases. ownership of bitmaps are transfered, no actual pixels are being copied.
- rnhmjoj 6y agoSure, locally: I had a remote display in mind.