3 ms·
> And if that wasn't enough, we had to build another windowing server Strictly speaking, Wayland is just the protocol. Pedantry aside, X11 is from 1987, where
by amarshall 4y ago
> And if that wasn't enough, we had to build another windowing server
Strictly speaking, Wayland is just the protocol. Pedantry aside, X11 is from 1987, whereas Apple totally redid their display server in 2001 with OS X, and Microsoft in 2006 with Vista. Wayland brings the Linux desktop kicking and screaming into the 21st century. But bazzar development will always be very different than cathedral development, so inevitably Wayland has its problems and rough edges. X11 being longer in the tooth doesn’t help.
- longrod 4y agoTrue but OSX & Microsoft didn't have to deal with the massive amount of fragmentation that exists in Linux. Moving to a better standard is no issue but when everyone is building their own ship at their own cost & labour, it's not such a great idea. Soon enough all the Linux forums will be filled with workarounds to get X or Y or Z app to work on Wayland or X or something else. The result? Nothing will work as expected for a long time (until everyone has forgotten X).