3 ms·

For one, your timeline is way off. Within the time period of GTK2 and GTK3 that would be more like Linux kernel v2.6 and v3.19. Yes there are still some project

For one, your timeline is way off. Within the time period of GTK2 and GTK3 that would be more like Linux kernel v2.6 and v3.19. Yes there are still some projects I know of using these, but for the most part they're not viable, certainly not if you want any of the new features that will probably not be backported. The mantra holds true for most. The tiny group that it doesn't hold for is on the hook for paying support costs indefinitely. Right now, native packaging isn't a viable option for a lot of things and it hasn't been for some time, have a look at the success of Docker.

smoldesu 4y ago
It's not chronologically sorted. I've heard this argument many times though, and it has failed again and again. The only time technology has seamlessly replaced a predecessor on Linux is when it reaches feature parity with whatever it usurps. I have no problem with PipeWire replacing Jack/Pulse. Both of those frankly suck, and PipeWire provides their functionality as well as it's own featureset that puts it heads-and-shoulders above the alternative. Wayland is not that. People are welcome to defend it all they want, but this futuristic technology won't replace everyone's setup. It's not inevitable. They made that choice when they dropped support for hardware that x11 handles without issue. My point is that people have used outdated technology for more petty reasons than just "it doesn't work on my hardware" before. If Wayland wants to be minimal and petty about their featureset, fine. They'll have a minimal and petty community to go along with it. Nothing is inevitable on the Linux desktop though, I'd hope most people on HN of all places would know that by now.
- Crysstalis 4y ago
  >I've heard this argument many times though, and it has failed again and again I am not speaking of you personally, this is in terms of distros as a whole. It has definitely not failed there, they will drop these packages when they become stale and it becomes too burdensome to support them for little benefit. Like, I don't know any common non-niche distros that are still shipping a 2.6 kernel. You can attempt to fight them but it will probably be futile, few have any reason to maintain that. >Wayland is not that. People are welcome to defend it all they want, but this futuristic technology won't replace everyone's setup. It's not inevitable. >Nothing is inevitable on the Linux desktop though, I'd hope most people on HN of all places would know that by now. Not true, death is inevitable. What is really inevitable is that x11 will fade away. Everything dies eventually. The question is what will replace it when that happens, if not Wayland then something else that probably has worse hardware support. We went through this already with the drama around Mir. Or maybe the Linux desktop will just die because it was always obscure, unpopular and fragmented with a severe lack of developers. >My point is that people have used outdated technology for more petty reasons than just "it doesn't work on my hardware" before. If Wayland wants to be minimal and petty about their featureset, fine. They'll have a minimal and petty community to go along with it. I don't see why this point is significant to anything. Using outdated technology for similarly petty reasons is just furthering the same problem and putting yourself in the same petty communities.
  - smoldesu 4y ago
    > Or maybe the Linux desktop will just die because it was always obscure, unpopular and fragmented with a severe lack of developers. I certainly believe that this is more likely than everyone transitioning to Wayland. And, when it inevitably does, I don't think the majority of people are going to pick Wayland to run their legacy systems on. If both desktop servers stopped development today, I reckon they'd have to pick the most-finished option.
    - Crysstalis 4y ago
      I don't think those people with legacy systems running on X11 will pick Linux at all. They will probably use XQuartz, or one of the many X servers that runs on Windows. BSD may even work for them. The only reason to use Linux is for dependency on some kernel features, X11 can be used on any other OS kernel.

smoldesu 4y ago

It's not chronologically sorted. I've heard this argument many times though, and it has failed again and again. The only time technology has seamlessly replaced a predecessor on Linux is when it reaches feature parity with whatever it usurps. I have no problem with PipeWire replacing Jack/Pulse. Both of those frankly suck, and PipeWire provides their functionality as well as it's own featureset that puts it heads-and-shoulders above the alternative. Wayland is not that. People are welcome to defend it all they want, but this futuristic technology won't replace everyone's setup. It's not inevitable. They made that choice when they dropped support for hardware that x11 handles without issue. My point is that people have used outdated technology for more petty reasons than just "it doesn't work on my hardware" before. If Wayland wants to be minimal and petty about their featureset, fine. They'll have a minimal and petty community to go along with it. Nothing is inevitable on the Linux desktop though, I'd hope most people on HN of all places would know that by now.

Crysstalis 4y ago
>I've heard this argument many times though, and it has failed again and again I am not speaking of you personally, this is in terms of distros as a whole. It has definitely not failed there, they will drop these packages when they become stale and it becomes too burdensome to support them for little benefit. Like, I don't know any common non-niche distros that are still shipping a 2.6 kernel. You can attempt to fight them but it will probably be futile, few have any reason to maintain that. >Wayland is not that. People are welcome to defend it all they want, but this futuristic technology won't replace everyone's setup. It's not inevitable. >Nothing is inevitable on the Linux desktop though, I'd hope most people on HN of all places would know that by now. Not true, death is inevitable. What is really inevitable is that x11 will fade away. Everything dies eventually. The question is what will replace it when that happens, if not Wayland then something else that probably has worse hardware support. We went through this already with the drama around Mir. Or maybe the Linux desktop will just die because it was always obscure, unpopular and fragmented with a severe lack of developers. >My point is that people have used outdated technology for more petty reasons than just "it doesn't work on my hardware" before. If Wayland wants to be minimal and petty about their featureset, fine. They'll have a minimal and petty community to go along with it. I don't see why this point is significant to anything. Using outdated technology for similarly petty reasons is just furthering the same problem and putting yourself in the same petty communities.
- smoldesu 4y ago
  > Or maybe the Linux desktop will just die because it was always obscure, unpopular and fragmented with a severe lack of developers. I certainly believe that this is more likely than everyone transitioning to Wayland. And, when it inevitably does, I don't think the majority of people are going to pick Wayland to run their legacy systems on. If both desktop servers stopped development today, I reckon they'd have to pick the most-finished option.
  - Crysstalis 4y ago
    I don't think those people with legacy systems running on X11 will pick Linux at all. They will probably use XQuartz, or one of the many X servers that runs on Windows. BSD may even work for them. The only reason to use Linux is for dependency on some kernel features, X11 can be used on any other OS kernel.