8 ms·

TBH This response is way too aggressive for the original comment. The facts stated are simply that today it is more efficient to encode video for remote graphi

by gbin 4y ago

TBH This response is way too aggressive for the original comment. The facts stated are simply that today it is more efficient to encode video for remote graphical sessions because the X11 applications already changed a long long time ago to adapt to the modern world of GPUs and accelerated compositing. BW, latency, efficiency, everything became better because a super computer with thousands of cores can do that and lighten the load on the CPUs. It doesn't say it doesn't work... It doesn't prevent you neither from running X11 or even booting up a PDP-11 if this is your favorite workflow!

d110af5ccf 4y ago
The problem is that the Wayland fans have a tendency (at least I feel) to significantly misrepresent things in their favor. Statements like "oh that's actually more efficient on Wayland". No, Wayland is incapable of the sorts of optimizations X can do by design. It is only more efficient if the X app is doing things in a specific way that doesn't take advantage of huge parts of the X protocol. Granted, most modern apps do exactly that at this point. That doesn't make such statements any less of a misrepresentation though. A much more reasonable claim would be that the network transparency afforded by the X protocol adds significant complexity which is no longer utilized by the majority of mainstream apps today. As such there's a reasonable case for dropping all that complexity from the core system and leaving it to peripheral libraries to handle on a case by case basis for the apps that want to make use of it. And the idea of lossy compression while using an image editing program being a desirable thing (as suggested elsewhere in this comment chain) is laughable. It's already bad enough reading text that's gone through lossy compression. I would never want compression artifacts while manipulating an image. My impression of Wayland so far is that I like the technicals but absolutely detest the people I encounter pushing it as a solution (it's quite similar to Rust in that regard I suppose). They would probably meet less resistance if they took more care not to misrepresent the overall state of things. I'll leave the link to KDE Wayland "showstoppers" for reference. Certainly that list is far shorter today than it used to be and many (not all) of the items are now solely on KDE's end. Nonetheless, fanboys have been claiming that Wayland is "production ready" the entire time. https://community.kde.org/Plasma/Wayland_Showstoppers https://community.kde.org/Plasma/Wayland_Showstoppers I'll switch to Wayland once it "just works" out of the box in terms of app integration on stable distributions including things like screen capture, fractional scaling factors, color management, all the stuff that works on X.
- cycomanic 4y ago
  Well the people who are pushing wayland are the same people that are maintaining xorg, so I would argue they know what they are talking about. I have also not heard of any one who loudly proclaims xorg is much beter and should instead be maintained to step up to actually do that.
  - michaelmrose 4y ago
    Look at this very statement it's completely inaccurate in a trivial fashion that ought not required analysis but here we are. The people who actually develop x or wayland are a tiny number of people. The people expressing opinions on the internet on tech is 1000x larger. The implications that the proponents are correct in their analysis because they develop it is fatally flawed if for no other reason than the subject is obviously not solely the tiny number of actual devs. Furthermore the arguments even of devs needs to stand on their own feet. Look at the prior comments where someone complains that random crashes result in the entire session going down. Who cares what anyone says about the theoretical design decisions regarding manifestly unsuitable tools.
    - customkitchen 4y ago
      You can make all the arguments you want but it won't do anything meaningful. If those 1000x people expressing opinions have the necessary domain expertise, and aren't just tossing out their feelings on what they think might be cool or might be nice in a perfect world, then they should start contributing to these projects and fixing the bugs. I mean, I think it would be cool if my PC never crashed. Isn't it easy and fun to say things like that?
      - michaelmrose 4y ago
        PCs running either Windows 10 or Linux with appropriate quality software and hardware almost never crash now so wish virtually granted I guess.
- ziftface 4y ago

by gbin 4y ago

d110af5ccf 4y ago

The problem is that the Wayland fans have a tendency (at least I feel) to significantly misrepresent things in their favor. Statements like "oh that's actually more efficient on Wayland". No, Wayland is incapable of the sorts of optimizations X can do by design. It is only more efficient if the X app is doing things in a specific way that doesn't take advantage of huge parts of the X protocol. Granted, most modern apps do exactly that at this point. That doesn't make such statements any less of a misrepresentation though. A much more reasonable claim would be that the network transparency afforded by the X protocol adds significant complexity which is no longer utilized by the majority of mainstream apps today. As such there's a reasonable case for dropping all that complexity from the core system and leaving it to peripheral libraries to handle on a case by case basis for the apps that want to make use of it. And the idea of lossy compression while using an image editing program being a desirable thing (as suggested elsewhere in this comment chain) is laughable. It's already bad enough reading text that's gone through lossy compression. I would never want compression artifacts while manipulating an image. My impression of Wayland so far is that I like the technicals but absolutely detest the people I encounter pushing it as a solution (it's quite similar to Rust in that regard I suppose). They would probably meet less resistance if they took more care not to misrepresent the overall state of things. I'll leave the link to KDE Wayland "showstoppers" for reference. Certainly that list is far shorter today than it used to be and many (not all) of the items are now solely on KDE's end. Nonetheless, fanboys have been claiming that Wayland is "production ready" the entire time. https://community.kde.org/Plasma/Wayland_Showstoppers https://community.kde.org/Plasma/Wayland_Showstoppers I'll switch to Wayland once it "just works" out of the box in terms of app integration on stable distributions including things like screen capture, fractional scaling factors, color management, all the stuff that works on X.

cycomanic 4y ago
Well the people who are pushing wayland are the same people that are maintaining xorg, so I would argue they know what they are talking about. I have also not heard of any one who loudly proclaims xorg is much beter and should instead be maintained to step up to actually do that.
- michaelmrose 4y ago
  Look at this very statement it's completely inaccurate in a trivial fashion that ought not required analysis but here we are. The people who actually develop x or wayland are a tiny number of people. The people expressing opinions on the internet on tech is 1000x larger. The implications that the proponents are correct in their analysis because they develop it is fatally flawed if for no other reason than the subject is obviously not solely the tiny number of actual devs. Furthermore the arguments even of devs needs to stand on their own feet. Look at the prior comments where someone complains that random crashes result in the entire session going down. Who cares what anyone says about the theoretical design decisions regarding manifestly unsuitable tools.
  - customkitchen 4y ago
    You can make all the arguments you want but it won't do anything meaningful. If those 1000x people expressing opinions have the necessary domain expertise, and aren't just tossing out their feelings on what they think might be cool or might be nice in a perfect world, then they should start contributing to these projects and fixing the bugs. I mean, I think it would be cool if my PC never crashed. Isn't it easy and fun to say things like that?
    - michaelmrose 4y ago
      PCs running either Windows 10 or Linux with appropriate quality software and hardware almost never crash now so wish virtually granted I guess.
ziftface 4y ago