5 ms·

We are still fixing stuff in Wayland, stuff that Microsoft and Apple had figured out 20 years ago. So defeating.

by wheelerof4te 4y ago

client4 4y ago
And Microsoft figuring out how to make Windows even worse with every new day!
- wheelerof4te 4y ago
  Indeed, but Microsoft knows how to make a OS graphics base and stick with it. MS does a lot of things wrong, but backwards compatibility is still their strong point.
  - paulryanrogers 4y ago
    Yet Microsoft makes so many of them. I'm not even sure what the current recommended way is anymore.
    - saghm 4y ago
      Having many graphics frameworks simultaneously supported is basically the ultimate evidence of the claim; they made half a dozen frameworks and stuck with all of them!
kaba0 4y ago
Like what? At least be specific.
- wheelerof4te 4y ago
  Like screen recording. Popular Wayland native apps not dependant on Xorg. Wine working on Wayland. Tangible benefits of switching to Wayland. And by those, I don't mean "no screen tearing", since it practically did not exist on most desktop environments with half-decent compositors.
  - kaba0 4y ago
    Screen recording works, even with OBS studio. What popular wayland native app is dependent on xorg? > half-decent compositors. At which point there was no point of X11 middle-maning between the compositor and apps -> tada Wayland it is. Also, screen tearing is a bigger issue on bigger resolution higher refresh rate monitors, hardware just grew up to 1080@60fps.
    - GauntletWizard 4y ago
      There's a ton of apps that are not Wayland native at all yet, and plenty that never will be because of the dubious security benefits. Chrome, for an example. Firefox isn't much better.
      - kaba0 4y ago
        Chrome is as wayland native as xorg native it is. It has backends for both. The same is true for Firefox. And no one ever said that every program will have to move to Wayland, XWayland was created specifically for legacy applications to be usable that won’t port over. (Though their number is limited, since most applications use a framework like gtk/qt/electron whatever and all of those natively support wayland without changing the programs).
  - edent 4y ago
    I run Wayland using PopOS. I can record screens and run WINE apps. I have a cheap laptop and it works just fine. Wayland means - for me - no fiddling with text files if I want an external monitor, roatated, with a weird resolution.
  - vlovich123 4y ago
    I run X11 as my daily driver in a 3 monitor setup and I regularly see tearing scrolling on a page in Kwin which I think qualifies as a half decent compositor, right?
    - josefx 4y ago
ElectricalUnion 4y ago
> We are still fixing stuff in Wayland, stuff that Microsoft and Apple had figured out 20 years ago. I don't know, given that the UX situation in Windows UI - itself a inconsistent disaster that makes the disjointed things that make up KDE looks like a consistent desktop experience. They can't decide what UI framework to keep supporting, they keep changing what you're supposed to use to build your GUI every bunch of years. As for the Apple side, well, destroying everything every few years with almost no regards for backwards compatibility isn't "figured out 20 years ago".
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
bionade24 4y ago
Apple has giving up on having consistently non-blurry fractional scaling, pushing apple users to buy monitors "recommended by Apple", even if they are from other vendors. On Windows not all Apps do scale on a HiDPI display. You then have to fiddle in the program's launch options and hope it's not too blurry when scaled. Wayland does only have blurriness with certain Xwayland embeddings. It's not a solved problem.

We are still fixing stuff in Wayland, stuff that Microsoft and Apple had figured out 20 years ago. So defeating.

client4 4y ago

And Microsoft figuring out how to make Windows even worse with every new day!

wheelerof4te 4y ago
Indeed, but Microsoft knows how to make a OS graphics base and stick with it. MS does a lot of things wrong, but backwards compatibility is still their strong point.
- paulryanrogers 4y ago
  Yet Microsoft makes so many of them. I'm not even sure what the current recommended way is anymore.
  - saghm 4y ago
    Having many graphics frameworks simultaneously supported is basically the ultimate evidence of the claim; they made half a dozen frameworks and stuck with all of them!

kaba0 4y ago

Like what? At least be specific.

wheelerof4te 4y ago
Like screen recording. Popular Wayland native apps not dependant on Xorg. Wine working on Wayland. Tangible benefits of switching to Wayland. And by those, I don't mean "no screen tearing", since it practically did not exist on most desktop environments with half-decent compositors.
- kaba0 4y ago
  Screen recording works, even with OBS studio. What popular wayland native app is dependent on xorg? > half-decent compositors. At which point there was no point of X11 middle-maning between the compositor and apps -> tada Wayland it is. Also, screen tearing is a bigger issue on bigger resolution higher refresh rate monitors, hardware just grew up to 1080@60fps.
  - GauntletWizard 4y ago
    There's a ton of apps that are not Wayland native at all yet, and plenty that never will be because of the dubious security benefits. Chrome, for an example. Firefox isn't much better.
    - kaba0 4y ago
      Chrome is as wayland native as xorg native it is. It has backends for both. The same is true for Firefox. And no one ever said that every program will have to move to Wayland, XWayland was created specifically for legacy applications to be usable that won’t port over. (Though their number is limited, since most applications use a framework like gtk/qt/electron whatever and all of those natively support wayland without changing the programs).
- edent 4y ago
  I run Wayland using PopOS. I can record screens and run WINE apps. I have a cheap laptop and it works just fine. Wayland means - for me - no fiddling with text files if I want an external monitor, roatated, with a weird resolution.
- vlovich123 4y ago
  I run X11 as my daily driver in a 3 monitor setup and I regularly see tearing scrolling on a page in Kwin which I think qualifies as a half decent compositor, right?
  - josefx 4y ago

ElectricalUnion 4y ago

> We are still fixing stuff in Wayland, stuff that Microsoft and Apple had figured out 20 years ago. I don't know, given that the UX situation in Windows UI - itself a inconsistent disaster that makes the disjointed things that make up KDE looks like a consistent desktop experience. They can't decide what UI framework to keep supporting, they keep changing what you're supposed to use to build your GUI every bunch of years. As for the Apple side, well, destroying everything every few years with almost no regards for backwards compatibility isn't "figured out 20 years ago".

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]

bionade24 4y ago

Apple has giving up on having consistently non-blurry fractional scaling, pushing apple users to buy monitors "recommended by Apple", even if they are from other vendors. On Windows not all Apps do scale on a HiDPI display. You then have to fiddle in the program's launch options and hope it's not too blurry when scaled. Wayland does only have blurriness with certain Xwayland embeddings. It's not a solved problem.