3 ms·

Wait just a second mister. Is it a loss of functionality or is it just "much harder"?

• ChuckNorris89 4y ago
  Why not both? It's a loss in functionality because it's much harder and the Linux desktop environment ecosystem is too niche, fragmented and underfunded to make the transition complete in a way that satisfies all camps so we end up in this traditional linux situation where several solutions coexist in parallel forever.
  • recuter 4y ago
    Time heals all wounds. If it is hard but not impossible eventually the gaps will be filled. Also the people who maintain X11 can't live forever sadly. Eventually there will only be Wayland. We only have to wait a few more decades at the outmost.
• zamalek 4y ago
  Neither. Screensharing was a massive issue for a while, but it's now far easier than X11 because the server/portal is responsible for a lot of the more fiddly bits. The underlying problem is that the protocol (ABI, really) has to be specified and implemented for these things to work. Screensharing was a prominent early example of something which hadn't been through that process. It was a very visible issue, an easy wound for hardcore X11 fanatics to pull at, and - apparently - continue to bash on long after it has been solved. Clipboard woes have likewise been solved. Mouse and keyboard injection has not yet been solved, but I recall there being some draft spec to that effect. Ultimately, if Wayland does 100% of what you need, you should be using it because it generally does those things better. If it doesn't do what you need, then stick with X11 until it does (and support for that protocol is widespread).