25 ms·

Wayland is a replacement for X11 in the same way that a tricycle is a replacement for a tractor. They have thrown everything difficult out of the spec and only

Wayland is a replacement for X11 in the same way that a tricycle is a replacement for a tractor. They have thrown everything difficult out of the spec and only implemented the most trivial functionality around a security model which you must actively break to get actual work (like screen shots) done. That Wayland is 10 years old and still barely usable should tell you how far software developers have fallen in the last 30 years.

teekert 3y ago
When I'm on Gnome, and I select Gnome on X, my trackpad functions as one expects from Linux. When I'm on Wayland, it's like a macbook.
- bandrami 3y ago
  And can't be configured. The loss of function for clickpads is particularly egregious; they're basically unusable under Wayland.
  - teekert 3y ago
    It's funny how I finally find my touchpad usable under wayland ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
    - bandrami 3y ago
      Notice I said clickpads. Touchpads work fine once you work around Wayland's bizarre fear of enabling tap-to-click.
      - teekert 3y ago
        Ah, I don't like tap-to-click, I always disable it, I need that clicky feeling, often I'll hook up a mouse as well :)
      - oynqr 3y ago
        s/Wayland/Gnome/g
        bandrami 3y ago
        IIRC the culprit is libinput, which worries tap to click is "confusing" for some reason. Which is why I use synaptics when I'm on X.
rodgerd 3y ago
The software developers who were maintaining X? Perhaps you could show them how it's done, since apparently you can do a better job. They've certainly been clear that they're happy for anyone who wants to take over Xorg, yet no-one from the peanut gallery ever does.
- hist_thr 3y ago
  [dead]
- sprash 3y ago
  It's a matter of funding. X11 development is not funded anymore whereas Wayland is heavily funded through proxies like Collabora or Igalia. It is unclear who are the originators of that money since those proxy orgs don't disclose who funds them. Since Wayland is a horribly complicated protocol that makes doing even the simplest tasks a major chore I would consider it sabotage. There are multiple billion+ dollar corps out there with a severe interest in a non fuctional FOSS ecosystem.
  - growse 3y ago
    A wild conspiracy theory appears! Of course, like any good conspiracy, it's very competent and expansive, managing to simultaneously secretly convince all the major distros to use it by default and cruelly suppressing any efforts to provide funding and engineering effort towards X11. In reality, Wayland works great for most Linux desktop users (on the mainstream distros) and no-one is funding X because no-one wants to.
    - sprash 3y ago
      EEE was a conspiracy theory as well until the Heloween documents were published. Also no Wayland does not work great for most Linux desktop users. Even not in reality. It works incredibly well at making the life for application developers extra hard though.
    - Monsterovich 3y ago
      > In reality, Wayland works great for most Linux desktop users (on the mainstream distros) and no-one is funding X because no-one wants to. Actually, because it's ready and it works. And yes, most distributions use Xorg by default and all attempts to switch to Wayland fail, ex. Ubuntu. (maybe GNOME is an exception, but it's probably the only DE where Wayland somehow works).
zamalek 3y ago
> They have thrown everything difficult out of the spec Not exactly, they have thrown out everything that almost nobody uses - such as networking. They have, however, added things that most people do care about - such as different HiDPI across multiple monitors and an extremely thin (low latency) render path. > That Wayland is 10 years old and still barely usable And that has changed in the past 2 years (with exception to whatever Ubuntu does to screw it up, but such is Ubuntu).
- hist_thr 3y ago
  >Not exactly, they have thrown out everything that almost nobody uses - such as networking. And color calibration. >such as different HiDPI across multiple monitors I had this working with multiple X11 servers 20 years ago. >And that has changed in the past 2 years I was told that exact same line 5 years ago. I guess it will be just as true in 5 years again.
  - fsh 3y ago
    > I had this working with multiple X11 servers 20 years ago. People want to move windows between their screens. The lack of proper HiDPI support was really starting to become a problem when trying to run Linux on a laptop that isn't from the early 2000s. Fortunately, with wayland, it now seems mostly solved (at least in Gnome and KDE).
    - srcthr 3y ago
      >People want to move windows between their screens. Yes, you use he fact x is a network server and run each screen as a separate client.
      - dontlaugh 3y ago
        Very funny.
    - j16sdiz 3y ago
      X11R6.4 had it with Xinerama extension, back in 1998.
throwme_123 3y ago
The last full release is X11R7.7 from... 2012 If it's a tractor, it's quite an old one. Give me that new tricyle instead: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wy8MZuAwNZc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wy8MZuAwNZc
- ori_b 3y ago
  That's because they modularized and stopped doing "katamari releases". The last X server release was in March 2023.
- badsectoracula 3y ago
  You refer to an old release model that was packing everything "X" into one thing. Nothing uses this release anymore. After X11R7.7 the Xorg project changed its release model so that instead of making a single release that contained everything, it was split into separate packages each one having its own releases, versioning, etc and being independent from each other. So depending on what you are looking for you'll get different results for the latest dates, though pretty much all of them would be more recent than 2012. For example when people mention "Xorg" they usually mean the standalone X server xorg-xserver. This had several releases this year with the last being xorg-server 21.1.8 released in March.
hollerith 3y ago
I take screen shots just fine on my Wayland system without needing to jump through any security hoops. None of the apps I use regularly need XWayland: they've all been ported to talk directly to the Wayland server. I like Wayland.
edgyquant 3y ago
This has been a talking point since wayland was announced. No one is buying it. Wayland is a very clear successor to X11 and OSs are going to choose one or the other at the end of the day.
- yjftsjthsd-h 3y ago
  Wayland is intended to be a successor, but remains behind in a nonzero number of cases, which is why most Linux distros do in fact ship both.
- badsectoracula 3y ago
  > OSs are going to choose one or the other at the end of the day. Aside from specialized distros, i don't see why they have to choose only one or the other instead of providing both. Most distros - especially the Debian derivatives - have a ton of alternatives for projects that do more or less the same thing and a bunch of obscure projects, having an X server surely isn't that much of a deal. Of course those that provide a default DE or whatever out of the box will most likely need to choose a default setting, but that is just that: a default setting. Just because my openSUSE Tumbleweed installation came with KDE doesn't mean i had to stick with it instead of replacing it with Window Maker.
tadfisher 3y ago
I totally agree. X11 is a tractor trying to be a supercar, a bus, an airplane, and a farm implement. Can you separate just the parts that make X.org a display server from the parts that implement mouse input, keyboard language mapping, general-purpose IPC, 2D graphics drawing, font rendering, userspace graphics driver abstraction, joystick device handling, SPICE display driver, and three different 2D graphics acceleration APIs? Because then you might be able to make a comparison between X11 and Wayland.
kiwijamo 3y ago
I use Wayland daily and haven't run into the issues you mention. It has worked better than X11 as a daily driver for a few years now. I appreciate may not work for some <1% of edge use cases but for most people Wayland works just fine. Things like screen tearing, issues with video acceleration, etc are all a thing of the past. To be honest I associate 'barely usable' more with X11. I haven't forgotten the good old days when I had to hack various configuration files just to get a working desktop and then hack some more to work around issues with tearing, video acceleration, etc. Wayland on the other had has just worked right out of the box since Debian 11. I have not touched a single file, line or character to get Wayland to work optiminally. That is a remarkable achievement IMHO which X11 took years and years to achieve.
- SoftTalker 3y ago
  Your memory of config file nightmares (I had them too) is a decade old now. X11 works without config for the vast majority of users. Yes it took a while to get there, but it's been there for a good while now and not really anything for Wayland to point at as a differentiator.
  - lmm 3y ago
    > Your memory of config file nightmares (I had them too) is a decade old now. It's at least 2 decades old, if it was ever a real problem in the first place.
    - justinclift 3y ago
      > ... if it was ever a real problem in the first place. It definitely used to be a huge pain in the arse. There used to be pages after pages after pages of random "HOW TO ..." style guides for people to configure X11 config files around the net (many just working for specific hw). It was an incredible mess, with pretty much nothing positive about it. ;)
      - mtlmtlmtlmtl 3y ago
        I've been using Linux for 20 years now and I've never needed more than 5 lines of Xorg config, only a couple lines of which has had meaningful information.
jeppesen-io 3y ago
> That Wayland is 10 years old and still barely usable Factually false, and easily known. Starting with most distros defaulting to wayland, Myself using it full time with zoom, screenshots I'm sure many things you say don't work > far software developers have fallen in the last 30 years. You can't be serious > They have thrown everything difficult out of the spec and only implemented the most trivial functionality around a security model which you must actively break to get actual work (like screen shots) done. You must really hate HTTP as spec. HTTP is so lazy. Could not even implement transport security or even TCP like functionality. Composability and layers are quite overrated But I guess I should just not feed the troll
kaba0 3y ago
Yeah, please repeat the same bullshit for the umpteenth time. This happens under every goddamn wayland-related thread from people who have never ever touched anything graphics related with this typical cocky attitude - at this point this is just fake news. So if X is so great, why exactly have the very developers who worked on it all switched to Wayland? Like, if they could made something you believe is good, shouldn’t you trust their expertise in this also? > security model which you must actively break to get actual work That’s literally how security models should work: you put tiny holes into a solid block. You can’t plug a swiss cheese’s holes after the fact. > That Wayland is 10 years old and still barely usable What exactly is your thought process here, what kind of process could change such an inherent protocol in a bazaar style ecosystem faster? It’s not apple who can just say “we are using this protocol from next year. If you wanna work, port your software”. Even if something is so much more superior than the status quo, it would need a huge amount of time to spread. Also the first 5 years of Wayland was very different from the last 5 - and it has definitely reached critical mass in the latter 5. A year now may easily introduce more progress than 5 at the beginning, from the cumulative effect of more contributors, more testers, etc. And that barely usable part is pure bullshit again — how else would it be the default protocol for plenty distros already?
- j16sdiz 3y ago
  > So if X is so great, why exactly have the very developers who worked on it all switched to Wayland? Because some developers love greenfield projects. See https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36642796 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36642796 > And that barely usable part is pure bullshit again — how else would it be the default protocol for plenty distros already? A default that broke half of the programs I use. Thank you. To be fair, lots of progress in the past two years. It went from 90% broken to 50% broken..
  - kaba0 3y ago
    Surely noone would like to develop something even if its greenfield if they don’t see it promising. Believe me, they would have been more then happy to pop into existence a 100% backwards compatible change, but that is impossible.
WastingMyTime89 3y ago
Can someone explain to me why Linux users seem so interested about having this long heated discussion about very low level piece of the OS infrastructure they actually have no expertise about and don’t really care about in a direct way? It’s a never ending source of amusement for me. If what you do is broken, just go see your OS provider and ask them to fix it. Why do you even care about how things are working under the hood and how developers chose to spend their time?
- smorrebrod 3y ago
  I think it is because Linux users tend to be more familiar with their software than users of other OSes. They chose it and they configured them, sometimes for hours. Also they may have bent software to their liking and when you change something so important as the way images are rendered, then their particular workflow can go haywire. I was in the community for less change (wayland, systemd, etc.) however now I tend to agree with you, I don't really care if I can still send emails, watch my DVDs and play some games.
  - vetinari 3y ago
    > I think it is because Linux users tend to be more familiar with their software than users of other OSes. But they really don't. They might have familiarized at one point of time, but that snapshot is not where the world is at now. They cannot really expect that the world around them will stop developing, so their know-how and hacks stay current. It is still this, all over again: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZTdUmlGxVo0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZTdUmlGxVo0. 12 years later and we still argue in circles.
    - smorrebrod 3y ago
      > But they really don't. They might have familiarized at one point of time, but that snapshot is not where the world is at now. They cannot really expect that the world around them will stop developing, so their know-how and hacks stay current. Maybe we have different experiences. I am not working in a computer related industry so the people I know who use Linux are the only one following tech news, self hosting services, etc. So in my experience they are more familiar with their software. But my point of view is necessarily incomplete. What I wanted to say was that people who do not know enough to be able to not run in circle, do it because they feel attached to them after becoming familiar with them after so many hours learning their paradigms, their inner workings, etc. Again, it may be my incomplete POV but I have never seen any Windows user look at source code to try to understand a particular function to adapt the software to their workflow. I've seen numerous Linux users do this.
tapoxi 3y ago
Taking a screenshot isn't breaking the model, it's using a portal. It just means that instead of every application having complete access to everything on the display, you move the trust to the compositor. I'm not a Windows user, but macOS behaves the same way. If an application wants to capture the screen, you need to give it explicit permission to do so.
horsawlarway 3y ago
I love this comment. Arrogance, fear, entitlement, and ignorance rolled into a giant blob, salted with a touch of insult and nostalgia. Absolutely no content worth commenting on, but guaranteed to start a holy war type argument on a thread that should be about some guy's hobby project about a thing he likes and does in his spare time. Truly - Well done sir. Class act.

teekert 3y ago

When I'm on Gnome, and I select Gnome on X, my trackpad functions as one expects from Linux. When I'm on Wayland, it's like a macbook.

bandrami 3y ago
And can't be configured. The loss of function for clickpads is particularly egregious; they're basically unusable under Wayland.
- teekert 3y ago
  It's funny how I finally find my touchpad usable under wayland ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  - bandrami 3y ago
    Notice I said clickpads. Touchpads work fine once you work around Wayland's bizarre fear of enabling tap-to-click.
    - teekert 3y ago
      Ah, I don't like tap-to-click, I always disable it, I need that clicky feeling, often I'll hook up a mouse as well :)
    - oynqr 3y ago
      s/Wayland/Gnome/g
      - bandrami 3y ago
        IIRC the culprit is libinput, which worries tap to click is "confusing" for some reason. Which is why I use synaptics when I'm on X.

rodgerd 3y ago

The software developers who were maintaining X? Perhaps you could show them how it's done, since apparently you can do a better job. They've certainly been clear that they're happy for anyone who wants to take over Xorg, yet no-one from the peanut gallery ever does.

hist_thr 3y ago
[dead]
sprash 3y ago
It's a matter of funding. X11 development is not funded anymore whereas Wayland is heavily funded through proxies like Collabora or Igalia. It is unclear who are the originators of that money since those proxy orgs don't disclose who funds them. Since Wayland is a horribly complicated protocol that makes doing even the simplest tasks a major chore I would consider it sabotage. There are multiple billion+ dollar corps out there with a severe interest in a non fuctional FOSS ecosystem.
- growse 3y ago
  A wild conspiracy theory appears! Of course, like any good conspiracy, it's very competent and expansive, managing to simultaneously secretly convince all the major distros to use it by default and cruelly suppressing any efforts to provide funding and engineering effort towards X11. In reality, Wayland works great for most Linux desktop users (on the mainstream distros) and no-one is funding X because no-one wants to.
  - sprash 3y ago
    EEE was a conspiracy theory as well until the Heloween documents were published. Also no Wayland does not work great for most Linux desktop users. Even not in reality. It works incredibly well at making the life for application developers extra hard though.
  - Monsterovich 3y ago
    > In reality, Wayland works great for most Linux desktop users (on the mainstream distros) and no-one is funding X because no-one wants to. Actually, because it's ready and it works. And yes, most distributions use Xorg by default and all attempts to switch to Wayland fail, ex. Ubuntu. (maybe GNOME is an exception, but it's probably the only DE where Wayland somehow works).

zamalek 3y ago

> They have thrown everything difficult out of the spec Not exactly, they have thrown out everything that almost nobody uses - such as networking. They have, however, added things that most people do care about - such as different HiDPI across multiple monitors and an extremely thin (low latency) render path. > That Wayland is 10 years old and still barely usable And that has changed in the past 2 years (with exception to whatever Ubuntu does to screw it up, but such is Ubuntu).

hist_thr 3y ago
>Not exactly, they have thrown out everything that almost nobody uses - such as networking. And color calibration. >such as different HiDPI across multiple monitors I had this working with multiple X11 servers 20 years ago. >And that has changed in the past 2 years I was told that exact same line 5 years ago. I guess it will be just as true in 5 years again.
- fsh 3y ago
  > I had this working with multiple X11 servers 20 years ago. People want to move windows between their screens. The lack of proper HiDPI support was really starting to become a problem when trying to run Linux on a laptop that isn't from the early 2000s. Fortunately, with wayland, it now seems mostly solved (at least in Gnome and KDE).
  - srcthr 3y ago
    >People want to move windows between their screens. Yes, you use he fact x is a network server and run each screen as a separate client.
    - dontlaugh 3y ago
      Very funny.
  - j16sdiz 3y ago
    X11R6.4 had it with Xinerama extension, back in 1998.

throwme_123 3y ago

The last full release is X11R7.7 from... 2012 If it's a tractor, it's quite an old one. Give me that new tricyle instead: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wy8MZuAwNZc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wy8MZuAwNZc

ori_b 3y ago
That's because they modularized and stopped doing "katamari releases". The last X server release was in March 2023.
badsectoracula 3y ago
You refer to an old release model that was packing everything "X" into one thing. Nothing uses this release anymore. After X11R7.7 the Xorg project changed its release model so that instead of making a single release that contained everything, it was split into separate packages each one having its own releases, versioning, etc and being independent from each other. So depending on what you are looking for you'll get different results for the latest dates, though pretty much all of them would be more recent than 2012. For example when people mention "Xorg" they usually mean the standalone X server xorg-xserver. This had several releases this year with the last being xorg-server 21.1.8 released in March.

hollerith 3y ago

I take screen shots just fine on my Wayland system without needing to jump through any security hoops. None of the apps I use regularly need XWayland: they've all been ported to talk directly to the Wayland server. I like Wayland.

edgyquant 3y ago

This has been a talking point since wayland was announced. No one is buying it. Wayland is a very clear successor to X11 and OSs are going to choose one or the other at the end of the day.

yjftsjthsd-h 3y ago
Wayland is intended to be a successor, but remains behind in a nonzero number of cases, which is why most Linux distros do in fact ship both.
badsectoracula 3y ago
> OSs are going to choose one or the other at the end of the day. Aside from specialized distros, i don't see why they have to choose only one or the other instead of providing both. Most distros - especially the Debian derivatives - have a ton of alternatives for projects that do more or less the same thing and a bunch of obscure projects, having an X server surely isn't that much of a deal. Of course those that provide a default DE or whatever out of the box will most likely need to choose a default setting, but that is just that: a default setting. Just because my openSUSE Tumbleweed installation came with KDE doesn't mean i had to stick with it instead of replacing it with Window Maker.

tadfisher 3y ago

I totally agree. X11 is a tractor trying to be a supercar, a bus, an airplane, and a farm implement. Can you separate just the parts that make X.org a display server from the parts that implement mouse input, keyboard language mapping, general-purpose IPC, 2D graphics drawing, font rendering, userspace graphics driver abstraction, joystick device handling, SPICE display driver, and three different 2D graphics acceleration APIs? Because then you might be able to make a comparison between X11 and Wayland.

kiwijamo 3y ago

I use Wayland daily and haven't run into the issues you mention. It has worked better than X11 as a daily driver for a few years now. I appreciate may not work for some <1% of edge use cases but for most people Wayland works just fine. Things like screen tearing, issues with video acceleration, etc are all a thing of the past. To be honest I associate 'barely usable' more with X11. I haven't forgotten the good old days when I had to hack various configuration files just to get a working desktop and then hack some more to work around issues with tearing, video acceleration, etc. Wayland on the other had has just worked right out of the box since Debian 11. I have not touched a single file, line or character to get Wayland to work optiminally. That is a remarkable achievement IMHO which X11 took years and years to achieve.

SoftTalker 3y ago
Your memory of config file nightmares (I had them too) is a decade old now. X11 works without config for the vast majority of users. Yes it took a while to get there, but it's been there for a good while now and not really anything for Wayland to point at as a differentiator.
- lmm 3y ago
  > Your memory of config file nightmares (I had them too) is a decade old now. It's at least 2 decades old, if it was ever a real problem in the first place.
  - justinclift 3y ago
    > ... if it was ever a real problem in the first place. It definitely used to be a huge pain in the arse. There used to be pages after pages after pages of random "HOW TO ..." style guides for people to configure X11 config files around the net (many just working for specific hw). It was an incredible mess, with pretty much nothing positive about it. ;)
    - mtlmtlmtlmtl 3y ago
      I've been using Linux for 20 years now and I've never needed more than 5 lines of Xorg config, only a couple lines of which has had meaningful information.

jeppesen-io 3y ago

> That Wayland is 10 years old and still barely usable Factually false, and easily known. Starting with most distros defaulting to wayland, Myself using it full time with zoom, screenshots I'm sure many things you say don't work > far software developers have fallen in the last 30 years. You can't be serious > They have thrown everything difficult out of the spec and only implemented the most trivial functionality around a security model which you must actively break to get actual work (like screen shots) done. You must really hate HTTP as spec. HTTP is so lazy. Could not even implement transport security or even TCP like functionality. Composability and layers are quite overrated But I guess I should just not feed the troll

kaba0 3y ago

Yeah, please repeat the same bullshit for the umpteenth time. This happens under every goddamn wayland-related thread from people who have never ever touched anything graphics related with this typical cocky attitude - at this point this is just fake news. So if X is so great, why exactly have the very developers who worked on it all switched to Wayland? Like, if they could made something you believe is good, shouldn’t you trust their expertise in this also? > security model which you must actively break to get actual work That’s literally how security models should work: you put tiny holes into a solid block. You can’t plug a swiss cheese’s holes after the fact. > That Wayland is 10 years old and still barely usable What exactly is your thought process here, what kind of process could change such an inherent protocol in a bazaar style ecosystem faster? It’s not apple who can just say “we are using this protocol from next year. If you wanna work, port your software”. Even if something is so much more superior than the status quo, it would need a huge amount of time to spread. Also the first 5 years of Wayland was very different from the last 5 - and it has definitely reached critical mass in the latter 5. A year now may easily introduce more progress than 5 at the beginning, from the cumulative effect of more contributors, more testers, etc. And that barely usable part is pure bullshit again — how else would it be the default protocol for plenty distros already?

j16sdiz 3y ago
> So if X is so great, why exactly have the very developers who worked on it all switched to Wayland? Because some developers love greenfield projects. See https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36642796 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36642796 > And that barely usable part is pure bullshit again — how else would it be the default protocol for plenty distros already? A default that broke half of the programs I use. Thank you. To be fair, lots of progress in the past two years. It went from 90% broken to 50% broken..
- kaba0 3y ago
  Surely noone would like to develop something even if its greenfield if they don’t see it promising. Believe me, they would have been more then happy to pop into existence a 100% backwards compatible change, but that is impossible.

WastingMyTime89 3y ago

Can someone explain to me why Linux users seem so interested about having this long heated discussion about very low level piece of the OS infrastructure they actually have no expertise about and don’t really care about in a direct way? It’s a never ending source of amusement for me. If what you do is broken, just go see your OS provider and ask them to fix it. Why do you even care about how things are working under the hood and how developers chose to spend their time?

smorrebrod 3y ago
I think it is because Linux users tend to be more familiar with their software than users of other OSes. They chose it and they configured them, sometimes for hours. Also they may have bent software to their liking and when you change something so important as the way images are rendered, then their particular workflow can go haywire. I was in the community for less change (wayland, systemd, etc.) however now I tend to agree with you, I don't really care if I can still send emails, watch my DVDs and play some games.
- vetinari 3y ago
  > I think it is because Linux users tend to be more familiar with their software than users of other OSes. But they really don't. They might have familiarized at one point of time, but that snapshot is not where the world is at now. They cannot really expect that the world around them will stop developing, so their know-how and hacks stay current. It is still this, all over again: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZTdUmlGxVo0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZTdUmlGxVo0. 12 years later and we still argue in circles.
  - smorrebrod 3y ago
    > But they really don't. They might have familiarized at one point of time, but that snapshot is not where the world is at now. They cannot really expect that the world around them will stop developing, so their know-how and hacks stay current. Maybe we have different experiences. I am not working in a computer related industry so the people I know who use Linux are the only one following tech news, self hosting services, etc. So in my experience they are more familiar with their software. But my point of view is necessarily incomplete. What I wanted to say was that people who do not know enough to be able to not run in circle, do it because they feel attached to them after becoming familiar with them after so many hours learning their paradigms, their inner workings, etc. Again, it may be my incomplete POV but I have never seen any Windows user look at source code to try to understand a particular function to adapt the software to their workflow. I've seen numerous Linux users do this.

tapoxi 3y ago

Taking a screenshot isn't breaking the model, it's using a portal. It just means that instead of every application having complete access to everything on the display, you move the trust to the compositor. I'm not a Windows user, but macOS behaves the same way. If an application wants to capture the screen, you need to give it explicit permission to do so.

horsawlarway 3y ago

I love this comment. Arrogance, fear, entitlement, and ignorance rolled into a giant blob, salted with a touch of insult and nostalgia. Absolutely no content worth commenting on, but guaranteed to start a holy war type argument on a thread that should be about some guy's hobby project about a thing he likes and does in his spare time. Truly - Well done sir. Class act.