2 ms·

Wayland already works, and is great for a lot of use cases; it's the default on distributions like Fedora, and has been for a while. It has nice things. For 90%

by caslon 3y ago

Wayland already works, and is great for a lot of use cases; it's the default on distributions like Fedora, and has been for a while. It has nice things. For 90% of users, it's better than X in most ways that matter. Similar, but much less catastrophic, to how Android isn't great for blind users, or people who want to do low-latency audio production, Wayland is actually great for most users, despite not appealing to extremely niche use cases. It's objectively better for most real-time use cases. I exclusively use X11 because of an extremely niche use case, and I can admit that Wayland is perfectly fine for 99% of things anyone wants to do with a computer. It's not a square wheel at all.

hulitu 3y ago
> Wayland already works, and is great for a lot of use cases; it's the default on distributions like Fedora, and has been for a while. It has nice things. For 90% of users, it's better than X in most ways that matter. > I exclusively use X11 because of an extremely niche use case, and I can admit that Wayland is perfectly fine for 99% I am also married with a nice girl, but the girl next door, looks much better. /s
LordShredda 3y ago
It's the 1% that makes Wayland awful. If it's such a small part, then why not support it anyways? If it's a security issue, let kde/gnome break it in their own ways.
phendrenad2 3y ago
> For 90% of users, it's better than X in most ways that matter What ways specifically?
brnt 3y ago
> For 90% of users, it's better than X in most ways that matter. I sincerely doubt this. The project hasn't organised much in the way of receiving user reports, and anyone with a negative one has experienced various levels of hostility: you are usually suspected of user error. The distro's that have switched also target devs/enthusiasts, who tend to have a particular subset of all possible hardware which leads to biased impressions. I think many don't quite understand that much of the hairyness in Xorg is necessary: it's the hardware that dictates the requirement of those 1001 little workaround. A clean slate doesn't mean the slate can stay clean: you either choose to support all of those unperfect devices, device-combos, user requests, or, and that seems to be what happened, you focus on a narrow happy path (for the kind of people the devs themselves see) and leave it at that. I don't mins that, but I do mind anyone arguing Wayland should be or is going to replace anything; look at the negative user reports. It's nowhere near there.
tommiegannert 3y ago
> Wayland already works, and is great for a lot of use cases; > I exclusively use X11 because of an extremely niche use case, and I can admit that Wayland is perfectly fine for 99% of things anyone wants to do with a computer. It's not a square wheel at all. This had me thinking about digital NIMBYism. Suggest others do one thing, while you do the opposite, because your reasons make sense. You still haven't addressed PCSX2's, or anyone else's, concrete reasons.
- caslon 3y ago
  I use X11 because I wrote a terrible usermode hack a decade ago for a niche (<2000 units) piece of hardware that gives incorrect EDID information and needs a handshake to turn itself on, and haven't tried to port my hack to the post-kms world yet. It is the definition of a legacy hack, and one I'm hoping to rid my systems of the second I get a decent vacation. I've used Wayland before; it's great. Most people aren't gamers; everything PCSX2 wants to do is something that 99% of people do not care about; for the majority non-gamer software, allowing a window to manage absolute position is pointless, or even bad. Apps shouldn't be able to force CSD if the user doesn't want it; GNOME is respecting user preference (and that's not a Wayland thing). Even so, it still works with XWayland. For Wayland users, there is no service disruption. Aside from people who dislike XWayland, anyway. Proprietary NVIDIA drivers being broken is an NVIDIA thing. Swapchains causing segfaults happened any time you used direct rendering from like 470 to 525, even on X11. They don't make great Linux drivers.

by caslon 3y ago

hulitu 3y ago

> Wayland already works, and is great for a lot of use cases; it's the default on distributions like Fedora, and has been for a while. It has nice things. For 90% of users, it's better than X in most ways that matter. > I exclusively use X11 because of an extremely niche use case, and I can admit that Wayland is perfectly fine for 99% I am also married with a nice girl, but the girl next door, looks much better. /s

LordShredda 3y ago

It's the 1% that makes Wayland awful. If it's such a small part, then why not support it anyways? If it's a security issue, let kde/gnome break it in their own ways.

phendrenad2 3y ago

> For 90% of users, it's better than X in most ways that matter What ways specifically?

brnt 3y ago

> For 90% of users, it's better than X in most ways that matter. I sincerely doubt this. The project hasn't organised much in the way of receiving user reports, and anyone with a negative one has experienced various levels of hostility: you are usually suspected of user error. The distro's that have switched also target devs/enthusiasts, who tend to have a particular subset of all possible hardware which leads to biased impressions. I think many don't quite understand that much of the hairyness in Xorg is necessary: it's the hardware that dictates the requirement of those 1001 little workaround. A clean slate doesn't mean the slate can stay clean: you either choose to support all of those unperfect devices, device-combos, user requests, or, and that seems to be what happened, you focus on a narrow happy path (for the kind of people the devs themselves see) and leave it at that. I don't mins that, but I do mind anyone arguing Wayland should be or is going to replace anything; look at the negative user reports. It's nowhere near there.

tommiegannert 3y ago

> Wayland already works, and is great for a lot of use cases; > I exclusively use X11 because of an extremely niche use case, and I can admit that Wayland is perfectly fine for 99% of things anyone wants to do with a computer. It's not a square wheel at all. This had me thinking about digital NIMBYism. Suggest others do one thing, while you do the opposite, because your reasons make sense. You still haven't addressed PCSX2's, or anyone else's, concrete reasons.

caslon 3y ago
I use X11 because I wrote a terrible usermode hack a decade ago for a niche (<2000 units) piece of hardware that gives incorrect EDID information and needs a handshake to turn itself on, and haven't tried to port my hack to the post-kms world yet. It is the definition of a legacy hack, and one I'm hoping to rid my systems of the second I get a decent vacation. I've used Wayland before; it's great. Most people aren't gamers; everything PCSX2 wants to do is something that 99% of people do not care about; for the majority non-gamer software, allowing a window to manage absolute position is pointless, or even bad. Apps shouldn't be able to force CSD if the user doesn't want it; GNOME is respecting user preference (and that's not a Wayland thing). Even so, it still works with XWayland. For Wayland users, there is no service disruption. Aside from people who dislike XWayland, anyway. Proprietary NVIDIA drivers being broken is an NVIDIA thing. Swapchains causing segfaults happened any time you used direct rendering from like 470 to 525, even on X11. They don't make great Linux drivers.