4 ms·
You seem to be seeing a confrontational message where I didn't mean one. Yes I'm sure you could find some old posts complaining about X that would illustrate th
by belval 3y ago
You seem to be seeing a confrontational message where I didn't mean one. Yes I'm sure you could find some old posts complaining about X that would illustrate the same phenomenon. My point is pretty much exactly that. Fast forward the next 5-10 years and we might all be on Wayland but they blew their first impression and that's delaying adoption.
- acdha 3y agoIt sounded like a but of a misdirected excuse: if someone is still complaining about Wayland now based on an initial experience half a decade ago, wouldn’t the first step be getting up to speed with the current state? When I read that I was reminded of how many Linux users had issues with things like mode lines back in the day, and that was a non-issue only a few years later.
- gpderetta 3y agoThe problem is 20 years ago you had to use XFree86 if you wanted graphical output in Linux, there was no other choice, so you had to put up with it no matter the craziness. Now X.org works fine for the majority of users, so for them (/raises hand) it is very hard to see the value proposition of switching to Wayland, especially if prior attempts were less than successful. The fact that X11 development has stalled might be a plus for those that just want a stable system, are used to the limitations and don't need new features. We will migrate eventually, likely at next distro upgrade, but there is no hurry.