3 ms·

We have to investigate if Windows and or Apple had their fingers init. At hindsight it seems such a stupid decision to fragment a small comminity by designing

We have to investigate if Windows and or Apple had their fingers init. At hindsight it seems such a stupid decision to fragment a small comminity by designing such a small protocol instead of revamping the existing X protocol to sane security stamdards

justinrubek 1y ago
People were and are free to do so. They've chosen not to, though, so far.
ezst 1y ago
X11 was an unmaintainable pile of legacy mess, Wayland was its exhausted developers starting from a blank slate with tons of lessons learned the hard way. It's not a cabal or a conspiracy, just a sensible evolution.
- immibis 1y ago
  The insane part is their explicit rejection of a bunch of things people actually want - like window coordinates and icons. Xorg has security module hooks btw
  - ezst 1y ago
    I don't have a horse in this race, but I also can't blame the Wayland designers for not rushing to implement something like that. Encouraging application developers to manipulate windows themselves essentially means turning them into window-manager developers, but with a hand tied in their back and probably little interest in doing it thoroughly. I think the practical results speak for themselves: I cannot count a single application that does it extensively and that isn't broken in the typical multi-monitor cases you find in the wild.
    - immibis 1y ago
      Well, in Wayland, the same apps just don't work at all. The developer basically has to rewrite them and turn them into different apps to make them work in Wayland. Is that good or bad? Maybe if you hate a certain type of app it's good, but this is the open source world and if something doesn't hurt anyone then you should probably be allowed to do it. It's not the display server's job to rule by fiat. It might be the window manager's job, but only if the application-provided coordinates don't work, or you're using something strict like a tiling WM.
      - ezst 1y ago
        > The developer basically has to rewrite them and turn them into different apps to make them work in Wayland. Is that good or bad? Maybe if you hate a certain type of app it's good Just to make the record straight, it's not about "hating" anybody or anything. And I really don't see the need to appeal to emotions here. It is about acknowledging that this way of doing things might, in retrospect, have been a bad idea all along and represents a technical dead-end. Departing from it, given the chance, is for the benefit of all in the long run (tech doesn't like carrying old bags around forever, and I suspect that your laptop don't hold a CD-ROM drive for similar reasons). > if something doesn't hurt anyone then you should probably be allowed to do it It would cost the Wayland compositors developers extra effort to maintain this capability for decades to come, it's not free. Moreover, those apps would still be broken by design (not in a position to do as good a job at positioning their windows as the compositors would do), so the compositors developers would, as a second order of annoyance, probably see their issue trackers filling-up with user complaints that are outside of their scope/power to address. > this is the open source world And the great news here is that those entrenched apps who refuse to adopt more modern UX paradigms (for the detriment of their old and new users alike, if I might say) will still be able to run through XWayland virtually forever.
- ahartmetz 1y ago
  It's a pattern that I have seen a few times before, "I know! We will do the exact opposite of the problems with the previous project!" - but that's not ideal neither.

justinrubek 1y ago

People were and are free to do so. They've chosen not to, though, so far.

ezst 1y ago

X11 was an unmaintainable pile of legacy mess, Wayland was its exhausted developers starting from a blank slate with tons of lessons learned the hard way. It's not a cabal or a conspiracy, just a sensible evolution.

immibis 1y ago
The insane part is their explicit rejection of a bunch of things people actually want - like window coordinates and icons. Xorg has security module hooks btw
- ezst 1y ago
  I don't have a horse in this race, but I also can't blame the Wayland designers for not rushing to implement something like that. Encouraging application developers to manipulate windows themselves essentially means turning them into window-manager developers, but with a hand tied in their back and probably little interest in doing it thoroughly. I think the practical results speak for themselves: I cannot count a single application that does it extensively and that isn't broken in the typical multi-monitor cases you find in the wild.
  - immibis 1y ago
    Well, in Wayland, the same apps just don't work at all. The developer basically has to rewrite them and turn them into different apps to make them work in Wayland. Is that good or bad? Maybe if you hate a certain type of app it's good, but this is the open source world and if something doesn't hurt anyone then you should probably be allowed to do it. It's not the display server's job to rule by fiat. It might be the window manager's job, but only if the application-provided coordinates don't work, or you're using something strict like a tiling WM.
    - ezst 1y ago
      > The developer basically has to rewrite them and turn them into different apps to make them work in Wayland. Is that good or bad? Maybe if you hate a certain type of app it's good Just to make the record straight, it's not about "hating" anybody or anything. And I really don't see the need to appeal to emotions here. It is about acknowledging that this way of doing things might, in retrospect, have been a bad idea all along and represents a technical dead-end. Departing from it, given the chance, is for the benefit of all in the long run (tech doesn't like carrying old bags around forever, and I suspect that your laptop don't hold a CD-ROM drive for similar reasons). > if something doesn't hurt anyone then you should probably be allowed to do it It would cost the Wayland compositors developers extra effort to maintain this capability for decades to come, it's not free. Moreover, those apps would still be broken by design (not in a position to do as good a job at positioning their windows as the compositors would do), so the compositors developers would, as a second order of annoyance, probably see their issue trackers filling-up with user complaints that are outside of their scope/power to address. > this is the open source world And the great news here is that those entrenched apps who refuse to adopt more modern UX paradigms (for the detriment of their old and new users alike, if I might say) will still be able to run through XWayland virtually forever.
ahartmetz 1y ago
It's a pattern that I have seen a few times before, "I know! We will do the exact opposite of the problems with the previous project!" - but that's not ideal neither.