4 ms·

I used daily drive Wayland. It's fine; for most of what I do I'm happier with it than I am macos or windows. I frequently ran into screen tearing on X, somethin

I used daily drive Wayland. It's fine; for most of what I do I'm happier with it than I am macos or windows. I frequently ran into screen tearing on X, something that I've not struggled with at all on Wayland. I feel for people who are bitten by Wayland, but there's a really vocal negative group on here that I suspect are very much in the minority. Much like the switch from init to system, most people are fine with it.

JoshTriplett 1y ago
It's understandable that people who aren't having problems aren't vocal; people don't usually go out of their way to say "everything's working fine, no issues". Wayland works for the vast majority of people, and it's improving steadily. One of the main differences that leads people to complain is that in X, there wasn't any security between applications, and anyone could write a quick hack that makes things work for them (e.g. watch the keyboard for a key globally, or mirror the display remotely). In Wayland, there's no escape hatch: either the desktop environment needs to handle something, or you need to add a protocol for it. People experiment with new protocols all the time, but the Wayland project itself is (by design) slow and careful about adopting extensions. It is understandable to wish for simpler times. But retrocomputing isn't a path forward here.