> so it's easy for either side to point that out. Sure, it is. But does it matter? I don't think so. I was happy with Xorg, and there were things it couldn't

> so it's easy for either side to point that out. Sure, it is. But does it matter? I don't think so. I was happy with Xorg, and there were things it couldn't do that I didn't plan on contributing, so I didn't complain to them. I am now happy with Wayland, and there are things it cannot do that I am not contributing, so I don't complain. What I see is that Wayland is quite active and they actually added things I needed that didn't exist a few years ago. That's great. Many people seem to be very vocal about how they prefer Xorg because it works for them: that's great, they can use Xorg. Someone wants to write another one? That's great, let them do it. Linux is about diversity. Don't come to Linux and ask it to become Windows or macOS.