4 ms·
A lot of people conflate Wayland being worse than X11 with Gnome on Wayland being worse than Gnome on X11. Wayland has been great for me for a few years now. I
by boomskats 3mo ago
A lot of people conflate Wayland being worse than X11 with Gnome on Wayland being worse than Gnome on X11.
Wayland has been great for me for a few years now. I don't use Gnome or nvidia though.
- doubled112 3mo agoIf I understand the semantics of it all correctly, in that sense, there is no such thing as "Wayland". It is all a little bit confusing compared to the X11 ecosystem. You don't run GNOME on Wayland. You run GNOME's Wayland compositor, which is an entirely different implementation than Plasma's Wayland compositor.
- boomskats 3mo agoThat's what I mean though. I've not used gnome for years, but I have a vague memory of gnome/mutter running on a single main thread which used to lock up quite a lot (javascript etc). And because in X it was X that used to manage things like rendering the mouse pointer every frame, whereas in Wayland it flipped to mutter having to do it directly, the stalls were way more obvious in wayland than X, which is where I think a lot of this perception came from. Again, not sure how much of this is accurate, but that's the point I was trying to make.
- seba_dos1 3mo agoYeah, I believe Mutter is directly responsible for a lot of bad rep Wayland gets. It got better in many areas, but the damage is done.