4 ms·

It won't be like Linux audio, because all Linux audio drivers are open source. If Intel can't get AMD and NVidia to support Wayland, and Canonical spoke the tru

by tinco 13y ago

It won't be like Linux audio, because all Linux audio drivers are open source. If Intel can't get AMD and NVidia to support Wayland, and Canonical spoke the truth when they said that AMD and NVidia will support Mir, then what reason will people have to use Wayland? It will only work with Intel cards. Intel is actively making a stand against Open Source. I know that's unlike them, but their stance just makes no sense from a free software perspective. When you look at it from the perspective of Canonical enabling AMD and NVidia to cooperate with introducing a new graphics driver interface, a shadowy doubt is cast over Intel's motivations.

toyg 13y ago
Well, what is stopping NVidia and AMD from cooperating on Wayland right now? When you look at it from this perspective, a shadowy doubt is cast over Canonical's motivations.
- ginko 13y ago
  This is the part that irritates me most about Mir: By rolling their own display server, Canonical has set back efforts to get all display vendors on board for supporting Wayland. If Ubuntu would have switched used Wayland (along with the other distributions), there would have been a very strong incentive for all vendors to support this in their drivers.
  - ikt 13y ago
    If Red Hat had supported .deb packages maybe packaging wouldn't be such a pain in the ass and we wouldn't have a .tar, .deb and a .rpm for every program. There are a lot of things in linux land that don't make sense, I think picking on Canonical for choosing to do what they want as opposed to all the others who are choosing to do what they want, is very un linux like.
    - ginko 13y ago
      The difference is that the choice of package system is completely in the domain of open source software. Proprietary drivers require support by hardware vendors. If we had solid, feature-complete open source graphics drivers this wouldn't be an issue.
  - synchronise 13y ago
    If this were the case, then why is a large swathe of proprietary drivers supporting only Surfaceflinger? If it's the most popular display framework in terms of use, then why not simply make it the default? Not Wayland nor X11 could garner the numbers required to overtake SF.

by tinco 13y ago

toyg 13y ago

Well, what is stopping NVidia and AMD from cooperating on Wayland right now? When you look at it from this perspective, a shadowy doubt is cast over Canonical's motivations.

ginko 13y ago
This is the part that irritates me most about Mir: By rolling their own display server, Canonical has set back efforts to get all display vendors on board for supporting Wayland. If Ubuntu would have switched used Wayland (along with the other distributions), there would have been a very strong incentive for all vendors to support this in their drivers.
- ikt 13y ago
  If Red Hat had supported .deb packages maybe packaging wouldn't be such a pain in the ass and we wouldn't have a .tar, .deb and a .rpm for every program. There are a lot of things in linux land that don't make sense, I think picking on Canonical for choosing to do what they want as opposed to all the others who are choosing to do what they want, is very un linux like.
  - ginko 13y ago
    The difference is that the choice of package system is completely in the domain of open source software. Proprietary drivers require support by hardware vendors. If we had solid, feature-complete open source graphics drivers this wouldn't be an issue.
- synchronise 13y ago
  If this were the case, then why is a large swathe of proprietary drivers supporting only Surfaceflinger? If it's the most popular display framework in terms of use, then why not simply make it the default? Not Wayland nor X11 could garner the numbers required to overtake SF.