In response to Wayland Breaks Your Bad Software

I say that the technical merits are irrelevant because I don’t believe that they’re a major factor any more in most people moving or not moving to Wayland.

With only a slight amount of generalization, none of these people will be moved by Wayland’s technical merits. The energetic people who could be persuaded by technical merits to go through switching desktop environments or in some cases replacing hardware (or accepting limited features) have mostly moved to Wayland already. The people who remain on X are there either because they don’t want to rebuild their desktop environment, they don’t want to do without features and performance they currently have, or their Linux distribution doesn’t think their desktop should switch to Wayland yet.

  • michaelrose@lemmy.mlEnglish
    1·
    1 year ago

    You ably demonstrate your own inability to listen. The monitor on my right hand side right here as I type this isn’t blurry there is no amount of proving that it MUST be blurry that is more persuasive than the fact that as I type this I’m looking at it.

    Furthermore I didn’t say that the existence of desktops obviated the need to worry about the impact of resolution/scaling on battery life. I said that the impacts on battery life were both minimal and meaningless because mixed DPI concerns by definition concerns exclusively desktops and laptops which are plugged into external monitors at which time logically your computer is also plugged into power. In fact the overwhelming configuration for those which use external monitors is a dock which delivers both connectivity to peripherals and powers. If you are using a desktop OR a plugged in laptop the benefits of scaling more efficiently is zero.

    I started using Linux with the release of the very first release of Fedora then denoted Fedora “Core” 1. I’m not sure how you hallucinated that Wayland got 4 years of design and 8 years of implementation. First off by the end of the month it will be 15 years old so you fail first at the most basic of math. Next I’m guessing you want to pretend it got four year of design to make the second number look less egregious.

    With graphics programming relatively in its infancy X11 didn’t require 15 years to become usable and Apple took how many years to produce their stack was it even one? Working with incredibly powerful hardware, with a wide variety of approaches well understood and documented 15 years is downright embarrassing. Much as I enjoy Linux the ecosystem is kind of a joke.

    • orangeboats@lemmy.world
      2·
      1 year ago

      You ably demonstrate your own inability to listen.

      Or was it you?

      I’m not sure how you hallucinated that Wayland got 4 years of design and 8 years of implementation.

      2012-2021, or to clarify “Late 2012 to early-mid 2021” seems to be 8-point-something years to me. I dunno, did mathematics change recently or something?

      With graphics programming relatively in its infancy X11 didn’t require 15 years to become usable

      I hope you do understand that graphics weren’t as complicated back then. Compositing of windows was not an idea (at least, not a widely spread one) in the 90s. Nor was sandboxing an idea back then. Or multidisplay (we hacked it onto X11 later through XRandR). Or HDR nowadays. Or HiDPI. Or touch input and gestures. We software rendered everything too, so DRI and friends weren’t thought of.

      In a way… you are actually insulting the kernel developers.