One thing I saw in comments about the removal of xorg server is that some might not see how much work is/was to maintain xorg server. I understand is hard to see from outside, but maintaining xorg server with the standards we have in RHEL is not a small beast. Let me share some:
Nobody’s pushing “against Wayland”. I don’t give a shit about Wayland or Xorg. What I care about is having a full-featured, easy to use desktop stack readily available.
Install Xorg yourself. Don’t make it easily accessible to new Linux users. Software vendors will take note and postpone doing any work for as long as possible.
And you obviously care a lot about Wayland and Xorg.
The “dead” Xorg works perfectly with everything. That’s the bar.
No, it doesn’t. And if it does, then it’s still insecure by design. When I hear statements like these, I get the urge to publish PoC Linux malware code on GitHub that uses X11 specific features to show just how not fine it is.
The Wayland choice of pushing complexity onto individual software projects by making them all reinvent a hundred wheels, and onto users by making them hunt down a hundred pieces of software to build a wobbly desktop stack sucks.
Substitute Wayland for X11 here. Both Wayland and X11 are protocols. X11 is such a lackluster protocol that all implementations died, except that Xorg still has users.
Install Xorg yourself. Don’t make it easily accessible to new Linux users.
New users will drop any distro whose default desktop doesn’t work perfectly and with all the features they want. Linux already has a high enough bar competing with Windows, creating additional artificial hurdles is dumb in the extreme.
And if it does, then it’s still insecure by design.
Security vs convenience has always been a give and take. There’s a cutoff point that users will not cross if the software becomes too inconvenient to use, even if it means greater security. The Wayland stack is currently on the bad side of that line and needs to step over if it wants to see mass adoption.
Substitute Wayland for X11 here. Both Wayland and X11 are protocols. X11 is such a lackluster protocol that all implementations died, except that Xorg still has users.
Nobody cares, all they see is the stack, with Wayland leading the point on the bad decisions.
And you obviously care a lot about Wayland and Xorg.
You are projecting. If this were any other piece of software, say, a text editor that works and does everything you need, and someone came and told you “you must use this new one, it’s the way forward, but oh it doesn’t have all the features you need from a text editor” you would say “thanks but I’ll wait until it’s ready”. But you see no problem in pushing Wayland on people who can’t use it?
Please understand that nobody will ever successfuly push through incomplete software. Not on Linux. There’s nothing you or anybody can do to convince people that incomplete software is complete and usable when it’s not.
New users will drop any distro whose default desktop doesn’t work perfectly and with all the features they want. Linux already has a high enough bar competing with Windows, creating additional artificial hurdles is dumb in the extreme.
Both Wayland and X11 are an artificial hurdle to someone, so at least pick the sane choice with a future.
Security vs convenience has always been a give and take. There’s a cutoff point that users will not cross if the software becomes too inconvenient to use, even if it means greater security. The Wayland stack is currently on the bad side of that line and needs to step over if it wants to see mass adoption.
No, Wayland is doing fine.
Nobody cares, all they see is the stack, with Wayland leading the point on the bad decisions.
Oh no, Wayland isn’t X11. It’s almost as if Wayland isn’t supposed to be 1:1 bug compatible with Xorg.
You are projecting. If this were any other piece of software, say, a text editor that works and does everything you need, and someone came and told you “you must use this new one, it’s the way forward, but oh it doesn’t have all the features you need from a text editor” you would say “thanks but I’ll wait until it’s ready”. But you see no problem in pushing Wayland on people who can’t use it?
I don’t know about what text editors you use, but my text editor doesn’t allow malware to log all keystrokes, tamper with windows of other apps, steal clipboard contents without consent, inject keystrokes into other windows, escalate privileges, and install rootkits that persist OS re-installs using the escalated privileges.
People work on Wayland. Nobody works on Xorg. Alternatives don’t exist.
Please understand that nobody will ever successfuly push through incomplete software. Not on Linux. There’s nothing you or anybody can do to convince people that incomplete software is complete and usable when it’s not.
Do you need a refresher about systemd, pulseaudio, etc.? I’m not in the systemd haters camp, but pulseaudio broke regularly for me. Yet every distro included pulseaudio.
Install Xorg yourself. Don’t make it easily accessible to new Linux users. Software vendors will take note and postpone doing any work for as long as possible.
And you obviously care a lot about Wayland and Xorg.
No, it doesn’t. And if it does, then it’s still insecure by design. When I hear statements like these, I get the urge to publish PoC Linux malware code on GitHub that uses X11 specific features to show just how not fine it is.
Substitute Wayland for X11 here. Both Wayland and X11 are protocols. X11 is such a lackluster protocol that all implementations died, except that Xorg still has users.
New users will drop any distro whose default desktop doesn’t work perfectly and with all the features they want. Linux already has a high enough bar competing with Windows, creating additional artificial hurdles is dumb in the extreme.
Security vs convenience has always been a give and take. There’s a cutoff point that users will not cross if the software becomes too inconvenient to use, even if it means greater security. The Wayland stack is currently on the bad side of that line and needs to step over if it wants to see mass adoption.
Nobody cares, all they see is the stack, with Wayland leading the point on the bad decisions.
You are projecting. If this were any other piece of software, say, a text editor that works and does everything you need, and someone came and told you “you must use this new one, it’s the way forward, but oh it doesn’t have all the features you need from a text editor” you would say “thanks but I’ll wait until it’s ready”. But you see no problem in pushing Wayland on people who can’t use it?
Please understand that nobody will ever successfuly push through incomplete software. Not on Linux. There’s nothing you or anybody can do to convince people that incomplete software is complete and usable when it’s not.
Both Wayland and X11 are an artificial hurdle to someone, so at least pick the sane choice with a future.
No, Wayland is doing fine.
Oh no, Wayland isn’t X11. It’s almost as if Wayland isn’t supposed to be 1:1 bug compatible with Xorg.
I don’t know about what text editors you use, but my text editor doesn’t allow malware to log all keystrokes, tamper with windows of other apps, steal clipboard contents without consent, inject keystrokes into other windows, escalate privileges, and install rootkits that persist OS re-installs using the escalated privileges.
People work on Wayland. Nobody works on Xorg. Alternatives don’t exist.
Do you need a refresher about systemd, pulseaudio, etc.? I’m not in the systemd haters camp, but pulseaudio broke regularly for me. Yet every distro included pulseaudio.