116
The cost of maintaining Xorg
(mastodon.social)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 29 Nov 2023
116 points (93.9% liked)
Linux
48132 readers
480 users here now
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Linux is a family of open source Unix-like operating systems based on the Linux kernel, an operating system kernel first released on September 17, 1991 by Linus Torvalds. Linux is typically packaged in a Linux distribution (or distro for short).
Distributions include the Linux kernel and supporting system software and libraries, many of which are provided by the GNU Project. Many Linux distributions use the word "Linux" in their name, but the Free Software Foundation uses the name GNU/Linux to emphasize the importance of GNU software, causing some controversy.
Rules
- Posts must be relevant to operating systems running the Linux kernel. GNU/Linux or otherwise.
- No misinformation
- No NSFW content
- No hate speech, bigotry, etc
Related Communities
Community icon by Alpár-Etele Méder, licensed under CC BY 3.0
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
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. The "dead" Xorg works perfectly with everything. That's the bar.
When I get a checkbox on the login screen saying "use Wayland" (or when the distro does it by default) I need everything to work. If everything does not work, I do not use it.
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. I have no incentive to take part in this particular rat race.
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.