Some of those arguments are legit but like half is complaining about wayland being fundamentally different to xorg and obviously you cannot use straight xorg apps on it.
“Linux is inferior because it breaks all my powershell scripts and all my windows only apps. Don’t use linux.”
I mean, to play devil’s advocate here - if functionality that you need is all of a sudden swept out from under you then it doesn’t matter from an end user perspective if it’s not the intended design for Wayland - to the user, Wayland is broken in that regard.
A better equivalent would be if an application you used every day for the last 10 years all of a sudden has an update that kills features you used because that’s no longer part of the dev(s) vision. Or headphone jacks on phones. Or whatever that weird thing with Teslas where they disabled a sensor in an OTA update and replaced it with some other solution(?).
Or to modify the example you put, if Windows killed the cmd shell and only left powershell in a Windows Update.
I have an application that I need to use at work which will never fit Wayland’s design, short of me either finding a new job, keeping a Windows install around, or using a really old version of Linux around in a VM when X11 has completely disappeared from all distros (which won’t really work) - there will be nothing that I can do about it on the Wayland side because it’s highly unlikely the devs will update it to be compatible (since it’s a shock that they actually even had Linux support in the first place).
As it is, I currently just pop into an X11 session whenever I’m on working hours, it will suck that I can’t do that with Fedora come next release when they completely drop X from the repos.
Most points are just complaining that tools specifically designed for X don’t work on Wayland. That’s like hanging onto your childhood pants and complaining they don’t fit anymore.
And one of the first points is how Wayland crash will bring down all running applications - yep, just like on X11! But it’s somehow Wayland’s fault.
Besides the fact that on Wayland running apps can survive a compositor crash (I think new KDE will have that feature), which I doubt can be done on X11.
An X session depends on the main user process. Unless a DE picks the compositor as the main process then no, a compositor crash won’t affect the session. But they don’t do that, for obvious reasons, since the compositor is just a feature among others. They typically have a special program that takes that role, for example xfce4-session.
And one of the first points is how Wayland crash will bring down all running applications - yep, just like on X11! But it’s somehow Wayland’s fault.
They said that a Wayland window manager will bring down all apps, not a Wayland crash. Which, again, is not like it works on X, as I explained above. The window manager on X, like the compositor, is just another feature. If it crashes it just gets replaced and the session continues.
A WM crash does not bring down all the other applications… but an X11 server crash definitely does!
In wayland they are the same program (a.k.a. the compositor). User applications can be designed to survive a compositor crash, though many are not able yet
But many of those are actively used by people. I use screen recording, screen sharing, global menus, key automation and window automation every day. Even if I wanted to use Wayland I couldn’t. What exactly is it that you want me to do?
I suppose it explains why people have a bad attitude about Wayland when tools providing useful functionality are described as trojans.
X11 can (…mostly…) have great security by just providing a suitable X Security module to it. It just seems it wasn’t considered that big of an issue that anyone bothered. Nokia Maemo/Meego used to rock such a module.
Removed by mod
Some of those arguments are legit but like half is complaining about wayland being fundamentally different to xorg and obviously you cannot use straight xorg apps on it.
“Linux is inferior because it breaks all my powershell scripts and all my windows only apps. Don’t use linux.”
I mean, to play devil’s advocate here - if functionality that you need is all of a sudden swept out from under you then it doesn’t matter from an end user perspective if it’s not the intended design for Wayland - to the user, Wayland is broken in that regard.
A better equivalent would be if an application you used every day for the last 10 years all of a sudden has an update that kills features you used because that’s no longer part of the dev(s) vision. Or headphone jacks on phones. Or whatever that weird thing with Teslas where they disabled a sensor in an OTA update and replaced it with some other solution(?).
Or to modify the example you put, if Windows killed the cmd shell and only left powershell in a Windows Update.
I have an application that I need to use at work which will never fit Wayland’s design, short of me either finding a new job, keeping a Windows install around, or using a really old version of Linux around in a VM when X11 has completely disappeared from all distros (which won’t really work) - there will be nothing that I can do about it on the Wayland side because it’s highly unlikely the devs will update it to be compatible (since it’s a shock that they actually even had Linux support in the first place).
As it is, I currently just pop into an X11 session whenever I’m on working hours, it will suck that I can’t do that with Fedora come next release when they completely drop X from the repos.
This is literally comedy lmao.
Most points are just complaining that tools specifically designed for X don’t work on Wayland. That’s like hanging onto your childhood pants and complaining they don’t fit anymore.
And one of the first points is how Wayland crash will bring down all running applications - yep, just like on X11! But it’s somehow Wayland’s fault.
Besides the fact that on Wayland running apps can survive a compositor crash (I think new KDE will have that feature), which I doubt can be done on X11.
And I had exactly zero crashes of Wayland in my life, on any device.
An X session depends on the main user process. Unless a DE picks the compositor as the main process then no, a compositor crash won’t affect the session. But they don’t do that, for obvious reasons, since the compositor is just a feature among others. They typically have a special program that takes that role, for example
xfce4-session.They said that a Wayland window manager will bring down all apps, not a Wayland crash. Which, again, is not like it works on X, as I explained above. The window manager on X, like the compositor, is just another feature. If it crashes it just gets replaced and the session continues.
This is not what they are saying.
This does not happen on Xorg. If the WM crashes, it’s possible to kill it and restart it without exiting running applications.
A WM crash does not bring down all the other applications… but an X11 server crash definitely does!
In wayland they are the same program (a.k.a. the compositor). User applications can be designed to survive a compositor crash, though many are not able yet
But many of those are actively used by people. I use screen recording, screen sharing, global menus, key automation and window automation every day. Even if I wanted to use Wayland I couldn’t. What exactly is it that you want me to do?
deleted by creator
I suppose it explains why people have a bad attitude about Wayland when tools providing useful functionality are described as trojans.
X11 can (…mostly…) have great security by just providing a suitable X Security module to it. It just seems it wasn’t considered that big of an issue that anyone bothered. Nokia Maemo/Meego used to rock such a module.
deleted by creator
By that logic, is the compositor working any different than a trojan? Is there really a difference?
The Wayland compositor is always capturing all your keyboard and mouse as well. No permissions asked. Pretty sus.
deleted by creator