Wayland is the IPv6 of desktop technology
This.
The technical merits of Wayland are mostly irrelevant
151–160 of 203 posts
Re: The technical merits of Wayland are mostly irrelevant
#152Re: The technical merits of Wayland are mostly irrelevant
#153As a Linux outsider, the X/Wayland thing is bizarre to me. The story I hear over and over is "X is dead, the last stable release was thirteen years ago, Wayland is the future and I love it except for these two hundred things I need that are broken on it." Like what the hell.
The more I learn about Linux, the more I want to wake up from this nightmare. It is a fragmented hellscape.
Re: The technical merits of Wayland are mostly irrelevant
#154Earlier quoted context omitted.
> No, I'd say X11 wasn't designed to be run on the network [...] That's just wrong. X11 was designed from the ground up to be used on the network. It just happens that nowadays requirements are different from when it was originally designed. Running X11 on the network was quite a thing in Unis all over the world, where you could have dedicated dozens of X11 graphic terminal servers (tektronix used to make good ones)…
Also, X networking was mostly used within local university and company networks, and not over the internet backbone. Well-designed local networks can be very low latency, often noticeably lower latency than disk I/O.
To be fair, X doesn't work that well over even local networks with modern apps.
Serving X applications (eg: Chromium) from the Raspberry Pi I'm targeting to the Mac I'm developing on is an exercise in futility, even if it does make 'download this to the target' easier. It's a lot faster to run Safari on the Mac and scp the download to the Pi, just because of interface latency issues.
Re: The technical merits of Wayland are mostly irrelevant
#155The last time I played with Wayland: * It broke screen sharing things * It removed X forwarding * It made my copy-paste life more complicated * It made steam ui ever slower Were these points fixed? what is the current usability of Wayland on these fronts?
What was the copy/paste issue?
It needed extra work to get copy paste working in vim. Since then I think nvim natively supports it.
Re: The technical merits of Wayland are mostly irrelevant
#156Earlier quoted context omitted.
> if I were running multiple monitors each with different scaling factors and refresh rates, but that sounds pretty niche So basically you're calling almost every modern laptop + external screen setup "pretty niche". I wonder whose post is more silly.
I think every monitor I've seen in the last 20 years has had a 60 Hz refresh rate. Most people probably don't even know scaling options exist, so using different ones on different monitors is going to be niche, yeah. I just got a new laptop for work last month. HDR 4k display. It's still 60 Hz. More only matters for people who are really into gaming, and then you wouldn't be using a laptop.
Refresh rate - sure. But scaling?...
> Most people probably don't even know scaling options exist, so using different ones on different monitors is going to be niche, yeah.
If you don't know the thing exists, that doesn't mean you don't use it. Modern OSes adjust scaling automatically for the screen DPI. Otherwise using configs like Retina MacBook + 1440p displays, or 4k laptop + 4k external display would be very painful.
Re: The technical merits of Wayland are mostly irrelevant
#157Earlier quoted context omitted.
> if I were running multiple monitors each with different scaling factors and refresh rates, but that sounds pretty niche So basically you're calling almost every modern laptop + external screen setup "pretty niche". I wonder whose post is more silly.
Virtually every modern laptop with a dGPU runs Nvidia, so Wayland is still a no-go there too. (And no, if Nouveau is an option for you then you probably wouldn't have a dGPU in the first place.)
Linux on the laptops with Nvidia dGPU is miserable enough without X/Wayland discussions. I beleive people who are buying laptops to install Linux mostly use ones without dGPUs.
Re: The technical merits of Wayland are mostly irrelevant
#158> they don't want to do without features and performance they currently have FWIW I do agree about the features problem, especially on Ubuntu - where I can only assume they have altered Wayland/Mutter just enough to break screen sharing. I don't have the problems on my personal NisOS machine, although to be fair I haven't used GNOME on my personal machine in >1y. Then there's also missing functionality, such as input…
Until someone gifts me three 144hz monitors and a graphics card that can meaningfully drive them, I will continue to not care.
Re: The technical merits of Wayland are mostly irrelevant
#159Wayland is the poster child for a rewrite that tries to be 'simple' and in doing so over-complicates things by under specification. Other commenters have mentioned that usability extension issues but I wanted to discuss my experience as someone who maintains their own wayland client (for drawterm: https://github.com/9front/drawterm ). There are plenty of technical differences between how KDE, Gnome, and Wlroots that…
> key repeat yourself...
now I understand why pressing "Supr" on Eclipse, doesn't repeat and removes anything more than a single character. Pretty anoying
Re: The technical merits of Wayland are mostly irrelevant
#160Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think every monitor I've seen in the last 20 years has had a 60 Hz refresh rate. Most people probably don't even know scaling options exist, so using different ones on different monitors is going to be niche, yeah. I just got a new laptop for work last month. HDR 4k display. It's still 60 Hz. More only matters for people who are really into gaming, and then you wouldn't be using a laptop.
Refresh rate - sure. But scaling?... > Most people probably don't even know scaling options exist, so using different ones on different monitors is going to be niche, yeah. If you don't know the thing exists, that doesn't mean you don't use it. Modern OSes adjust scaling automatically for the screen DPI. Otherwise using configs like Retina MacBook + 1440p displays, or 4k laptop + 4k external display would be very pai…
To be honest I've never seen scaling done well. I just plugged my 32" 4k monitor into my 16" windows work laptop (both 4k), and things on the monitor are too big, even after tweaking!
I have everything set to 100% scaling because that's a low as you can put it. The defaults had my laptop at 250% (!!!) and external monitor at 150%, which makes the laptop in particular look like some cramped 800x600 monitor out of 1995. In theory I'd like to have my external display be at something like 75% because it's so much larger than the laptop, but I've never seen any OS support this. Does wayland let you do fractional scales like this?
Edit: I also just tried plugging my 4k monitor into my Linux laptop (with a 1920x1080 screen), and it at least defaults both to 100%, which is more sane than "modern" windows. Again I'd probably prefer 75% scaling on the 1080 monitor because things are otherwise too big.