Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Wayland set the Linux Desktop back by 10 years?

omar.yt

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

431–440 of 502 posts

Re: Wayland set the Linux Desktop back by 10 years?

#431

Post by NetMageSCW »

palata wrote: post #329
bvrmn wrote: post #296

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Who is forced to use it? Just use X11, as you said (many times) you do already. Recent versions of gnome session are compiled only with wayland support in archlinux. To change DE or distribution or use custom package is quite a stretch to call it's not forced.

But then it's not Wayland's fault: Gnome decided to move to it and stop supporting X. I don't like systemd and the fact that mainstream distros push for it, but as a result I use a distro that gives me the choice (Gentoo). Who am I to tell the distro maintainer what they should do for free ?

Just because it’s free doesn’t mean you shouldn’t call them out on their stupidity.

Re: Wayland set the Linux Desktop back by 10 years?

#432

Post by NetMageSCW »

palata wrote: post #324
flohofwoe wrote: post #315

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The main problem of Wayland is fragmentation, technical problems could be solved by throwing work at it, but not as long as Wayland is "just a protocol". Designing it as a protocol (and with optional extensions on top!), instead of a traditional centralized implementation was a pretty stupid decision (and not just in hindsight). Instead of bundling forces to improve a single implementation like it was the case with X…

I feel like it's a philosophical question. I like freedom and diversity. I don't want Linux to be like Windows or macOS with one window manager, one init system, etc. I like that people (and I) can experiment. Is it less efficient than paying for Windows and macOS? Probably. Is it less polished? Certainly. But that's exactly what I want. If I wanted Windows or macOS, I would use Windows or macOS.

But that attitude means that “the year of the Linux desktop” will never actually arrive because the vast majority don’t want less polished, hard to choose, undocumented testing.

Re: Wayland set the Linux Desktop back by 10 years?

#433

Post by lyu07282 »

dismalaf wrote: post #419
lyu07282 wrote: post #410

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> There's been recent news pieces here about stuff like age verification that is firmly coming from the left. California and New York are blue states that implement age verification, but Texas, Alabama and Utah for example also implemented similar laws, it IS bipartisan. Its a pretty staggering how the right was able to brand themselves this way, the most ideologically authoritarian belief system and people think its…

> Its like you think the democratic party or the UK Labor party is ideologically aligned with China, North Korea, Cuba or Venezuela? Why not show my whole sentence in context? Address what I actually wrote? Instead of just making shit up... I think this is actually the worst bad-faith comment I've seen on the internet, and that's saying something...

But what is your issue there? You said

> Leftist states are absolutely authoritarian, from the UK jailing people for social media posts to China to extreme examples like NK, Cuba and Venezuela.

So what is the issue you are having with the sentence you quoted? You clearly identified them all as "leftist states". If "Leftist states are absolutely authoritarian", are right-wing states not?

Also I think its an insult to China to compare them in any way to the UK, yet another thing you will never understand.

Re: Wayland set the Linux Desktop back by 10 years?

#434

Post by hysan »

tapoxi wrote: post #96
xbar wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It reads like a user that tried Wayland again last week, found the same issues and wrote a piece that tried to summarize why they remain sad after 17 years of waiting for Wayland to address its issues.

There is no "Wayland" to address these issues. It's like asking "web" to address its issues. Wayland is a protocol with multiple different implementations.

This is quite wrong? There are some features that get blocked from being implemented because Wayland refused to define a protocol for everyone to implement. Window positioning being a recent example of how progress can get blocked for many years due to Wayland.

Re: Wayland set the Linux Desktop back by 10 years?

#435

Post by Teknoman117 »

snvzz wrote: post #377
Crespyl wrote: post #245

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The argument that can be made is that we never would've gotten PipeWire without going through PulseAudio first.

We got the much superior jack two years before pulseaudio was even a thing. Pulseaudio was a derail of Linux audio. We could have skipped it entirely.

Comparing JACK and PulseAudio is like comparing apples and oranges. And honestly, JACK by itself is unsuitable as an audio server for general desktop usage.

JACK doesn’t support device hotplug (ya know, connecting and disconnecting a headset, something most of us do) and it also doesn’t support multiple applications generating audio without the user having to configure how audio is mixed.

JACK is designed for low latency in environments like Digital Audio Workstations (DAW) where you know 1) what audio hardware is present at all times, and 2) what applications are going to generate audio.

Many people who use/used JACK ran a PulseAudio bridge on top of it for every application that wasn’t the one or two applications that needed ultra low latency audio.

PulseAudio had some major warts, but JACK wasn’t some panacea that did everything better.

Re: Wayland set the Linux Desktop back by 10 years?

#436

Post by subscribed »

elsjaako wrote: post #375
darthoctopus wrote: post #255

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Who is forced to use it? Just use X11, as you said (many times) you do already. I can no longer use GNOME on X11, and the decision to remove support was a deliberate one. Users are definitely being forced.

You can use an old version of Gnome and accept older software, or you can organize some fellow GNOME enthusiasts to maintain it, possibly with paid developers. You can't legally get old versions of Windows or Photoshop, and you can't legally fix them if you find problems. GNOME gives you that freedom. This isn't just a theoretical possibility: both MATE and Cinnamon are GNOME forks. You can argue that maintaining and…

Unless security patches are still developed and released for older versions, I'd strongly discourage it.

Re: Wayland set the Linux Desktop back by 10 years?

#437

Post by NetMageSCW »

MBCook wrote: post #144
andrewstuart2 wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My experience lately has been similar. Most things work well now. But, I think the article has some valid points about how long it's taken to get even this far. And it just kinda sucks that some things are still broken or don't have alternatives (the #1 thing I miss right now is Barrier (Synergy) for using my macbook from my linux desktop). HDR gaming on linux is possible thanks to Valve but it's still nowhere near a…

The amount of time it’s taken to get here I think is THE fair criticism. They had an absolute ton of work to do to design it and get it all running. It was never going to be fast. And it’s not like they could order any of the desktop environments to do what they want. There have always seemed to have been commenters who were annoyed it didn’t come practically done with every feature from X plus 30 more from the day o…

Based on the article, here is still a decade in the future and that is the main complaint.

Re: Wayland set the Linux Desktop back by 10 years?

#438

Post by NetMageSCW »

philwelch wrote: post #92
renewiltord wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Decades of using Linux desktops and nothing has ever changed hahaha. Users still complain things don’t work. Fans still say “oh what a first world problem”. Like a little 2004 era time loop. People still installing Dapper Drake. Haha. In the time that people have been talking about the Wayland future to today where they’re still talking about it I have lived in 3 continents, met my wife and had a child, and experienc…

Hey at least they finished Perl 6!

I think it’s more like they gave up on Perl 6, admitted it was a mistake, and renamed all that work like it wasn’t related to Perl. Where it languishes in mostly obscurity.

Re: Wayland set the Linux Desktop back by 10 years?

#439

Post by pavlus »

nubinetwork wrote: post #182

Same old complaints copy pasted from that one github rant... "my obs doesn't work, copy paste doesn't work..." That stuff has literally been working fine for years...

That rant is especially funny, because its author (probonopd) was responsible for some of the things he was ranting about, by ignoring pull requests to his projects, that would resolve them.

Re: Wayland set the Linux Desktop back by 10 years?

#440

Post by NetMageSCW »

Blikkentrekker wrote: post #352
__d wrote: post #257

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wouldn't say "mentally unstable", but zealous is probably fair. To create something like the GNU project, or OpenBSD, or Linux, takes serious levels of commitment. You really have to believe in it, and to a degree, you have to _will_ it into being. Along the way, you need to explain why your crazy idea is worth all the sacrifice, discourage those who would distract your team members, maintain your own and the team'…

> That said, we all enjoy the fruits of their labors ... Well, we also enjoy the issues. When you talk to them they are extremely uncompromising in practice and extremely tribalistic. I think “tribalistic” is maybe a better word for what I feel is an issue. “Not invented here syndrome” reigns supreme in open source and in general it's full of extreme fanboys who aren't willing to admit anything is wrong with “their t…

For some reason this is reminding of the Gimp developers decision to default to saving in Gimp format, even if you opened a JPEG file, and there response to complaints was if you don’t like it, don’t use Gimp. So I don’t.
Post reply on HN