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

471–480 of 502 posts

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

#471

Post by Blikkentrekker »

NetMageSCW wrote: post #440
Blikkentrekker wrote: post #352

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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.

Yes, that, or the “Use case for ?” memes. Ebassi once got father angry at me after finding out that I did not run Polkit or a system dbus on my system and alledged that I must not know what they do because everyone would want that.

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

#472

Post by antisol »

dralley wrote: post #173
Teknoman117 wrote: post #109

I strongly disagree with the premise. Regardless of how you feel about Wayland, its creation set off _massive_ improvements across the entire Linux graphics stack. For those of us who were using Linux on the desktop in decades past, remember when you couldn't use a GPU without X running? Remember the days when you needed an X session running in order to use CUDA or OpenCL? Remember the days when the entire graphics d…

Same thing with Pulse Audio People cursed the name for years, because it exposed all of the terrible, glitchy audio hardware drivers and refused on general principle to work around the issues to the degree that previous audio solutions had. And the result was that while the experience was inconsistent and buggy for years, it did eventually drag the Linux audio stack into a better place.

Pulseaudio was, is, and always will be trash.

The ALSA drivers for all the creative labs cards worked perfectly well. I never had any issues at all under ALSA, or under OSS before that.

I've had tons of issues with audio bugs once pulseaudio was introduced. To this day the most common solution to any audio issue I see is `pkill -9 pulseaudio`. And it solves the problem about 99% of the time.

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

#473

Post by righthand »

scheeseman486 wrote: post #456
righthand wrote: post #371

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wasnt wrong. It took them 17 years to come to an agreement. Just because they “just decided” this year or last year or whatever doesn’t make me wrong. And my point about them not caring about timely decisions was in my original comment so I didn’t write some garbage hopping from one idea to another. Seek help over your anger issues.

The cadence of decisions being made and problems being solved on Wayland has massively increased over the last 5 years and being ignorant to that and implying that the project is still spinning it's wheels is delusional. Calling your posts garbage isn't an expression of anger. You should try being a little less sensitive when people mock you for saying dumb shit.

The cadence is still too slow and pathetic but clearly your dip shit brain is involved with Wayland as you’re getting defensive about it. These things should have been established 10 years ago at the very least, as the article says, computers and display servers aren’t a new puzzle to figure out. You should lay yourself down on some railroad tracks so you can remove your dumb shit self from this world.

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

#474

Post by ndiddy »

bigyabai wrote: post #401
ndiddy wrote: post #380

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's true that Gamescope is a Wayland compositor, but it does not support Wayland clients ("native Wayland programs" if you're unfamiliar with *nix terminology). In handheld mode, everything you see on your screen is an X11 client running under Xwayland. I have no interest in arguing over whether X11 or Wayland is better (I've used both and both work fine for me) but I would not use the Steam Deck to argue that Wayla…

Using Xwayland is using Wayland. It's entirely a moot point anyways, since Wine/Proton supports a native Wayland background these days anyhow.

There’s a gradient. For example, if I ran rootful Xwayland, ran an X11 DE inside that, and then solely used X11 software, it would technically be using Wayland but it would not be what most people are referring to when they are discussing the Wayland transition on the Linux desktop. Similarly, arguing that Wayland is being battle-tested by hundreds of thousands of gamers by citing a single-tasking gaming focused Wayland compositor that only supports X11 clients is not what most people are referring to discussing the Wayland transition either.

Wine/Proton may support a native Wayland backend but it’s not currently being used on the Steam Deck.

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

#476

Post by Blikkentrekker »

antisol wrote: post #465
Blikkentrekker wrote: post #205

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The python 2 to 3 situation was a similar colossal mistake of honestly incompetent developers who really enjoy programming in their free time who don't understand that time is money for most people. By comparison, Rust with its edition system understands this. But this is the major issue. They don't understand that even if Wayland had feature-parity with X11. The simple fact that it works differently means that if I…

Indeed. And what many seem to fail to notice is that at it's core it's exactly the same mistake being made all over again. A mistake that I've seen so many times over and over again, increasingly commonly in recent years, which can be summed up thusly: "I want to make some incompatible changes in my thing that is being widely used by (say) thousands or millions of people. I could spend a bunch of time ensuring I'm ba…

> Indeed. And what many seem to fail to notice is that at it's core it's exactly the same mistake being made all over again. A mistake that I've seen so many times over and over again, increasingly commonly in recent years, which can be summed up thusly:

Yes, just as the idea of “We will start anew because the codebase is a mess and this time we'll make it clean.”. 10 years ago, whenever I saw something like that I would've said that person has zero actual experience working as a programmer. I've seen teams go through this multiple times but at the end, the new codebase when all the features are added is just as much of a mess as the old, at best a slight improvement. People who say this just underestimate the scope. But these people have experience. They're just optimistic and full of wishful thinking maybe?

> See, I don't think you're giving them enough credit. Or is it too much credit? These are not stupid people. I say they do understand this, they just don't care about your time enough to do anything about it.

I disagree. I've talked with many of those people both online and in real life who don't understand that for most people time has value. They really just don't get it. They're not stupid; they just don't really think about it that way and don't have much to do in their lives aside from this one specific hobby.

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

#477

Post by antisol »

Blikkentrekker wrote: post #476
antisol wrote: post #465

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Indeed. And what many seem to fail to notice is that at it's core it's exactly the same mistake being made all over again. A mistake that I've seen so many times over and over again, increasingly commonly in recent years, which can be summed up thusly: "I want to make some incompatible changes in my thing that is being widely used by (say) thousands or millions of people. I could spend a bunch of time ensuring I'm ba…

> Indeed. And what many seem to fail to notice is that at it's core it's exactly the same mistake being made all over again. A mistake that I've seen so many times over and over again, increasingly commonly in recent years, which can be summed up thusly: Yes, just as the idea of “We will start anew because the codebase is a mess and this time we'll make it clean.”. 10 years ago, whenever I saw something like that I w…

  > 10 years ago, whenever I saw something like that I would've said that person has zero actual experience working as a programmer
That, or maybe they've just never really tried the whole "I'll start from scratch and get it right this time" thing and discovered for themselves how misguided it is.

It's also really easy to tell yourself "but this time I'll get it right!". I'm still guilty of believing it sometimes.

  > But these people have experience. They're just optimistic and full of wishful thinking maybe?
Or perhaps simple myopia and lack of long term planning? I don't know.

I feel like it's probably easy in a project like this to lose sight of what regular users want, or to feel like you know better and so should be able to dictate to them what they should want. And because you've had your head buried in the project for a decade, dealing only with team members who share all the same opinions, you're shocked when people don't find "but if you ever get a HDR monitor it might be marginally better" to be a compelling reason to have to re-write all the scripts they've been building and relying on for 20 years.

  > I disagree. I've talked with many of those people both online and in real life who don't understand that for most people time has value. They really just don't get it. They're not stupid; they just don't really think about it that way and don't have much to do in their lives aside from this one specific hobby.
Yeah you might be right. I don't have anything to back up my opinion, I was really just trying not to assume they're stupid. And I feel like I have run into people like this.

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

#478

Post by MrDrMcCoy »

Blikkentrekker wrote: post #355
simonask wrote: post #303

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're lamenting the use of time by people, but you are not those people's boss. People work on what they want to work on. There is no rule that people who worked on Wayland (and I happen to think they did a great job) would have worked on Xorg instead, or that the original motivations for building Wayland are invalid.

Well that's the issue with free software isn't it. In properitary software people work on what their boss tells them to work on which is decided by market research based on what people want. Others said in this thread that Wayland in many ways was more so trying to solve issues for developers than for users and that's true.

Market research is far more often used to measure what will make or save the most money that they can get away with. Nobody cares about what the plebs want.

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

#479

Post by jauntywundrkind »

tmtvl wrote: post #360
mid-kid wrote: post #317

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What other options are there?

SolydXK. There's others, like Siduction and whatnot, but Solyd is pretty solid.

I did a bunch of distro hopping in the 90's but locked onto Debian (mainly testing, now largely unstable) not long after. I'm still just not sure what compels people elsewhere. Especially now: the Debian installer was vicious if you were a newbie, but I hear it's pretty ok now.

This is largely a me problem! I don't understand what the value add is of other offerings. It's unclear what else would be good or why. Debian feels like it really has what's needed now. Things work. Hardware support is good. Especially in the systemd era, so much of what used to make distros unique is just no longer a factor; there's common means for most Linux 's operation. My gut tells me we are forking and flavoring for not much at all. Aside from learning some new commands, learning Arch has been such a recent non-event for me. It feels like we are having weird popularity contests over nothing. And that amplifies my sense of: why not just use Debian?

But I also have two and a half plus decades of Linux, and my inability to differentiate and assess from beginner's eyes is absolutely key to this all. I try to ask folks, but it's still all so unclear what real motivations, and more, what real differences there are.

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

#480

Post by jrm4 »

palata wrote: post #453
jrm4 wrote: post #386

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, double down -- You personally are not forced to use it, but today this is a terrible argument that, perhaps subconsciously, reinforces the falsehood that "you don't have to use it" is an okay and reasonable response, when it's really merely a selfish one. Again, Linux is everywhere and the better thing to do is to consider how the bad rollout of Wayland affects everyone -- especially, e.g. that rising 2 or 3 perc…

> It is FAR more important to raise that marketshare I don't see why. Most users of OSes couldn't care less about their OS. The vast majority of humans are happy with Windows, macOS, iOS or Android. To the point where those who aren't are a rounding error. I don't want to make Linux look like Windows, such that those people can finally use Linux and I can proudly look at a marketshare. If a Linux distro ever gets a "…

eh, look up Richard Stallman et al. This isn't about "user preference," it's about preserving freedom in computing.
Post reply on HN