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

The X.Org Server Is Abandonware?

phoronix.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

591–600 of 714 posts

Re: The X.Org Server Is Abandonware?

#591

Post by jhasse »

gtirloni wrote: post #148
darthrupert wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wayland was the last straw for me. It made me switch to Macs after 20 years of almost exclusive Linux on the desktop and a few dev stints. It was cool when my time was less expensive. I check the state of the linux world about once a year still. And obviously keep using it on the servers. Best of luck to everyone using it for desktop. I totally get why you do it, but it's just not for me right now.

Nobody is forcing you to use Wayland. Or are they? On Fedora it's a single line change em /etc to disable it (which I do because of Nvidia).

btw: Fedora automatically disables Wayland on Nvidia hardware (because Xwayland applications can't be accelerated IIRC).

Re: The X.Org Server Is Abandonware?

#592

Post by sergeykish »

wegs wrote: post #586
nialv7 wrote: post #517

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I find it really arrogant to claim "this software does everything I need, so it should never change", while in reality you are but an infinitesimally small part of the user base said software has to support. Sure, all the software can stay where they are if all the developers had to serve is you. But that is just not the reality.

There isn't a magical different userbase Linux has to serve which has somehow bizarre needs not served by thoughtfully-designed older software, but which newer, poorly-designed software somehow meets. Yes, we need a newer web browser, but that could run on old-school Linux/Unix just fine. Aside from that, there isn't anything wrong with nineties Linux which couldn't have been brought up to modern standards with a bit…

Maybe you should fine community that shares your views.

I don't use pulseaudio, networkmanager, desktop environment, works perfectly in Arch Linux [1]. Arch has great wiki, it is correct. System is quite transparent.

I am fine with systemd but, for example, Void Linux [2] uses runit, Alpine Linux [3] uses OpenRC and is compiled statically.

Arch Linux pacman serves my needs perfectly, it is quick, it shows only relevant information. AUR provides ready made PKGBUILDs.

Lots of Linux distributions is its strength. It allows people with niche requirements find its home. We are far better members of societies when supporting our system than grunting.

[1] https://www.archlinux.org/

[2] https://voidlinux.org/

[3] https://alpinelinux.org/

Re: The X.Org Server Is Abandonware?

#593

Post by School-Cotton »

wegs wrote: post #586
nialv7 wrote: post #517

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I find it really arrogant to claim "this software does everything I need, so it should never change", while in reality you are but an infinitesimally small part of the user base said software has to support. Sure, all the software can stay where they are if all the developers had to serve is you. But that is just not the reality.

There isn't a magical different userbase Linux has to serve which has somehow bizarre needs not served by thoughtfully-designed older software, but which newer, poorly-designed software somehow meets. Yes, we need a newer web browser, but that could run on old-school Linux/Unix just fine. Aside from that, there isn't anything wrong with nineties Linux which couldn't have been brought up to modern standards with a bit…

I think you would enjoy OpenBSD.

Re: The X.Org Server Is Abandonware?

#594

Post by School-Cotton »

phkahler wrote: post #512
WesolyKubeczek wrote: post #422

What looks like "typical Linux geeks being geeks" with this situation: 1) the old, mostly working thing is being abandoned in favor of 2) that new thing which doesn't work in so many cases it's laughable, even after 11 years. How many years was it between the concept of X and a working release at Palo Alto? Note that the new situation is so perfect for passing the buck from the windowing system to the compositors, an…

>> that new thing which doesn't work in so many cases it's laughable, even after 11 years. I've been using Wayland for years now and it works great. The one and only thing I use X for is OBS studio because they're still working out the window capture stuff, which BTW mean poking the right hole through security that X doesnt even have. Most the things that don't work well on Wayland are old junk.

Do you use Chrome? Scrolling with a touchpad still doesn’t work on Wayland (it emulates discrete mouse wheel scrolling, rather than going pixel-by-pixel).

There is IIRC some chrome setting that fixes this, but it doesn’t help with chrome-based electron apps that don’t expose the internal settings (like Slack).

Re: The X.Org Server Is Abandonware?

#595

Post by jhasse »

andreyv wrote: post #204
dralley wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Wayland is also, with its forced composition, hostile to interactive applications requiring low latency, e.g. video games. https://www.gamingonlinux.com/articles/gnomes-mutter-gets-fu...

In fast-paced games it is essential to disable vertical synchronization as well, trading possible tearing for less input lag. Does Wayland support this?

Yes.

Re: The X.Org Server Is Abandonware?

#596

Post by jjt-yn_t »

blibble wrote: post #346
swiley wrote: post #67

Sure X.org is abandonware but there are serious problems Wayland still hasn't solved that X has. 1) Wayland is really slow. I don't know if it's the compositing or what but it's unusable on lighter hardware that X ran fine on. 2) Widget toolkits handling window decoration is awful. Before the large number of toolkits just meant some controls were a little different but now basic behavior changes based on how programm…

> Wayland is really slow. as a counterpoint: my sway (Wayland) system is the first one I've ever had where I can watch youtube, or vlc/mpv at 60fps without flickering, dropping frames or tearing I've used nvidia and radeon cards, plus intel onboard in this machine with X and none of them allowed all of the above the display server also remains responsive even if one client starts going nuts generally sway is consider…

Unclear which hardware you have working with sway?

Re: The X.Org Server Is Abandonware?

#597

Post by [deleted] »

RedShift1 wrote: post #561
WesolyKubeczek wrote: post #422

What looks like "typical Linux geeks being geeks" with this situation: 1) the old, mostly working thing is being abandoned in favor of 2) that new thing which doesn't work in so many cases it's laughable, even after 11 years. How many years was it between the concept of X and a working release at Palo Alto? Note that the new situation is so perfect for passing the buck from the windowing system to the compositors, an…

Imagine if all the work that has gone into Wayland went into Xorg... We'd have a pretty sweet graphical server.

[deleted]

Re: The X.Org Server Is Abandonware?

#598

Post by Const-me »

bsder wrote: post #528
WesolyKubeczek wrote: post #422

What looks like "typical Linux geeks being geeks" with this situation: 1) the old, mostly working thing is being abandoned in favor of 2) that new thing which doesn't work in so many cases it's laughable, even after 11 years. How many years was it between the concept of X and a working release at Palo Alto? Note that the new situation is so perfect for passing the buck from the windowing system to the compositors, an…

> 1) the old, mostly working thing is being abandoned in favor of Except that X11 is NOT "mostly working" for a significant amount of modern usages. Yes, if you happen to want to run your Terminal, Emacs, etc. remotely over a network connection, X11 is your huckleberry--but only because anything more complicated than a bitmap makes that a very difficult problem. If you want HiDPI, subpixel anti-aliasing, color calibr…

> X11 only works to a certain degree, some days, for some people, for some video cards.

Cases in point: this project, https://github.com/const-me/Vrmac/ a non-trivial demo such as 3D teapot or 2D tiger.

Run that in desktop, and you’ll see occasional tearing.

Run the same demo on top of bare OS kernel (i.e. reboot to console), and it will work flawlessly on top of DRM/KMS, on the same Raspberry Pi4.

Re: The X.Org Server Is Abandonware?

#599

Post by wegs »

School-Cotton wrote: post #593
wegs wrote: post #586

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There isn't a magical different userbase Linux has to serve which has somehow bizarre needs not served by thoughtfully-designed older software, but which newer, poorly-designed software somehow meets. Yes, we need a newer web browser, but that could run on old-school Linux/Unix just fine. Aside from that, there isn't anything wrong with nineties Linux which couldn't have been brought up to modern standards with a bit…

I think you would enjoy OpenBSD.

Computers aren't things I enjoy. They're things I stomach. I think I'd use OpenBSD if I were confident that after setting it up, it worked reliably, without changes, for the next few decades, with transparent system upgrades.

Part of that is working Bluetooth, power management, webcams, video conferencing, OBS, and similar. Historically, OpenBSD was behind Linux on working reliably.

Debian used to do this before:

1) It fell behind on hardware support, as laptops took over desktops; and

2) Ubuntu/Fedora started putting out massive numbers of half-baked technologies, and everything building atop those.

I switched to Ubuntu, without Gnome, but increasingly, things don't work without Ubuntu's UX, and snap shows a future I don't want to head down anymore.

I'll look into arch linux, as someone suggested.

Re: The X.Org Server Is Abandonware?

#600

Post by utxaa »

WesolyKubeczek wrote: post #422

What looks like "typical Linux geeks being geeks" with this situation: 1) the old, mostly working thing is being abandoned in favor of 2) that new thing which doesn't work in so many cases it's laughable, even after 11 years. How many years was it between the concept of X and a working release at Palo Alto? Note that the new situation is so perfect for passing the buck from the windowing system to the compositors, an…

yes. but to be fair is more like typical humans being typical humans.
Post reply on HN