Strong words

There seems to be some memo that I didn't get. _Why_ is the existence of Wayland a _bad_ thing? What else would be better? It is a long overdue refactoring of the display/rendering/windowing plumbing that is careful not to reinvent new wheels but replace old and wobbly ones. In the medium term it will allow X to drop a load of old cruft.

This will surely end up making the overstretched X maintainers' lives easier, and more fulfilling than bodging improvements that are better and more simply done elsewhere.

It seems to be well supported by Red Hat and hopefully Canonical will soon be getting actively involved too.

As for remote-X issues, I certainly don't disagree there's problems there.
Using Linux desktops over network X clients has been getting steadily worse over recent years, not because X is getting worse but because it is being asked to do more and more. GLib/cairo-based software expects textures and gradients where previously it was just pixels. SunRay thin clients got round to adding the X RENDER extension a couple of years ago, making the performance of GLib-based software on them merely sucky instead of snailishly unusable.

These problems, however, are not within Wayland's scope at present. Its design carefully leaves a clear field in which to fix them. And so long as workarounds like Xvnc and Xpra continue to work, we should at least not go backwards.

What's not to like? It seems to me that Wayland deserves our support and help during the inevitable teething issues rather than criticism.