User: Password:
|
|
Subscribe / Log in / New account

The Wayland Situation: Facts About X vs. Wayland (Phoronix)

The Wayland Situation: Facts About X vs. Wayland (Phoronix)

Posted Jun 10, 2013 21:17 UTC (Mon) by rahvin (subscriber, #16953)
In reply to: The Wayland Situation: Facts About X vs. Wayland (Phoronix) by Corkscrew
Parent article: The Wayland Situation: Facts About X vs. Wayland (Phoronix)

The "fork" also allows people to keep using X until they are convinced that Wayland is appropriate for their workload. This is what bothers me so much about people that are up in arms about Wayland. X11 isn't going anywhere. It hasn't changed much in a decade and it will likely continue to not change much for the next decade.

If Wayland becomes popular at some point down the road you might need to switch to use some application BUT I'd be willing to bet that at that point whatever issue you have with Wayland will be mostly addressed (though you will never address the underlying assumption that client side drawing is better) or at least band-aided over to be tolerable.


(Log in to post comments)

The Wayland Situation: Facts About X vs. Wayland (Phoronix)

Posted Jun 18, 2013 11:31 UTC (Tue) by nix (subscriber, #2304) [Link]

X11 isn't going anywhere --- but if people start targetting applications for Wayland, every single such application is an application I suddenly cannot run remotely with anything like the transport efficiency of X apps, particularly not if they are using anything for which GlyphSets would have been used (I don't really care if e.g. 3D games start to use Wayland).

And *that* is a loss of functionality. As mmarq has pointed out, Wayland only doesn't reduce functionality if *nobody targets it*. In which case its existence seems rather pointless.


Copyright © 2017, Eklektix, Inc.
Comments and public postings are copyrighted by their creators.
Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds