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

Wayland explanations are STILL confusing and worrying users

Wayland explanations are STILL confusing and worrying users

Posted Jun 14, 2013 19:04 UTC (Fri) by daniels (subscriber, #16193)
In reply to: Wayland explanations are STILL confusing and worrying users by dlang
Parent article: The Wayland Situation: Facts About X vs. Wayland (Phoronix)

Of course there are specific examples. xeyes and xedit will be better without bulk image transfer. Much like vim and irssi (which I use every day) are much faster over a remote shell protocol than either X11 or a bulk image transfer protocol. But, as I've said repeatedly, I'm talking about the vast majority (by usage) of apps and toolkits.

(And hey, if that's bothering you, why? XWayland continues to exist as a first-class solution. Just do remote forwarding to that.)


(Log in to post comments)

Wayland explanations are STILL confusing and worrying users

Posted Jun 18, 2013 11:51 UTC (Tue) by nix (subscriber, #2304) [Link]

Well, I just hope that text editors forever continue to target X rather than paying the least attention to Wayland, then, since you don't care about text editors.

FWIW, with the exception of a bunch of molecular modellers almost the only people I have ever seen use X in anger outside Linux distributors, and the only people I have ever seen use remote X routinely, have used it overwhelmingly for... text editing! In fact this is a majority use case for *all* computers used in work environments, if you include word processors and spreadsheets, which will suffer the same scroll-related problems as text editors if run remotely over anything implemented via bitmap-hurling.

But you don't care about that, as you have made abundantly clear by comparing those of us who care about remote use of such applications to people using xeyes. I'm not sure what use cases you *do* care about, if text editors and word processors and spreadsheets are all excluded. It doesn't leave much except for video playback and web browsers, and if you only want to use *those* you might as well use a tablet these days.

Wayland explanations are STILL confusing and worrying users

Posted Jun 18, 2013 12:09 UTC (Tue) by daniels (subscriber, #16193) [Link]

Kristian's rolling-hash implementation of remote Wayland is _specifically designed_ for scrolling content, be it text or images. Have a look at:
http://people.freedesktop.org/~krh/rolling-hash/f8.png
http://people.freedesktop.org/~krh/rolling-hash/f9.png
http://people.freedesktop.org/~krh/rolling-hash/f8-f9-deb...

And then come back and tell me again how no-one working on Wayland cares about terminals, text editors, or scrolling text.

How you've taken from me saying that the overwhelming majority of my day is spent in vim, irssi, Evolution, Evince, or Chrome scrolling huge chunks of text, that I don't care about scrolling text, is honestly beyond me. I'm not comparing scrolling text to xeyes either: I'm saying that even X11 isn't a very efficient protocol for scrolling text, because oddly enough the most efficient protocol for doing that is text-based. Like SSH. Just as X11 is the most efficient protocol for transferring X11 primitives.

I'm done arguing with people who have constructed strawman motives for a strawman protocol, neither of which bear any resemblance whatsoever to reality.

Wayland explanations are STILL confusing and worrying users

Posted Jun 18, 2013 13:09 UTC (Tue) by nix (subscriber, #2304) [Link]

Awesome!

Why on earth didn't you just say that to start with rather than going all sarcastic and contemptuous? All I said was that I couldn't think of an implementation -- that doesn't mean there isn't one.

Wayland explanations are STILL confusing and worrying users

Posted Jun 18, 2013 13:57 UTC (Tue) by daniels (subscriber, #16193) [Link]

I've said it over and over, repeatedly, time after time, in the comments here. But unfortunately people insist on ascribing motivations we don't have to us, while critiquing a design which doesn't exist. Gets pretty tiring after a while, to be told neither myself or Kristian care about text, which is why the hypothetical design the internet has collectively made up for Wayland remoting (despite pointers to the actual design) is deficient. Really, really tiring.

Wayland explanations are STILL confusing and worrying users

Posted Jun 25, 2013 20:31 UTC (Tue) by nix (subscriber, #2304) [Link]

That's what happens when you implement impossible magic. People don't realise it could possibly work, so assume it doesn't. :)

Wayland explanations are STILL confusing and worrying users

Posted Jun 18, 2013 13:11 UTC (Tue) by nix (subscriber, #2304) [Link]

Kristian's rolling-hash implementation
Oof. So you're still analyzing bitmaps on every scroll to determine that they consist of scrolled text. Cache-ruinous compared to what is currently done. Oh well, at least you're not throwing them over the network.


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