• solrize@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    10
    arrow-down
    54
    ·
    3 months ago

    Can anyone explain why Wayland exists or who cares about it? X has been around forever, it sucks but it works and everything supports it. Alternatives like NeWS came around that were radically better, but were too soon or relied too much on corporate support, so they faded. The GNU project originally intended to write its own thing, but settled for using X. Now there’s Wayland though, which seems like a slight improvement over X, but mostly kind of a lateral move.

    If you’re going to replace X, why not do something a lot better? If not actual NeWS, then something that incorporates some of its ideas. I think Squeak was like that but I don’t know much about it.

      • Vincent@feddit.nl
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        3 months ago

        Likewise, there are plenty of definitions of “better” that make Wayland a lot better. It’s just that it’s a lot of work to make something better, especially for some interpretations of “better”.

    • unknowing8343@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      33
      ·
      3 months ago

      But Wayland is waaay better than X in basically everything? Performance and security are simply in another league entirely. And these 2 are the most important factors.

      The rest of the “features” will be eventually there. In fact, mostly are there already. I’ve been using Wayland 2 years without issues. The important thing is that now the sofware is solid, the code is clean and the performance is amazing. Growing from there will be so much better than from X11.

          • 𝘋𝘪𝘳𝘬@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            3 months ago

            The screen capture protocol was merged a month ago.

            That’s part of my issue I have with Wayland protocols. It was added a month ago. After several years! During research I found discussions ~6 years old, this PR was 2 years old, and superseded a 4 years old other request.

            In the meantime some environments implemented that on their own without waiting for the protocol. If I understand correctly: Gnome as well as KDE have implemented it outside the protocol. And Hyprland devs forked wlroots to advance development faster and also add that. (Correct me if I’m wrong.)

            Since labwc uses wlroots (but is a bit slow with adapting to new versions) it will take quite some time before I can put a checkmark after my last usecase. I am optimistic that it will work. But I accepted that it may take several years to add new functionality and a few months before the functionality arrives in wlroots and at some point after that in labwc.

            • tekato@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              3 months ago

              Yes. Wayland protocols take too long to get merged. Actually, a few days ago some people (mostly Valve guys) got tired of it and took action by proposing changes[1, 2, 3, 4]to the way new protocols are handled. Hopefully it gets better. Also, if your compositor is based on wlroots, then you might get support for the new protocol very soon.

    • Fonzie!@ttrpg.network
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      26
      ·
      3 months ago

      From what I can see it mostly does ease of development better; it’s a completely new and rather lean codebase, and it’s seen as an investment in compatibility with graphical applications.

      Also, it has lock screens. X cannot do lock screens; it can have an app being full screen and pray to some collection of deities that nothing will come in front of it or that the fake lock screen won’t draw far too small, but it cannot natively do secure lockscreens that are guaranteed to work.
      So there, it does something much better: security.

    • vga@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      I have been using X11 since 1996, and I never felt that it was very good. Sure, at the start it was better the then state-of-the-art desktop (Windows 95), mostly thanks to Linux, but that advantage went away in 2001 when OS/X was released. And even Windows went past it at some point, perhaps around Windows 7 or 8.

      Wayland took a long time to get there, but it definitely is there today.

    • priapus@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      You answered your question of why Wayland exists right after asking it. X sucks. Wayland is a very significant improvement, I’m not sure why you think it’s a lateral move.

      Also, X works for some cases, but not all, just lime Wayland. Using multiple refresh rates doesnt work well, HDR has no hope of ever working, and fractional scaling is horrible. Wayland has initial support for HDR and great support for the other two.

    • SimplyTadpole@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      3 months ago

      I don’t know how or why, but I get absolutely atrocious stuttering while playing games on X11 that simply doesn’t occur with Wayland, so X is just not an option for me.

    • Possibly linux@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      3 months ago

      Wayland cuts out the need for a display server. It also has the benefit of being designed for hardware made in this century