In response to Wayland Breaks Your Bad Software

I say that the technical merits are irrelevant because I don’t believe that they’re a major factor any more in most people moving or not moving to Wayland.

With only a slight amount of generalization, none of these people will be moved by Wayland’s technical merits. The energetic people who could be persuaded by technical merits to go through switching desktop environments or in some cases replacing hardware (or accepting limited features) have mostly moved to Wayland already. The people who remain on X are there either because they don’t want to rebuild their desktop environment, they don’t want to do without features and performance they currently have, or their Linux distribution doesn’t think their desktop should switch to Wayland yet.

    • orangeboats@lemmy.world
      121·
      1 year ago

      I feel that the biggest mistake of X11’s protocol design is the idea of a “root window” that is supposed to cover the whole screen.

      Perhaps that worked greatly in the 1990s, but it’s just completely incompatible with multi-displays that we commonly see in modern setups. Hacks upon hacks were involved to make multi-displays a possibility on X11. The root window no longer corresponded to a single display. In heterogenous display setups, part of the root window is actually invisible.

      Later on we decided to stack compositing on top of the already-hacky mess, and it was so bad that many opted to disable the compositor (no Martha, compositors are more than wobbly windows!).

      And then there’s the problem of sandboxing programs… Which is completely unmappable to X11 even with hacks.

      • michaelrose@lemmy.ml
        56·
        1 year ago

        Multiple displays work fine. The only thing that needs to be drawn in the root window is attractive backgrounds sized to your displays I’m not sure why you think that is hacky or complicated.

        • West Siberian Laika@lemm.ee
          81·
          1 year ago

          Multiple displays only work as long as you have identical resolutions and refresh rates. Good luck mixing monitors with different scaling factors and refresh rates on X11.

          • Hexarei@programming.dev
            31·
            1 year ago

            I run multiple refresh rates without any trouble, one 165hz monitor alongside my other 60hz ones. Is that supposed to be broken somehow?

          • michaelrose@lemmy.mlEnglish
            12·
            1 year ago

            This wasn’t true in 2003 when I started using Linux in fact the feature is so old I’m not sure exactly when it was implemented. You have always been able to have different resolutions and in fact different scaling factors. It works like this

            You scale your lower DPI display or displays UP to match your highest DPI and let X scale down to the physical size. HIGHER / LOWER = SCALE FACTOR. So with 2 27" monitors where one is 4k and the other is 1080p the factor is 2, a 27" 4K with a 24" 1080p is roughly 1.75.

            Configured like so everything is sharp and UI elements are the same size on every screen. If your monitors are vertically aligned you could put a window between monitors and see the damn characters lined up correctly.

            If you use the soooo unfriendly Nvidia GPU you can actually configure this in its GUI for configuring your monitors. If not you can set with xrandr the argument is --scale shockingly enough

            Different refresh rates also of course work but you ARE limited to the lower refresh rate. This is about the only meaningful limitation.

    • woelkchen@lemmy.world
      10·
      1 year ago

      This is not an insult to the people behind X11.

      The people behind X11 agree and that’s why they founded Wayland.