These projects get a lot of criticism.
Why, and is it deserved?
Try out Proton Mail, the secure email that protects your privacy:
https://proton.me/mail/TheLinuxEXP
Grab a brand new laptop or desktop running Linux: https://www.tuxedocomputers.com/en
SUPPORT THE CHANNEL:
Get access to:
a Daily Linux News show
a weekly patroncast for more thoughts
your name in the credits
YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@thelinuxexp/join
Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/thelinuxexperiment
Or, you can donate whatever you want:
Liberapay: https://liberapay.com/TheLinuxExperiment/
↑ GET TLE MERCH
Support the channel AND get cool new gear: https://the-linux-experiment.creator-spring.com/
Timestamps:
00:00 Intro
01:04 Sponsor: Proton Mail
02:16 SystemD (of course)
07:04 Wayland
12:27 Ubuntu
15:38 Snaps
20:24 Flatpak
24:11 Gnome
30:34 Conclusion
31:11 Sponsor: Tuxedo Computers
I did - in my very first post. I won’t repeat it here because I don’t care. There are lots. But hey - you got your individual monitor scaling so… I guess fuck everything else yeah?
You mean the way X handled window positioning? Yeah, good riddance. That was always a bad way to handle things and has been a major pain in the ass for window managers that tried to do anything out of the ordinary. Removing that was a deliberate choice. I’m quite happy to trade that anti-feature for HDR, useful VRR support and no tearing, ever.
I mean the way literally every other display handles it other than Wayland which “knows better than I do” apparently. “You don’t want that - I know you don’t” is so pandering.
Windows allows it. MacOS allows it. Wayland is pure and perfect.
Yes, window management systems that are as old as X have that escape hatch of allowing positioning by global coordinates. It’s pretty much impossible to take that ability away from applications when it inevitably becomes an issue.
You can try to frame this as pandering, condescending, mean or the devs having a personal vendetta against your workflow all you want, there are tradeoffs with such fundamental design decisions which have been deliberated over a lot. You either make global window position the sole responsibility of the compositor or you expose control to applications and get an unmanageable mess, which you can’t fix.
Afaik, there are plans to implement additional client hints which applications can use to indicate desired window positioning or even manage relative position of multiple windows, but they don’t involve direct access to the global coordinates. This is mainly a concern for complex multi-window legacy applications which are currently stuck on xwayland. See this for example: https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/wayland/wayland-protocols/-/merge_requests/264
Do you have an issue that actually requires this or do you just have an issue with how a certain compositor handles window placement?
rofl
That’s hilariously stupid. Like every window management system other than Wayland is just an unmanageable mess because they allow this?
You’re arguing a particular problem and solutions to it rather than acknowledging the category of problem and the greater issue it shows. That it’s taken 20 years for the team to maybe kinda consider implementing basic functionality that is provided by every windowing system not named Wayland is f’ing ridiculous. And it’s not the only feature that has taken ages without being addressed. It’s a project team problem. Their ivory tower design didn’t address the real world usage and they lack the flexibility to deviate from their design.
This is like arguing with someone on the phoronix forums and I’m genuinely disappointed. This isn’t basic functionality, it’s a complicated design choice and just going: “do it the same way everyone else does lmao it’s not that hard” while ignoring all the problems this has caused over the years is incredibly disingenuous. I get it, you just want Windows, or MacOS or whatever traditional, windows inspired never-changing desktop UI you’re used to. You don’t care about things like different screen shapes, scrollable compositors or enabling new window management strategies. Ironically, most people can already have that with current Wayland compositors. It works fine for the vast majority of users. What’s so “ivory tower” and “not real world usage” about that? I’m using it. I have been since before it was made default in Fedora, because it solved my screen tearing issues immediately. I’m using it at work and at home. It’s fine. Yes there are missing features. No, it’s not “basic functionality” or complete deal breakers for everyone but a tiny subset of users. That obviously doesn’t stop some people from blowing it out of proportion apparently.
Fine, pivot to complaining about the pace of development instead. I’m sure everyone who has been successfully using Wayland for years is going to see your vague hints of what’s wrong with it and the Wayland devs will go back to working on X.
I should know better than to engage with someone willing to throw around meaningless buzzwords like ivory tower design.
My dude that was my point - you misunderstood it for complaining about the one exact example I gave. An example you seem to think is just unsolvable by the Wayland team despite having been addressed by “everyone else”. That example isn’t even so important. It’s a minor but expected feature that seemingly breaks the brilliant architecture of Wayland.
Well - I can’t. Pop_OS KDE doesn’t work on Nvidia in Wayland mode. Because nobody though to involve Nvidia in the discussions and just assumed they would change everything for 0.01% of their users. Well done Wayland team. 🤷