After more than forty years, everyone knows that it’s time to retire the X Window System – X11 for short – on account of it being old and decrepit. Or at least that’s what t…
I started linux with wayland and i have no clue why it’s such a controversy lmao.
I recently ran into an user that rarely used x11. We were testing lsfg-vk, and right now it has a bug that when you close the game it most of the time it hangs and doesn’t quick properly.
The person complained about having to open the terminal to kill the app when it hangs and I had to explain that this is not an issue for me because I use xkill which they never knew was a thing that avoided that whole mess of having to open a terminal to kill a window.
But anyways, not a big deal if you can no longer use xkill, it is a very handy tool that saves a lot of key presses but not a vital thing in the end.
The big issue holding me on x11 is that there is no way to merge multiple displays as one, something that on x11 is a very simple xrandr --setmonitor is impossible on wayland, there is no way to do it.
The fact that most new Linux users share your experience is exactly the reality this article fails to perceive. It is a old man who swears his slide rule is faster than your calculator.
The main issue is that some things still refuse to work with Wayland properly, as it requires a rewrite for certain cases due to a different architecture.
Overall, Wayland is superior, but the transition is not complete yet and some things are harder to adapt than others.
I want to correct “refuse to work” with “do not work” but it is a completely valid take that some Wayland stewards resist adding certain functionality (especially the GNOME folks).
I will take issue with “requires a rewrite”. Wayland is designed to be extended. It is more that things need to be added than fixed. Almost all the issues are due to security in Wayland. You need explicit support to do things (whereas X11 apps just do them and nobody stops them—even when they should).
I started linux with wayland and i have no clue why it’s such a controversy lmao.
I recently ran into an user that rarely used x11. We were testing lsfg-vk, and right now it has a bug that when you close the game it most of the time it hangs and doesn’t quick properly.
The person complained about having to open the terminal to kill the app when it hangs and I had to explain that this is not an issue for me because I use
xkillwhich they never knew was a thing that avoided that whole mess of having to open a terminal to kill a window.But anyways, not a big deal if you can no longer use
xkill, it is a very handy tool that saves a lot of key presses but not a vital thing in the end.The big issue holding me on x11 is that there is no way to merge multiple displays as one, something that on x11 is a very simple
xrandr --setmonitoris impossible on wayland, there is no way to do it.The fact that most new Linux users share your experience is exactly the reality this article fails to perceive. It is a old man who swears his slide rule is faster than your calculator.
The main issue is that some things still refuse to work with Wayland properly, as it requires a rewrite for certain cases due to a different architecture.
Overall, Wayland is superior, but the transition is not complete yet and some things are harder to adapt than others.
Totally fair take.
I want to correct “refuse to work” with “do not work” but it is a completely valid take that some Wayland stewards resist adding certain functionality (especially the GNOME folks).
I will take issue with “requires a rewrite”. Wayland is designed to be extended. It is more that things need to be added than fixed. Almost all the issues are due to security in Wayland. You need explicit support to do things (whereas X11 apps just do them and nobody stops them—even when they should).