Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Running Wayland: It Works, But A Lot Of Work Remains

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #61
    Originally posted by R___ View Post
    This is a bad time to push Wayland. Valve is trying to port games, and Windows 8 is going to alienate users (who won't have a stable OS to move to due to Wayland). Obviously Wayland won't be ready to replace X for quite some time. I see the advantages, but it needs to be an extremely smooth transition or it will cause more problems than it solves.
    Well, there is always OSX for the masses

    Seriously all the major players should be coordinating things so that every thing falls into place at the right time and with so many moving parts its going to be a real challenge to make Wayland happen

    All the bickering within the community is NOT going to help make things better, just sayin

    Comment


    • #62
      Originally posted by BO$$ View Post
      Yes it is being force down our throats! Since when did it became normal to name stable something which is unstable and put it into distros? The unknowing users upgrades, gets something new that doesn't work, and instead of doing his shit he wastes time repairing or replacing with an earlier version that worked (or goes back to windows)....
      Wayland is good in theory but right now it's shit. And since it's going to be released into 13.04 (some sources say it was supposed to be in 12.10), a lot of people will fuck over their PCs by upgrading!!

      I am not against change but fucking test beforehand!!

      Oh and by the way if you hate this community, FUCK OFF!!!
      And who says they won't test things beforehand ? Who says they will enforce Wayland even if it's not working ?

      No serious or official source says that they will include it and make it default for 13.04/12.10. And even they included it they'd never make it default unless it's rock-solid for most of people, they aren't that stupid you know...

      And no serious distro will default to Wayland until it's mature and got most of toolkits and hardware working on it without problems else they'd just shoot themselves in the foot and loose most of their users, which is not in their interest at all.

      Just... relax and stop speculating. Did you see any official announcement about a distro that plans to default to Wayland in a near future in the first place ?..

      Comment


      • #63
        Originally posted by Scias View Post
        And even they included it they'd never make it default unless it's rock-solid for most of people, they aren't that stupid you know...
        I dunno... compiz, unity and lightdm are a disaster in 12.04. Stuff doesn't even work, but they pushed it out. It doesn't look like they did a lot of testing from my point of view.

        Maybe I'm just one of the rare birds who has an incompatible system. But it's probably naive to think the transition to Wayland won't be wrinkled with problems and headaches. Stuff that average folk just don't want to deal with.

        Comment


        • #64
          Originally posted by BO$$ View Post
          Amen brother! Looks like people above only talk about linux don't actually use it. When was the last time they pushed a new technology out there and it just worked? Seriously, it's more like, whenever I hear some enthusiastic idiots saying they'll release some new stuff I'm thinking here goes anothere 2 hours-2 days of fixing broken crap! It's never rock solid. It never: just works!
          My primary computer runs ArchLinux with PulseAudio and Systemd. No problems with either of these technologies. I was using ubuntu for the PA transition and although there were a few issues in the first release with PA (I remember flash being a pain) these were fixed by the next release. I ran compiz .9.x for a while before I switched to Kwin for KDE integration. I have found new stuff on linux to be very stable and usable. And my computers with linux have always "just worked" (with the exception of my wireless card which had an out of tree driver for the first 4 kernels I had it for)

          Comment


          • #65
            Originally posted by ShadowBane View Post
            My primary computer runs ArchLinux with PulseAudio and Systemd. No problems with either of these technologies. I was using ubuntu for the PA transition and although there were a few issues in the first release with PA (I remember flash being a pain) these were fixed by the next release. I ran compiz .9.x for a while before I switched to Kwin for KDE integration. I have found new stuff on linux to be very stable and usable. And my computers with linux have always "just worked" (with the exception of my wireless card which had an out of tree driver for the first 4 kernels I had it for)
            Yeah I find Arch has a lot less hacks and bugs than Ubuntu, probably because it has a lot less unnecessary shit/patches, but Arch can be a bitch to setup.
            I find Fedora's the same as Arch, but is easier to set up... although it still has some issues and I still wouldn't say it's better than Arch.

            Arch is hands down amazing if you're up for installing and figuring things out.

            Comment


            • #66
              Originally posted by BO$$ View Post
              Amen brother! Looks like people above only talk about linux don't actually use it. When was the last time they pushed a new technology out there and it just worked? Seriously, it's more like, whenever I hear some enthusiastic idiots saying they'll release some new stuff I'm thinking here goes anothere 2 hours-2 days of fixing broken crap! It's never rock solid. It never: just works!
              And people like you seem to only make wrong assumptions about others and doesn't seem to dig a bit deeper to find the truth.

              Here Archlinux + Systemd (since more than a year) + Pulseaudio (since version 1.0) + KDE (since 4.2). It just works (tm) without extra configuration besides look and feel. Althrough I don't use it, I tested lightdm(-kde) a few days ago (you can even check my comment here http://www.sharpley.org.uk/blog/lightdm-0_2) and besides multiscreen support it worked out of the box.

              I agree that some of this stuff (and mainly Pulse) was problematic at start. Like for Pulse, the first time I encountered it was on the first Ubuntu that included it by default (9.04?) and it was a total nightmare, and for a lot of users...

              So, distro integration is very important to judge before judging software. The fact that some distros enforce non-mature software or badly integrate it doesn't mean the software is bad or doesn't need to be encouraged and only deserves to be threated like plague like you seem to do.

              Anyways no one forces you to upgrade or use this distro or keep your default distro setup.

              Yeah I find Arch has a lot less hacks and bugs than Ubuntu, probably because it has a lot less unnecessary shit/patches, but Arch can be a bitch to setup.
              I find Fedora's the same as Arch, but is easier to set up... although it still has some issues and I still wouldn't say it's better than Arch.
              One of the main points of Arch is that it doesn't include a default (enforced) setup including some fresh software that might annoy some users. With Arch you're free to build your distro however you want from scratch, so I'd not say Fedora is as vanilla as Arch is.

              Comment


              • #67
                One of the main points of Arch is that it doesn't include a default (enforced) setup including some fresh software that might annoy some users. With Arch you're free to build your distro however you want from scratch, so I'd not say Fedora is as vanilla as Arch is.
                Yeah, that's likely the reason; if the OS is tailored to the computer, it tends to work better.
                Another reason preinstalled Linux computers would be very convenient if they were more prevalent.

                Comment


                • #68
                  Originally posted by johnc View Post
                  but you like it rough...?
                  I keep coming back here despite getting no value out of the experience and having relatively little impact in getting people to actually improve things that need improving, so yes, I apparently like it quite rough indeed. :/

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    Originally posted by Mystro256 View Post
                    Yeah, that's likely the reason; if the OS is tailored to the computer, it tends to work better.
                    Another reason preinstalled Linux computers would be very convenient if they were more prevalent.
                    You weren't around for the early days of the PC, were you?

                    Comment


                    • #70
                      Originally posted by BO$$ View Post
                      Amen brother! Looks like people above only talk about linux don't actually use it. When was the last time they pushed a new technology out there and it just worked? Seriously, it's more like, whenever I hear some enthusiastic idiots saying they'll release some new stuff I'm thinking here goes anothere 2 hours-2 days of fixing broken crap! It's never rock solid. It never: just works!
                      Seriously GTFO outta this place and use some other OS. I'm so sick of your shit.
                      FOSS is and always will be community effort, which means if something doesn't work out,
                      you don't complain to people you didn't pay, no, you help out yourself.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X