Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

GNOME Shell Wayland Benchmarks From Fedora 20

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

  • #16
    Originally posted by verde View Post
    Why everyone expect Wayland and/or Mir to offer better berformance than Xorg? Their existence has to do with better quality, not performance. Am I wrong?
    Also performance. Both Mir API and wayland protocol require less roundtrips than X11 for displaying something, and are both asynchronous, so we do expect better native performance (in terms of framerate but also in terms of time-to-screen / lag).

    When considering Mir + XMir or wayland + Xwayland, you have a full X server + the Mir/wayland layer compared to a full X server, so the performance can only be equal at best.

    Regarding your Mir/wayland taunts, please consider that Mir is not (should not) be criticized on a technical basis, as it's architecture is very similar to wayland, although more targeted / less generic.
    What is considered "bad" is that they could have entirely (and as easily) implemented the whole "Mir thing" as a wayland shell, fitting every technical necessity that they have put forward so far for Mir. Instead, they created their own API, which although being open source, is not made to be used by any other DE apart unity, so that their work will be absolutely useless for the entire gnu/linux community except for canonical.
    And this as been (justifiably) considered as a dick move by said community, which has (understandably) stirred some harsh (and sometimes not so rational) comments.

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by verde View Post
      Since when all the other Mir threads where related to Wayland?
      Because Canonical announced the project as being against Wayland with a barrage of FUD. There is a reason why this keeps coming up.

      Comment

      Working...
      X