Go take a look at the proprietary side. In *most* categories of software, there's way more superfluous proprietary apps than there are open source ones.
Desktops are a kind of special case, because most proprietary OS's don't support custom desktop environments, this is something only enabled by open operating systems and software environments.
As to your question "who needs them": the people who use them, duh.
What mistakes are those? Wayland is FIXING the mistakes of Xorg.If wayland is considered an improvement over xorg ( and I strongly disagree with it, primarily because the same people are doing both and are making the same mistakes ALREADY
Wayland is used by far more projects than Mir. For most projects, there is really no need to support Wayland at this point, because it's not yet in the stage where it would be deployed for "consumer use" (except on mobile, where it's already being used in products that are being sold right now - which is again more than Mir can say). Furthermore, XWayland provides the compatibility for projects that don't support Wayland.and what is worse, wayland is still not used by most projects anyway),
In Mir's case, implementations can not vary, because Canonical has clearly stated that if any competing Mir implementation appears, they will not bother maintaining compatibility with it. With Mir, it's canonical's implementation or nothing, and even that is designed purely for the needs of the Unity DE, not as a universal solution.then Mir is xorg done right. I agree with Mark's notion of an API driven driver, rather than a collection of implemented protocols. In both cases implementations can vary but at least they can be externalized. One only has to look at the popularity of direct X and direct 3D APIs- if its design was anything like X or wayland, it is unlikely to have become popular. Apple's platform benefited from coco and openGL.
In contrast, Wayland is being developed collaboratively and for the use of all DE's, and promises stable API's for both compositors and clients.
The APIs are there: OpenGL (ES), for example. Wayland is designed to be highly flexible, use whatever API you want to render your stuff. Yes, in theory you could use the DirectX gallium state tracker for rendering. But you could also use some library (GTK, QT, cairo, ...) and it will just work. Now guess how you render on Mir... It looks to me like you're confusing rendering APIs and the display server.I think that with an API driven approach that Mir is taking, the driver support will be better, as has been with windows (direct 3D, draw, X etc). Besides, it is unlikely to be affected by kernel upgrades or as is the case now, with (xorg) library changes.
But yes, wayland also has client side and server side APIs (how else should it make sure different programs (clients) can talk to different compositors/WMs (servers) ?). The difference between the Mir and wayland APIs is that waylands APIs are stable while Mir factors them around Unity (and Canonical already told they will break them whenever Unity demands that), so have fun using anything other than (the correct version of) Unity with (the correct version of) Mir.
Better driver support? Both, Wayland and Mir use EGL (or libhybris on android) to talk to the driver. So support will be equal.
Last edited by TAXI; 06-12-2014 at 05:35 AM.
You have ignored the level of support that Wayland has and that you can use it already, while at the same time saying it isn't mature. Very illogical, or maybe nice to have different levels of expectations: "having Mir is great as Wayland is not entirely mature!".. ehh, right.
The other thing that you're suggesting is that Mir is being criticized for no particular reason. That's a nice way to ignore the entire history of the incorrect statements about Wayland. Despite them retracting those, they're still being repeated again and again. As a result, you'll have other people refuting that over and over again.
Having well publicized people making claims that they have to send out corrections for or apologize after is not helping. The initial bit is repeated in loads of news stories. The apology/correction is not. What to you get: very critical comments and lack of trust.