BO$$, you are really a high-level troll. Respect.
xorg is here before windows existed.
The present xorg developers have inhereted that that it is.
You're so blind, that i'm actually spend some time to 'enlighten' you, if you're willing to see the truth:
xorg mistakes are (summarized):
-it does more than one thing (it's not just a display server)
-it uses the network for communication (every window/app knows what happens in all others)
-it has no master/root window (problems with screen savers, for instance)
-server-side decorations (less customizability for apps)
-asynconous design ('lag' effect on internet pages for instance)
Unless i forgot something, these are the problems that make xorg the mess that it is.
The current developers have inherited that and yet they still work on it and tried to make it better. But the mess is so huge, that it can be fixed without breaking everything up.
That's why wayland was created. It breaks everything up, but fixes all the mistakes.
-minimal (does on thing, and does it well)
-it comunicates from server to window and vice-versa
-it has root window
You see, since wayland was created by the same heroes that maintain xorg, it has none of it's flaws!
The only 'flaw' that Mark can point out is that wayland doesn't licks canonical's ass.
So, Wayland does everything that MIR does, is usable by Canonical as it is, they just don't want to... They suffer from the 'not created by us' syndrom and they want to force everyone to use Ubuntu, since they have Steam working with them, deals with laptop makers. Ther're making the exact same monoplistic moves as M$!
Wayland is actually better than MIR in these points:
-maintains stable API
-works with any distro/DE
-is not controlled by a single company, but instead is an open project
So get your research and facts straight cause u're blind my friend!!
"I'm sick of these nobody's projects that go nowhere."
Like Linux ?
Ubuntu is mostly another one of the bunch. Most of the software on it is from this "nobody's projects".They have no interest in self destructing. The fact that Mir is controlled by a company is a plus not a minus. Finally some accountability. I'm sick of these nobody's projects that go nowhere.
So, they can see the future, since most of them are there before Canonical even exists.The only reason it works with any distro/DE is because those distros and DEs are maintained by assholes who try to sabotage Canonical.
We can say the same about X.org/Wayland maintainers on maintaining a display server compared to Canonical's folks. Truth is, Canonical's software never got into such a low level before.I also trust they know a bit more about OSes than you and have a very good reason why they created Mir and it's not because of NIH.
Popular distro != good programmers. At most, they are great at neat-picking other's software and PR, judging only by the popularity of the distro. Programming or designing software is a whole different world. A hint, most Gentoo and Arch users are programmers, and probably fairly good at it. Would you trust any of them to make a user friendly distro? Hint, they use one that isn't friendly at all. So, apples and oranges here.These guys have a really popular distro, let's give them a little credit, OK? They may know they do.
And cause of that these distros/DEs existed before Mir, Unity and even Ubuntu...The only reason it works with any distro/DE is because those distros and DEs are maintained by assholes who try to sabotage Canonical.
How do you come to that conclusion? What OS beside Ubuntu did we see from Canonical?I also trust they know a bit more about OSes
Till now all reasons they gave have been proven to be invalid. So where are these "very good reasons" ?and have a very good reason why they created Mir
Then do your self a flavor and shut up. You still didn't take your pills, did you?I don't know
//EDIT: BTW, from your link:
Remember: They didn't plan the API as good as Wayland did but rushed it instead... And the the same guy told he thinks Wayland is re-creating the issues of X... *facepalm*"the API for the Mir Client library will always be backwards compatible"
Last edited by TAXI; 07-25-2013 at 05:26 AM.
Still no reply to the proposed patches...
How to interprete this?