1. Computers
  2. Display Drivers
  3. Graphics Cards
  4. Memory
  5. Motherboards
  6. Processors
  7. Software
  8. Storage
  9. Operating Systems


Facebook RSS Twitter Twitter Google Plus


Phoronix Test Suite

OpenBenchmarking Benchmarking Platform
Phoromatic Test Orchestration

The Wayland Situation: Facts About X vs. Wayland

Eric Griffith

Published on 7 June 2013
Written by Eric Griffith
Page 3 of 4 - 284 Comments

Some Misconceptions about X and Wayland

I) “X is The UNIX Way.” The Unix Way says to do one thing and do it well-- X handled printing, it handled buffer management, it was its own toolkit, it handled fonts, it was a binary interpreter, along with loads of other things. What ONE THING was X doing and what ONE THING was X doing well?

II) “X is Network Transparent.” Wrong. Its not. Core X and DRI-1 were network transparent. No one uses either one. Shared-Memory, DRI-2 and DRI-3000 are NOT network transparent, they do NOT work over the network. Modern day X comes down to synchronous, poorly done VNC. If it was poorly done, async, VNC then maybe we could make it work. But its not. Xlib is synchronous (and the movement to XCB is a slow one) which makes networking a NIGHTMARE.

III) “The Wayland developers are only re-implementing X11 because they don't understand it.” Wrong. Most of the Wayland developers ARE former X11 developers. They know how terrible it is. They know where its failings are. They want to do better than X11.

IV) “Wayland requires 3D.” Wrong. It requires compositing, but that's not necessarily 3D. Nothing in Wayland requires 3D, there is even a Pixmen backend for software rendering.

V) “Wayland can't do remoting.” Wrong. Wayland should be BETTER than X at remoting, partially do its asynchronous-by-design nature. Wayland remoting will probably look a like a higher-performance version of VNC, a prototype already exists. And this is without us even giving it serious thought about how to make it better. We could probably do better if we tried.

VI) “Wayland breaks everyone's desktop.” Also wrong. Once XWayland is finalized and merged we should have more-or-less perfect backwards compatibility because every X app just gets its own mini X-server to deal with. There is one known snag and thats with window transformations because app thinks its in the top right corner of the screen (yay global coordinates) because that client's X server is locked to the size of that client's window.

Latest Linux News
  1. Mesa 10.5.6 Brings Fixes All Over The Place
  2. NVIDIA's Proprietary Driver Is Moving Closer With Kernel Mode-Setting
  3. The Latest Linux Kernel Git Code Fixes The EXT4 RAID0 Corruption Problem
  4. Features Added To Mesa 10.6 For Open-Source GPU Drivers
  5. Ubuntu's LXD vs. KVM For The Linux Cloud
  6. Fedora Server 22 Benchmarks With XFS & The Linux 4.0 Kernel
  7. GCC 6 Gets Support For The IBM z13 Mainframe Server
  8. Fedora 22 Is Being Released Next Tuesday
  9. OpenWRT 15.05 Preparing Improved Security & Better Networking
  10. Using The New LLVM/Clang OpenMP Support
Latest Articles & Reviews
  1. The Latest Features For Linux Performance Management + Benchmark Monitoring
  2. Noctua NH-U12DX i4 + NF-F12
  3. Btrfs RAID 0/1 Benchmarks On The Linux 4.1 Kernel
  4. The State Of Various Firefox Features
Most Viewed News This Week
  1. The Linux 4.0 Kernel Currently Has An EXT4 Corruption Issue
  2. The Linux 4.0 EXT4 RAID Corruption Bug Has Been Uncovered
  3. AMDGPU Open-Source Driver Code Continues Maturing
  4. Microsoft Open-Sources The Windows Communication Foundation
  5. Another HTTPS Vulnerability Rattles The Internet
  6. LibreOffice 5.0 Open-Source Office Suite Has Been Branched
  7. Systemd 220 Has Finally Been Released
  8. Will Ubuntu Linux Hit 200 Million Users This Year?