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.org

The Wayland Situation: Facts About X vs. Wayland

Eric Griffith

Published on 7 June 2013
Written by Eric Griffith
Page 3 of 4 - 282 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 Hardware Reviews
  1. MSI X99S SLI PLUS On Linux
  2. NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970 Offers Great Linux Performance
  3. CompuLab Intense-PC2: An Excellent, Fanless, Mini PC Powered By Intel's i7 Haswell
  4. From The Atom 330 To Haswell ULT: Intel Linux Performance Benchmarks
Latest Linux Articles
  1. Open-Source Radeon 2D Performance Is Better With Ubuntu 14.10
  2. RunAbove: A POWER8 Compute Cloud With Offerings Up To 176 Threads
  3. 6-Way Ubuntu 14.10 Linux Desktop Benchmarks
  4. Ubuntu 14.10 XMir System Compositor Benchmarks
Latest Linux News
  1. Dead Island GOTY Now Available On Linux/SteamOS
  2. Ubuntu 14.04 In The Power8 Cloud From RunAbove
  3. KDE With Theoretical Client-Side Decorations, Windows 10 Influence
  4. Sandusky Lee: Great Cabinets For Storing All Your Computer Gear
  5. Fedora 21 Beta & Final Release Slip Further
  6. Mesa 10.3.2 Has A Couple Bug-Fixes
  7. RadeonSI/R600g HyperZ Support Gets Turned Back On
  8. openSUSE Factory & Tumbleweed Are Merging
  9. More Fedora Delays: Fedora 21 Beta Slips
  10. Mono Brings C# To The Unreal Engine 4
Latest Forum Discussions
  1. Updated and Optimized Ubuntu Free Graphics Drivers
  2. HOPE: The Ease Of Python With The Speed Of C++
  3. Use Ubuntu MATE 14.10 Make it an official distro.
  4. Users/Developers Threatening Fork Of Debian GNU/Linux
  5. Debian Is Back To Discussing Init Systems, Freedom of Choice
  6. AMD Radeon VDPAU Video Performance With Gallium3D
  7. Ubuntu 16.04 Might Be The Distribution's Last 32-Bit Release
  8. Linux hacker compares Solaris kernel code: