KDE Wayland Is Not Yet Interested In NVIDIA's EGLStreams Approach

[unixfan2001]

Though I personally agree with the KDE devs, they need to be careful. They're slowly alienating many users. They won't support Mir.

I'm sure this was already addressed somewhere down this thread (haven't read through it all, yet) but why the heck would they need to support Mir?
No one but Canonical does and, as it stands, it's tightly integrated with Unity.

Saying KDE doesn't run on top of Mir is sort of like complaining that the Windows desktop won't run on top of Apple Quartz.

[unixfan2001]

Android / Chrome OS: is very clear to me that Google is very likely to use linux+ Wayland + Mesa(maybe even systemd) on their X86 versions of this OSes and nVidia is not a strong contender here either to justify Google adopt a second codepath either(most x86 systems will be Intel and to a smaller extent AMD since nVidia doesn't have an x86 license)

Outside the Android compatibility layer there is very little use for Wayland on Chrome OS. Chrome OS already has Freon.

[nomadewolf]

Though I personally agree with the KDE devs, they need to be careful. They're slowly alienating many users. They won't support Mir, GLES support is poorly documented and a little confusing (albeit, I haven't checked up on that in over a year), Wayland progress is slow, and they seem to have issues with closed-source drivers. None of this really affects me (though I would prefer to use wayland) and I still use KDE on my main PC, but KDE has lost a lot of it's userbase since version 4 was released, and stuff like this isn't helping.

I disagree.
The only 3 problems with version 4, for me are:
the Menu... (all they had to do here was make the tabs vertical and the Menu would actually be usable)
the fact that if you dowload a zip file and open it directly, there's this weird bug (just fix it already)
Nemo doens't allow you to play video files from network shares directly... (ok, maybe new feature, but wouldn't it be worth it?)

All these problems seem simple enough to tackle and are the reason why i always fall back to Cinnamon/MATE.
Wayland progress is slow, but we don't have proper Wayland in any other DE. And we won't for, at least, another year.
I like that they don't support MIR. If i understand correctly, in order to use MIR you have to use Unity and vice-versa because Canonical doens't care about API (or ABI, or whatever)... So it breaks all the time... So, who cares?
Never had any driver related problems. And i use all kind of hardware.
What KDE did with version 4, Gnome is basically doing with version 3, except even worse...

My DE ranking, for now is as follows:
1. Cinnamon
2. MATE
3. KDE

[Serafean]

HITLER! There, Godwin's done for this thread.

Total and utter bullcrap, you are talking of BSDs that have permissive licenses.
Linux's whole point is stated by its license, GPL v2, STRONG copyleft license. You are NOT supposed to run closed drivers on it, and any modification you ship to people MUST be redistributed also in source form, which is NOT freedom, it is enforcement of Torvald's will on you.

Freedom of choice was NEVER said nor implied anywhere, and it's usually bullcrap coming from Ubuntu propaganda.

a) If anyone's it's Stallman's will.
b) read https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.en.html

Yes, the GPL bans you from redistributing only binaries, so as to ensure the end user has the same freedom you had creating those binaries...

Only 1 single point is needed to debunk all of this nonsense about Linux > Windows.

Find a single USB 80211ac stick that works OOTB in Linux.

Intel 7260, I plugged it in, and it just worked.

[Sonadow]

Intel 7260, I plugged it in, and it just worked.

Someone is clearly illiterate.

Find a single USB 80211ac stick that works OOTB in Linux.

[schmidtbag]

You and Schmidtbag and many others are projecting your own viewpoints on what the point of Linux is on Linux, and while it's well outgrown it's point... that's still the real point of Linux. Anything else may be a personal rationale for use, and may be the point for you for using Linux, but It's not intrinsically the point of Linux itself.

What I stated is not my rationale for use - it is the go-to description of what makes Linux famous. Look at any source explaining what Linux is, and within the first sentence you'll probably see "free" in there (whether they're describing cost or libre). People don't go to Linux because Linus said it was supposed to be a hobby minix clone 25 years ago. Most [PC] users flock to Linux because it's free and incompatible with Windows viruses. A massive percentage go to it because of the freedoms. I'm neither of those, though they do help in many ways. I just simply like the structure of it and the fact that it just simply works for my needs. Costing nothing is a major convenience, and I really like the community even though I personally don't care if a community contribution is closed-source. If FreeBSD, Solaris, Minix, etc had better driver support, I wouldn't mind switching to those. If I had a reason to buy RHEL or SUSE, I would.

Point is - Linux is a community project, and the community states what it means. That being said, starshipeleven technically isn't wrong; what makes him wrong is he treats his statements as fact, hence me not feeling the need to respond to him anymore. The only reason Linux works as a community project is because of the freedoms involved. It doesn't matter what Linus originally intended it to be - it's not even a hobby to him anymore, it's his job, so that's 1 big chunk of info that is no longer relevant.

That said yes, you're right it's under GPL as a complete work, however... since when is the GPL, and particularly the GPL v2 about use? Furthermore even if... we are to presuppose that the GPL did consider usage as opposed to just distribution, Torvalds only cares about the social contract of "You make changes, I get them back" now while writing and distributing proprietary drivers certainly violates that, I'll absolutely agree, but the end user using proprietary drivers doesn't.

I get the impression it's much simpler than that. If you want to be quoting Linus, he's stated in multiple interviews that he effectively doesn't care what you do with Linux. Change it for yourself or profit from it and keep all the proceeds to yourself - it doesn't matter, according to him. Sure, he prefers you contribute changes to it, but he doesn't treat that as a requirement. The license may state otherwise, but who is going to stop you? There are thousands of obscure devices out there that use a modified version of Linux and I have no doubt that most of them do not contribute back to the kernel/Linus/community. Many of these devices have closed-source software involved, and they're allowed to do that.

[Tomin]

Find a single USB 80211ac stick that works OOTB in Linux.

There are none. ZERO. Period. So no internet for such people.

Erm, I think I have one. I use it with Raspberry Pi B and OpenELEC and I certainly haven't installed any drivers to that. It may use some firmware, but Intel chips use them too. I can check the model this weekend, but I think it's Netgear AC6100 that uses some Realtek chip (I really need to check that, I can't be sure now). No, I haven't tested how fast it is and it used to need out of tree drivers (open source though). I could also check, if it works out of the box with current kernels on other distributions.

I don't know what you exactly meant by OOTB, because for example on Debian you almost always need to get a non-free firmware package to use any WiFi sticks and therefore it's very hard to find any that would work out of the box. If you mean that when the firmwares are installed, the WiFi stick would work just by plugging it in, then there are some, even 802.11ac. (also Debian stable uses old kernels, but that's another problem) On some distributions the firmwares are included already on installation media, because they are not so picky about those things.

[Theriverlethe]

Only 1 single point is needed to debunk all of this nonsense about Linux > Windows.

Find a single USB 80211ac stick that works OOTB in Linux.

There are none. ZERO. Period. So no internet for such people.

Aside from driver availability having nothing to do with operating system quality, why did you pick such an irrelevant niche example (that's not even true, as pointed out elsewhere)? Epic debunk fail.

[Sonadow]

Erm, I think I have one. I use it with Raspberry Pi B and OpenELEC and I certainly haven't installed any drivers to that. It may use some firmware, but Intel chips use them too. I can check the model this weekend, but I think it's Netgear AC6100 that uses some Realtek chip (I really need to check that, I can't be sure now). No, I haven't tested how fast it is and it used to need out of tree drivers (open source though). I could also check, if it works out of the box with current kernels on other distributions.

I don't know what you exactly meant by OOTB, because for example on Debian you almost always need to get a non-free firmware package to use any WiFi sticks and therefore it's very hard to find any that would work out of the box. If you mean that when the firmwares are installed, the WiFi stick would work just by plugging it in, then there are some, even 802.11ac. (also Debian stable uses old kernels, but that's another problem) On some distributions the firmwares are included already on installation media, because they are not so picky about those things.

I'm not interested in the firmware. Firmware means nothing if the hardware has zero support in the kernel tree to begin with.

And the chipset used by the A6100 (rtl8811au) is not supported by the mainline kernel. Just because distributions like OpenELEC patch in a third-party driver does not make it supported under any circumstances if the hardware is as good as non-existant in Linus's tree.

Aside from driver availability having nothing to do with operating system quality, why did you pick such an irrelevant niche example (that's not even true, as pointed out elsewhere)?

OS quality means jack **** when a user cannot even use their hardware on it. I can't use my 5 year old Samsung printer or 10 year old Canon scanner on Linux. That makes it inferior to Windows since i cannot get work done on Linux.

[ssokolow]

OS quality means jack **** when a user cannot even use their hardware on it. I can't use my 5 year old Samsung printer or 10 year old Canon scanner on Linux. That makes it inferior to Windows since i cannot get work done on Linux.

So? If I cared to do the research to refresh my memory, I could point to tons of hardware (most definitely including old printers and scanners) that got broken in the move from Win9x to WinXP, from 32-bit Windows to 64-bit Windows, or even in the move from Win7 to Win10, but which works on Linux.

"X is inferior to Y" shouldn't be so subjective.