Originally posted by Khrundel
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
The Story of Ubuntu's Mir Abstraction Layer (MirAL)
Collapse
X
-
- Likes 1
-
Originally posted by jo-erlend View Postlook at the people commenting on Mir articles against Mir and look for them adding something to an article about Wayland.
Originally posted by jo-erlend View PostIt seems to me that the people who do write interesting articles or comments about Wayland, are not the same people who are constantly attacking Mir, because they're focusing on Wayland.
Originally posted by jo-erlend View PostOn the other hand, the people who are writing interesting articles and comments about Mir, doesn't attack Wayland, because they're focusing on Mir.
Originally posted by jo-erlend View PostThe Free Software community is never going to evolve into a Single Hierarchy, which to my mind is a good thing.
- Likes 1
Comment
-
Originally posted by TheBlackCat View PostThe big difference is that Wayland does bring visible advantages over X11. Better security, less tearing, less lockups, better performance, fewer layout glitches, etc. Mir, on the other hand, doesn't have any advantages (at least none that the Mir developers have bothered to express and that weren't immediately shown to be false), and lots of disadvantages.
First, Wayland, being a protocol, can't fix any glitches/tearing. Wayland compositors can. But all modern X11 WMs are using composition, so, maybe there are some problems with glitches on X11, but I haven't noticed one for a long time. Second, all layouting currently done by toolkits, they use same layouting on X11. Third, better security always mean less possibilities. In case of Wayland, for example, for some security reasons, they don't allow top level windows to determine their screen positions. They say this decision is final. This means apps must use some non-portable workaround simply to save window position! Wine developers can't implement Wayland backend because Windows apps heavily rely on ability to open a window at any specified location.
So, these advantages over X11 are controversial. And your confidence about Mir lacking same advantages based on nothing.
The funny thing about all Mir critics is that you think about Wayland as some kind of rightful heir to X11 while Mir is usurper. That is not true.
- Likes 2
Comment
-
Originally posted by Khrundel View PostThe funny thing about all Mir critics is that you think about Wayland as some kind of rightful heir to X11 while Mir is usurper. That is not true.
Wayland *is* the heir, based on consensus. And Mir *is* the usurper, going against the consensus and causing unnecessary disruption.
- Likes 1
Comment
-
Originally posted by Khrundel View PostYou must be kidding.
First, Wayland, being a protocol, can't fix any glitches/tearing. Wayland compositors can. But all modern X11 WMs are using composition, so, maybe there are some problems with glitches on X11, but I haven't noticed one for a long time.
Originally posted by Khrundel View PostSecond, all layouting currently done by toolkits, they use same layouting on X11.
Originally posted by Khrundel View PostThird, better security always mean less possibilities. In case of Wayland, for example, for some security reasons, they don't allow top level windows to determine their screen positions. They say this decision is final. This means apps must use some non-portable workaround simply to save window position!
Originally posted by Khrundel View PostAnd your confidence about Mir lacking same advantages based on nothing.
Originally posted by Khrundel View PostThe funny thing about all Mir critics is that you think about Wayland as some kind of rightful heir to X11 while Mir is usurper. That is not true.
Comment
Comment