Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

It's Time To Admit It: The X.Org Server Is Abandonware

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • X is a security nightmare.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by frank007

      You have just written the future of Linux (one of the future, but the most possible, because the companies that hold Linux want money too).
      Avoidable with a possible fork...

      Comment


      • Originally posted by jo-erlend View Post

        Why is software the only thing you enjoy that you're not willing to pay for? If the average Linux desktop user paid $10us per year for their desktop, then we would have a fantastic desktop. I will never understand why FOSS enthusiasts want to punish developers for licensing their software as FOSS. It's legitimizing the argument for proprietary software. Doesn't anyone understand that?
        I didn't say that I wouldn't be willing to pay for software. But that's not really what we're talking about.
        I have zero interest in a proprietary Microsoft desktop for Linux.
        If however, they wanted to create a totally new open source desktop in place of X11 and Wayland, one that others can build upon and still have compitibility with whatever proprietary thing they want to sell, then that's fine.
        Actually that's better than fine since it looks like we're stuck with dead X11 and going nowhere Wayland.

        If I wanted a proprietary Microsoft desktop, they already sell one, and I'm not interested in it.

        Comment


        • finally, Xorg has gone deprecated. I'm waiting for the first Linux Os Wayland-based without any trace of Xorg.

          Comment


          • X.org is absolutly not abandonware in practise, because it is commonly used in way bigger numbers (comparing to Wayland). However future of Linux desktop with GUI in my opinion is looking grim.

            1st. Transitioning entire aplication from X to wayland is big process for every single program. So new programs will still be going out using X for really long time, so Linux will be fragmentarized longer and longer.

            2nd. Wayland by itself is horribly managed, there is no clear standarization, no organization like Khnosos that sets what we need and what we set as optional etc. Like current GBM vs EGLstreams and way more stuff is something that should be decided by GPU vendors together etc. but nope. Also it should be decided not just for Linux but for BSDs etc. It is something where Intel dictates how stuff should work although certain stuff clearly could be done better.

            I really don't understand why Wayland and stuff around Wayland are not managed way Vulkan is. Like there needs to be standard, there needs to be conformance testing. Current Wayland has tons of bugs on each GPU driver that are unique just to that vendor where practicly only employee of company can fix it.

            Also fragmentarization of Linux desktop is not a good thing anyhow.

            Comment


            • Wonder what would happen to the Nvidia folks like me. I might be forced to change my GPU, which is kinda of wasteful. Just hoping that I don't have to do it too soon.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by piotrj3 View Post
                1st. Transitioning entire aplication from X to wayland is big process for every single program. So new programs will still be going out using X for really long time, so Linux will be fragmentarized longer and longer.
                With Qt it is rather simple and doesn't even require a recompile. I assume GTK also has that transition automatically covered in some way or another.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by blacknova View Post
                  The problem is the UI as we know it have been developed in the first place for business needs. All the different form components menus, etc. So the demand have in the time backed the development of X, MacOS and than OSX application servers and even Win32.
                  Since than business applications have moved into web and clouds and all they really need of client machine is to be able to run a browser, which is provide a runtime and UI-layer for applications.

                  With this there are really no one who want to back a real replacement for older windowing systems. IMHO.
                  I see you have a very valid point here.

                  I tried Wayland and it seems extremely
                  immature . 11 years of development
                  and I see too many caveats. Developers oversimplified design, then added extensions
                  and rely on zillion implementations. libweston is still a joke, too.

                  I see Wayland got developed mainly for kiosks, car infotainment and other antidesktop stuff. But Wayland not cares enough about desktop and standarization.

                  Comment


                  • Tell that to my IoTland-less Gentoo installation.
                    Why is X12 not a thing? Because there's no money in desktops.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by awesz View Post
                      Tell that to my IoTland-less Gentoo installation.
                      Why is X12 not a thing? Because there's no money in desktops.
                      Wayland is X12

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X