Originally posted by johnc
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Ubuntu Allegedly To Have Its Own X, Wayland Alternative
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by smitty3268 View PostCan you explain this? What features does the Win7 display server have that Wayland will be missing? It seems to me like Wayland is actually cribbing a lot of stuff from the Win7 design.
1) You could install / update a video driver without having to reboot and without having to close out your applications and log out.
2) You could simultaneously run multiple GPUs from different vendors and have an extended desktop across the outputs.
These sorts of things would make me more interested in Wayland, since I don't think we'll see them in X.org any time soon.
Comment
-
Originally posted by johnc View PostIf these features are planned for Wayland, it should definitely be communicated, because it'd be nice if...
1) You could install / update a video driver without having to reboot and without having to close out your applications and log out.
2) You could simultaneously run multiple GPUs from different vendors and have an extended desktop across the outputs.
These sorts of things would make me more interested in Wayland, since I don't think we'll see them in X.org any time soon.
2) No idea. Isn't that Xinerama? (Wayland does make multi-monitor easier so it very well COULD b e able to do that, but I dont know)All opinions are my own not those of my employer if you know who they are.
Comment
-
Originally posted by johnc View PostIf these features are planned for Wayland, it should definitely be communicated, because it'd be nice if...
1) You could install / update a video driver without having to reboot and without having to close out your applications and log out.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Ericg View Post1) Cleaner code,
2) cleaner and more efficient protocol,
3) better support for GPU-switching,
4) better support for full-screen apps (try having a full screen window change the resolution under X, depending on your WM you'll get mixed results)
5) proper screenlocking (under X an app can bypass the screenlock if it really wants to)
6) lightweight enough that it can be used on tablets, phones or desktops.
7) Better multi-monitor support,
8) frame-perfect graphics-- no lagging, tearing or stuttering
9) also fun fact: its relatively future-proof. The wayland protocol really just moves pointers and buffers around to different sections, it lets other programs handle what those buffers contain, how the data got there and things like that. By letting third party handle the major implementation details and just having the protocol as barebones as possible it means if there ever comes a day when we have a big shift in how we do graphics (like X went through) we may not have to throw the protocol out the window or start bypassing it like we did with X, we just change the 3rd party bits to the new architecture./ style and keep plugging away
(It seems like most people forgot there was X1-10 before X11, and before that there was something called "W" to explore similar features.)
Comment
-
Originally posted by JanC View PostOf course almost(?) all of those issues could be addressed in X12 if anybody ever got around to start working on it...
(It seems like most people forgot there was X1-10 before X11, and before that there was something called "W" to explore similar features.)
If the ideal how it should work in Wayland differ from the original ideal of how xorg should work I think a new name is logical.Last edited by Akka; 09 February 2013, 07:53 PM.
Comment
-
Originally posted by JanC View PostOf course almost(?) all of those issues could be addressed in X12 if anybody ever got around to start working on it...
(It seems like most people forgot there was X1-10 before X11, and before that there was something called "W" to explore similar features.)
Comment
-
Originally posted by JanC View PostOf course almost(?) all of those issues could be addressed in X12 if anybody ever got around to start working on it...
(It seems like most people forgot there was X1-10 before X11, and before that there was something called "W" to explore similar features.)
You also avoid any political issues that would come up from anyone still using the X protocol wanting to give input on the development.All opinions are my own not those of my employer if you know who they are.
Comment
-
Originally posted by F i L View PostYeah.. and if X12 did all those things then X12 applications wouldn't be compatible with X11, nor would proprietary X12 drivers.. so you'd have a improved, simplified DS called "X12" which wasn't fully compatible with X11, but could probably host X11 applications... which is exactly what Wayland is. It just isn't called "X12".
Comment
-
Originally posted by curaga View PostWith one very important difference: X12 would have network support for all applications
"X is not network transparent anymore and hasn't been for years." -- Daniel Stone (one of the head devs on X.org and)All opinions are my own not those of my employer if you know who they are.
Comment
Comment