Microsoft Makes Open-Source Windows Forms, WinUI, WPF

[misp]

You can't port the Win32 code over to Wayland because Wayland is some hot garbage lacking essential features by design. (i.e. it's a WONTFIX rather than a "submit a patch and we'll ignore it" thing)

Blind fanboys.

Read already that Mir was better designed protocol. You know something about it?

I think it was said that they later had to add wayland extensions to get some features Mir had...

[Michael_S]

EEE is over in areas where Microsoft is weak and unable to do EEE any more.

The moment Microsoft starts dominating in some area and EEE becomes profitable/possible again, EEE will be back.

I think this is true of every major tech company. It just happens that Microsoft is the biggest example of it. But Twitter and Facebook were much more open to third party client developers until they were hugely popular, and then they shifted to shut APIs they didn't like and buy and incorporate competitors. Oracle hated and spread FUD about open source SQL databases until they couldn't ignore them anymore, and then suddenly they pretended to love MySQL and they bought it and did what they could to turn it into an on-ramp into their proprietary offerings.

Google is no different. Arguably they did an EEE with RSS with Google Reader - shift huge sections of the market to their service, and then kill it. They're definitely doing EEE with Android - early Android had very little proprietary in it, but over time Google halted investment in open source aspects and kept shifting everything to proprietary services.

The two lessons from all of this are:

1. Free-as-in-freedom is the only consistently good for users option. We should be using, investing in, and promoting it.

2. If you're going to deal with products from major tech companies, in each individual industry try to support the players that are not in a dominant position or near one. If you can avoid it, don't rent your servers from Amazon. If you can avoid it, don't use Chrome as your browser. If you can avoid it, don't use Android for mobile computing. If you can avoid it, don't use Office for your productivity applications. etc...

[Vistaus]

Read already that Mir was better designed protocol. You know something about it?

I think it was said that they later had to add wayland extensions to get some features Mir had...

The best designed protocol is Arcan.

[Weasel]

Read already that Mir was better designed protocol. You know something about it?

I think it was said that they later had to add wayland extensions to get some features Mir had...

I don't know anything about Mir, sorry.

[oiaohm]

I don't know anything about Mir, sorry.

https://github.com/wayland-project/wayland-protocols/blob/master/stable/xdg-shell/xdg-shell.xml

You don't know Wayland either Weasel. Misp would be referencing the xdg-shell stuff.

This xdg-shell was not part of early wayland standard. Moved from unstable to stable part of the protocol 2 years ago.

Ideas from Mir have in fact made way into the wayland standard.

WONTFIX does not mean the wayland protocol would not have created over time a different way of achieving same result.

xdg-shell is a relative position solution for windows. X11 windows are all relative position placed. There is not as much difference as one thinks.

X11 really does not have absolute positions. So it comes how does X11 fake absolution positions. It fakes it with a root window. Wayland does not provide root window so application is responsible to create it own. Now extension to add a root window with no contents has never been requested of the Wayland protocol. xdg-shell + a root window provided by compositor would be functionally identical to what X11 has.

Yes the WONFIX I have seen was asking for real absolute positions that was a feature that X11 itself does not have.

[oiaohm]

https://valadoc.org/gtk+-3.0/Gtk.Window.get_position.html

By the way if anyone had read the GTK documentation you would know that X11 absolute position from it relative position system is a roll of dice luck if it tells you anything near true.

Going relative to your own window under Wayland is a lot more predictable.

[Weasel]

https://github.com/wayland-project/w.../xdg-shell.xml

You don't know Wayland either Weasel.

Way more than a parrot who doesn't even know how to code. Why don't you go and suggest your fabulous ideas since you know how to solve Wayland's "problems"? Maybe even write a patch (if you even could) and show them how it's done. Cause I'm getting tired of schooling a dummy.

[oiaohm]

Way more than a parrot who doesn't even know how to code. Why don't you go and suggest your fabulous ideas since you know how to solve Wayland's "problems"? Maybe even write a patch (if you even could) and show them how it's done. Cause I'm getting tired of schooling a dummy.

No Weasel you comments about wayland show you are moron who has never read the protocol carefully. There are odd things that exist in the protocol the ability to create windows that take no input and are no visible to user yet a fully maximised. Wayland requires reading protocol and rethinking about how you will do stuff.

The fact everything is in wayland bar a root window. Then you look at protocol asking how can create that and you find that the protocol include odd things like the ability to create windows that ignores all input and allows that input to go to what ever window/surface is behind them.

[Weasel]

No Weasel you comments about wayland show you are moron who has never read the protocol carefully. There are odd things that exist in the protocol the ability to create windows that take no input and are no visible to user yet a fully maximised. Wayland requires reading protocol and rethinking about how you will do stuff.

Show me the code that does it or shut the fuck up.

You're delusional if you think that it has such an easy workaround when the Wayland devs ON PURPOSE didn't do it for their "security" and "privacy" bullshit. Such a thing would be trivially exploitable by malware which basically renders their entire idiotic reasoning moot.

So in this respect Wayland is still garbage since you have to jump through more hoops for the same thing while still being "vulnerable". (implying window positions is a vulnerability, but that's Wayland devs' incomprehensible brain)

[oiaohm]

You're delusional if you think that it has such an easy workaround when the Wayland devs ON PURPOSE didn't do it for their "security" and "privacy" bullshit. Such a thing would be trivially exploitable by malware which basically renders their entire idiotic reasoning moot.

No this is because you are a idiot not all changes with wayland are because of security.

Wayland developer got rid of the root window idea and attempt to force usage of relative addressing purely because of the following.
1) due to X11 issues relative addressing between your own windows works on X11 where using the global relative addressing can be unpredictable so majority of X11 programs are coded to use relative addressing this is why GTK setting returned address value to 0,0 under wayland effects less than 10 percent of GTK applications. Basically no need to duplicate something that is already broken.
2) it fixes a graphical problem.

You are using global relative addressing(x11 root window) the following problem happens.

Your program is attempting to draw a pop up window while user is moving window and is using the global relative addressing. The pop up fails to appear above the window and fails to stay in the right location as window moves.

Things are done differently in wayland to X11 for 3 reasons.
1) security/privacy
2) performance
3) prevent graphical glitches.

The no root window is to prevent graphical glitches. The stuff that was done to prevent graphical glitches normal has ways of getting them back under wayland just takes thinking. If you jump though these extra hoops you must intentionally want the graphical glitches or at least not care if users see them.

Security and privacy was the removal of means to see other application windows unless you have permission of the compositor or those programs have passed you a file handle of the surface of windows you are meant to see.

One of the key objectives of wayland is to be able to render perfectly every single time. Having pop ups appear in the wrong places does not meet that requirement.

Weasel you have not read what the key objectives of Wayland were or you might have worked out that there was another reason why particular features are not gone but now just hard to use. Global relative address to current screen under wayland has just been made harder to use because you should be avoiding using this due to the graphical problems it can cause.