Fedora Workstation 41 To No Longer Install GNOME X.Org Session By Default

[Weasel]

Read my lips: We. Do. Not. Give. A. Fcsk. About. Windows/MacOS/iOS/Android.

Who's we? You and 0.1% of the population?

Stay in your ignorance, fits you well.

[cend]

Let's just put the holy wars aside and let time decide the winner.

[User42]

The issue is no truetype font comes even close to Terminus in terms of legibility on standard DPI screens.

Apparently not... And if you really wanted to, you can generate bitmap fonts out of any vector font, the way you like them. The opposite however is not possible in the general case. Sounds like yr problem is with font choice and maybe font rasterisation...

I understand you have a 4K 27" panel and you're high on the Wayland's hype train but the vast majority of people will not buy into uber new tech just because of fancy new features.

So I understand you have a single 220i 11" CRT screen and X11 caters to your needs but the vast majority of people will not buy into uber ancient tech just because you fancy deprecated, boggus or plain outdated features. Also Wayland is a protocol. I still find it weird you insist on blaming a protocol for implementation's supposed shortcomings... It's at the level of blaming HTTP (or HTML) because a website does not work in IE6 anymore or a website made for IE6 does not work correctly on any modern browser. There can be an argument about browsers, but the protocol...

But yeah, Wayland is shit in terms of rendering fonts with pixel precision, so let's announce people who need/want it the Luddites.

I think you are onto something... I was thinking the same of SSH the other day: it does not render fonts well either... Such a shame font rendering is part of the specification!

whose display stack is an order of magnitude more advanced than Wayland's but Wayland cannot

I would actually say infinitely more... Wayland being a protocol and not a display stack... I could say the same of FTP, UDP or USB3...

You whine over implementations and blame the protocol... There is a gazillion crappy websites that are not standard conformant and don't work well, blaming HTTP for those would be as ludicrous. If you have issues with Wayland, you need to complain about protocol decisions, not "look, when I use rescaling, my bitmap font go all blurry".

[User42]

False because everyone approximately knows what a modern GUI stack must provide and Wayland doesn't guarantee that.

Oh I see the misunderstanding now... Wayland precisely defines what a modern GUI stack must provide. That's literally its purpose in life. Again, have a grip with the protocol, good: report and submit it.

Wrong because the web server's primary and only job is to listen on port 80 or/and 443 and reply to HTTP 1.1 GET requests. Everything beyond that is optional and depends on what the web server owner wants/needs. POST, HEAD, PUT, dynamic scripting, dynamic web pages, cookies, location, referrer, etc. is all optional.

What you describe as "primary and only job" is the very definition of a protocol: how two "HTTP-compliant" entities MUST talk to each other.

You also figured that protocols can have optional components. Very good. And that each implementation could elect to implement parts or all of them, within the bounds set by the protocol. Excellent.

That's precisely what Wayland is, albeit for display so instead of countering my argument, you've shown you've understood it and gave it more ground. Thanks.

[avis]

Apparently not... And if you really wanted to, you can generate bitmap fonts out of any vector font, the way you like them. The opposite however is not possible in the general case. Sounds like yr problem is with font choice and maybe font rasterisation...



So I understand you have a single 220i 11" CRT screen and X11 caters to your needs but the vast majority of people will not buy into uber ancient tech just because you fancy deprecated, boggus or plain outdated features. Also Wayland is a protocol. I still find it weird you insist on blaming a protocol for implementation's supposed shortcomings... It's at the level of blaming HTTP (or HTML) because a website does not work in IE6 anymore or a website made for IE6 does not work correctly on any modern browser. There can be an argument about browsers, but the protocol...



I think you are onto something... I was thinking the same of SSH the other day: it does not render fonts well either... Such a shame font rendering is part of the specification!




I would actually say infinitely more... Wayland being a protocol and not a display stack... I could say the same of FTP, UDP or USB3...

You whine over implementations and blame the protocol... There is a gazillion crappy websites that are not standard conformant and don't work well, blaming HTTP for those would be as ludicrous. If you have issues with Wayland, you need to complain about protocol decisions, not "look, when I use rescaling, my bitmap font go all blurry".

Your speculation about what people buy/use falls flat given steam survey/amazon/newegg/retail stats.

• People do not predominantly buy high DPI monitors. The only high DPI tech that the average person uses is their smartphone where no one really codes/uses the terminal.
• Generating bitmap fonts from TrueType fonts will produce utter crap. Terminus was designed from scratch and drawn manually. It has no "truetype"/vector underpinnings. Every character was generated by hand.
• Like I said Terminus looks better/more eligible than monospaced truetype fonts even on high DPI screens.
• Windows perfectly supports bitmap fonts despite having a much more advanced display server. Even one piece of it, RDP/MSTSC runs circles around anything Wayland based because Wayland cannot offer anything but VNC. Yeah, there's RDP except it works as VNC beneath. Windows sends vector data allowing to actually render on the other side (sans fonts which AFAIK are now sent as bitmaps) thus being extremely efficient, Wayland has no choice but to send entire window rectangles even if a single pixel has changed.

Please erect a new wall of text calling me a Luddite. That will be funny except it's also be cringy as hell given Windows has no such issues but Wayland does. And Microsoft doesn't offer 15+ WDDM implementations with a varying feature set. They have very deep pockets but that would be insanity. Wayland suddenly requires at least a couple full-time engineers for each implementation. Amazing. And people have been complaining non-stop how Open Source is underfunded/understaffed. I guess with Wayland it's no longer an issue. Oh, wait it is. It's egregious.

[omer666]

Anecdotal evidence is anecdotal and extremely popular among Linux fans.

Guess what, I cannot run my XFCE session under Wayland. You've got no crashes but I have no Wayland at all.

And you must love this tidbit from https://wiki.xfce.org/releng/wayland_roadmap :



Amazing progress! Fragmentation! (In-) Completeness! (Missing) Features! XFCE doesn't even pretend they will support HDR or VRR any time soon.

I fucking hate Wayland. Not the protocol, I hate how it merges the display server and the window manager and doesn't provide a common featureful core/feature set for all its users. Maybe in 20 years from now, all Wayland compositors will have all the features now available in KWin ... doubt! LMAO. What a shitshow.

Quite funny, you quote something I wrote about my own experience using GNOME on Wayland and you call it anecdotal. I am completely fine with that.

But then you share your own anecdotal experience, and even funnier, it's not even about the same subject. Good work.

[avis]

Quite funny, you quote something I wrote about my own experience using GNOME on Wayland and you call it anecdotal. I am completely fine with that.

But then you share your own anecdotal experience, and even funnier, it's not even about the same subject. Good work.

Literally hundreds of thousands of XFCE users (it's the third most popular DE in Linux after Gnome/KDE) cannot use Wayland and that's "anecdotal" evidence? English and logic are both lost on you.

[rhavenn]

Indeed. I'm using ms teams for work in chromium on Fedora 39 Wayland and both video conferencing and desktop sharing works just fine.

You mind sharing how you got it to do that? Firefox works for "meetings" in Teams, but isn't support for phone calls / Teams VOIP so I've been using Edge for Linux for Teams. Fedora 39 KDE edition with Wayland. I have / had the WebRTC flag set in chrome://flags. It doesn't appear to be there now. I just see a black window / nothing when people share with me and no one sees anything when I share.

It worked in Fedora 38 / early 39, but then broke at some point. Hmm..seems there is now a "ozone" setting which the default is still "X11". Set it to Wayland and we'll see what happens. I have the xdg-portal-kde and pipewire stuff.

[avis]

Oh I see the misunderstanding now... Wayland precisely defines what a modern GUI stack must provide. That's literally its purpose in life. Again, have a grip with the protocol, good: report and submit it.



What you describe as "primary and only job" is the very definition of a protocol: how two "HTTP-compliant" entities MUST talk to each other.

You also figured that protocols can have optional components. Very good. And that each implementation could elect to implement parts or all of them, within the bounds set by the protocol. Excellent.

That's precisely what Wayland is, albeit for display so instead of countering my argument, you've shown you've understood it and gave it more ground. Thanks.

I'm exhausted by this argument. You funnily suggest it's about the Wayland protocol or say some funny shit about HTTP but in the end of the day users install Linux, choose not to run Gnome/KDE and get a crappy experience. That's what Wayland is. And I will not suggest anything to the Wayland committee. I'm not insane. They have been arguing for months whether to allow applications to set their own icons for fuck's sake. That's insanity. The Wayland steer group consists of lunatics/people who hate the concept of the modern desktop. And you're arguing it's fine. Linux has never offered anything that sets it apart (except being choke full of bugs and regressions and not offering any compatibility - yeah, that's something), now people advocate for Linux to have a display stack that makes Linux ... unusable have you chosen to use something different than KDE/Gnome and then my example with raster fonts shows that even KDE/Gnome Wayland implementations could be woefully bad if you don't have a high DPI display.

[Nocifer]

Who's we? You and 0.1% of the population?

Stay in your ignorance, fits you well.

We as in the (or at least most) users of Phoronix, who come here to talk primarily about Linux and not to pester people about how Windows is soooo much better and how Linux sucks worse than Vista and XP. Also, we as in the Linux developers, who are perfectly capable of engineering and developing something on their own merit and do not need to pander to Windows/MacOS/iOS/Android tech stacks like birdies in heat, and who certainly do not need clueless non-developers to "educate" them as to how they should be doing their jobs.

Go play with birdie, Weasel.

EDIT:

Linux has never offered anything that sets it apart (except being choke full of bugs and regressions and not offering any compatibility - yeah, that's something)

Oh ffs birdie, this is too moronic a statement, even for you. Linux has never offered anything that sets it apart? From goddamn freaking Windows? Whose only real reason of still existing in 2024 is the practice of strategically vendor-locking enterprise users in Office and fps-hunting kiddos in gaming? Are we still talking about the same OS? The same world? The same reality?