this post was submitted on 12 Jan 2024
295 points (81.3% liked)

linuxmemes

20880 readers
1000 users here now

I use Arch btw


Sister communities:

Community rules

  1. Follow the site-wide rules and code of conduct
  2. Be civil
  3. Post Linux-related content
  4. No recent reposts

Please report posts and comments that break these rules!

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 5 points 10 months ago

if developers keep pushing incomplete and buggy software to the end users instead of actually fixing bugs

My understanding is, the issue is that fixing bugs in X has become too much of an issue due to bloat and bad historical architecture, so the developers working on it - and providing the software for free, if not working for free - instead worked together to develop a new standard aiming to fix the issues inherent to X's code and design.

The "list of problems" is absolute bullshit right from the start. The first two sections are "It didn't used to work like this in X, Wayland is trash!" and "I had some screen recording software using X APIs and they don't work when not running in X!". In fact, a lot of them follow this pattern, blaming Wayland because it doesn't have 100% backwards compatibility. It's not an X rewrite, it's meant to be a new, better piece of software.

I will not deny that Wayland has problems, of course - but those mostly come down to NVidia refusing to support open protocols, missing features that are yet to be implemented, and missing software support for Wayland.

I will also say that on Arch, which doesn't assume I'm using X, Wayland does work completely fine for me when following instructions. It might be an issue with the distro you're using not having good support, or one of those edge cases like problematic hardware. I definitely agree that you should stick with X for now if you have problems, but I'll also say that you're getting it for free, and if you don't report problems, they might also not know about them, for example because it only occurs on specific hardware.