In response to Wayland Breaks Your Bad Software

I say that the technical merits are irrelevant because I don’t believe that they’re a major factor any more in most people moving or not moving to Wayland.

With only a slight amount of generalization, none of these people will be moved by Wayland’s technical merits. The energetic people who could be persuaded by technical merits to go through switching desktop environments or in some cases replacing hardware (or accepting limited features) have mostly moved to Wayland already. The people who remain on X are there either because they don’t want to rebuild their desktop environment, they don’t want to do without features and performance they currently have, or their Linux distribution doesn’t think their desktop should switch to Wayland yet.

  • LeFantome@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    15
    ·
    1 year ago

    When both NVIDIA and KDE work well with Wayland, most of the anti-Wayland energy will go away. The advocates will calm down too bar cause they will have won.

    • ExLisper@linux.community
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I don’t think the sentiment is ‘anti-wayland’. Most people just don’t care. I’m using Awesome WM and it doesn’t support Wayland. As OP says, why would I rewrite all my plugins and config just to the sake of switching to Wayland? I would have to invest a lot of time and what will I gain? Absolutely nothing. On my work computer I have different distro and I’m using Cinnamon. I think it uses Wayland but I didn’t even bother to check. It works exactly the same as Gnome on X11. Why would I care?

      • yum13241
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        The Cinnamon team didn’t even consider Wayland yet.