To Wayland, or not to Wayland

J

jb82

I'd like to start a discussion and gather opinions on why people actually prefer Wayland over Xorg with well-configured compositors (providing vsync, fading, and other features).

As for myself, I use dwm with picom and have also tried dwl. However, given my workflow (terminal-based coding, browsing, etc.), I find it hard to notice any significant advantages of Wayland.
 
I never tried wayland. I don't intend to either. For a long time, I didn't see the need for any experiments, given that Xorg worked perfectly fine for me (and then, lots of experiences you're reading aren't exactly positive, at least that's my probably subjective observation over many years reading forums and similar). I'm also not convinced by the design, I think a "display server" should be capable of doing more than just compositing (fully rendered) windows...

Meanwhile, since I started working on my Xmoji tool, I'm "hooked" on X11 anyways, as I deliberately opted to base it on X11, utterly non-portable to anything else...
 
jb82 said:
why people actually prefer Wayland over Xorg
Click to expand...
People don't tend to prefer Wayland over Xorg.

It was possibly going to be the alternative Linux display system (in our grandkids lifespan?). But just like systemd, it doesn't really affect FreeBSD.

Have fun with it but don't be a mug forcing yourself to use immature, early adopter software if you have to struggle unnecessarily. Think of Wayland today being more similar to X10 compared to X11. A little incomplete.
 
kpedersen said:
Have fun with it but don't be a mug forcing yourself to use immature, early adopter software if you have to struggle unnecessarily. Think of Wayland today being more similar to X10 compared to X11. A little incomplete.
Click to expand...
I've never understood why this particular topic resonates so much. Why not call it just the alternative? There is a lot of software out there, so why does Wayland deserve so much attention from people who use Xorg and have no plans to change that?

I've been using tiling WMs exclusively for about 10 years, and mostly it was i3 under Xorg. About a year ago I switched to Sway just because there was some Wayland-native software I wanted to try. It took me little to no time to adjust, and like jb82, I still don't see much of a difference as a result. But is this a bad thing, or a good thing? I had no issues with Xorg, so for me, no difference is a positive.

Of course, if you need some missing features or don't really like the design, then it makes no sense to use Wayland, but why bother then? Fortunately, FreeBSD is not a mainstream Linux distro and comes without graphical environment, so users are free to choose the one they prefer. I hope it'll stay that way.
 
I want Wayland to be just a short relief until firmwares (future UEFI or brand-new successors) virtualizes ALL hardwares and their runtime service become responsible for functionalities something between Wayland and X with strictly standardized way for ALL OS'es running on them, of course including Windows.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top