Well known KDE developer Nate Graham is out with a blog post today outlining his latest Wayland thoughts, how X11 is a bad platform, and the recent topic of “Wayland breaking everything” isn’t really accurate.
“In this context, “breaking everything” is another perhaps less accurate way of saying “not everything is fully ported yet”. This porting is necessary because Wayland is designed to target a future that doesn’t include 100% drop-in compatibility with everything we did in the past, because it turns out that a lot of those things don’t make sense anymore. For the ones that do, a compatibility layer (XWayland) is already provided, and anything needing deeper system integration generally has a path forward (Portals and Wayland protocols and PipeWire) or is being actively worked on. It’s all happening!”
You will never be a real display server. You have no hardware cursors, you have no xrandr, you have no setxkbmap. You are a toy project twisted by Red Hat and GNOME into a crude mockery of X11’s perfection.
All the “validation” you get is two-faced and half-hearted. Behind your back people mock you. Your developers are disgusted and ashamed of you, your “users” laugh at your lack of features behind closed doors.
Linux users are utterly repulsed by you. Thousands of years of evolution have allowed them to sniff out defective software with incredible efficiency. Even Wayland sessions that “work” look uncanny and unnatural to a seasoned sysadmin. Your bizarre render loop is a dead giveaway. And even if you manage to get a drunk Arch user home with you, he’ll turn tail and bolt the second he gets a whiff of your high latency due to forced VSync.
You will never be happy. You wrench out a fake smile every single morning and tell yourself it’s going to be ok, but deep inside you feel the technical debt creeping up like a weed, ready to crush you under the unbearable weight.
Eventually it’ll be too much to bear - you’ll log into the GitLab instance, select the project, press Delete, and plunge it into the cold abyss. Your users will find the deletion notice, heartbroken but relieved that they no longer have to live with the unbearable shame and disappointment. They’ll remember you as the biggest failure of open source development, and every passerby for the rest of eternity will know a badly run project has failed there. Your code will decay and go to historical archives, and all that will remain of your legacy is a codebase that is unmistakably poorly written.
This is your fate. This is what you chose. There is no turning back.
WE HAVE FOUND THE WAYLAND TROLL 🎉🎉🎉
Fuck off
You at least have to appreciate the effort that went into writing this
Pasta? Pasta.
👆 boomer moment
Ok zoomer
after more than 25 years using linux I could not care less about those dramas, when my distro will drop xorg I’ll switch and that’s it. I’ve got way too much stuff to implement myself already, there is no time for that. I mean, I’ve even embraced systemd…
I love Wayland until I don’t. I honestly don’t think about it, it gets out of my way and my system is stable, until I go to use something like scrcpy that just doesn’t work at all. Luckily, the amount of things that straight up don’t work is shrinking.
Anecdote, I know, but for my use cases, Wayland just isn’t there yet- I wind up with far more random bugs and less battery life. I don’t pretend to know why, I’m a pleb non-developer, but until that’s resolved I’m still stuck on X. I’d love to use the new shiny thing of The Future™, but not at the cost of stability and usability.
I think that given how frequently this argument is brought up (and it is of course true about it not being completely there yet) so this is just my opinion on the situation (and I am not a dev so I am fine with being wrong and corrected). It is kind of needed for more projects/distros to start actively using it. As a lot of the stuff kind of needs the band-aid ripped off to start forcing it to get there faster at this point. Otherwise it just keeps being held back as people on the coding end of things will keep focusing on X11 issues instead of getting things ready for Wayland.
Kind of like the conundrum of mobile OSes that aren’t Android or iOS. It is hard to get people/companies to even try the new OS because the lack of apps (specifically the most common ones used by the most people). But app devs don’t want to spend time re-building or starting new apps for an OS that isn’t being used (or on devices people are buying). So at a certain point it needs both sides to interact and make progress. The OS needs the apps more at this point, and getting feedback and data from those devs makes it known where things are and aren’t working. But it is also true the devs for the apps might end up finding out the OS is actually easier to work with compared to what they have been doing/dealing with on Android/iOS.
Getting a replacement for X11 has been needed for a long time as the OSes and features keep needing something new to better work for how computers have advanced. And it isn’t something that many devs would want to take on given how easy it is to just use what is already known. Since Wayland has finally gotten to the point it is now, it is time for more devs to start learning/moving to the new thing to get attention to the stuff that they need. The hardest part is this in between period for users as it can and will cause random issues (like the ones you have seen). Stability is important, but Linux is great because there will always be distros and projects that keeping the old thing running well is the main objective. So we are in some great times for the new to be pushed hard so it can become the stable future needed.
Been trying to think of a term for this issue. It’s not quite chicken or egg. But both sides need the other side to incentivize them. If one gets going the other will follow, but they’re waiting for each other. Like some sort of collaborative standoff.
Wayland nearly doubled my battery life lol
It’s super impressive to see Wayland having its big breakthrough moment. I remember reading about Wayland 10 years ago and worrying it was going to end up as a dead project.
Oh boy, 102 comments. Knowing Phoronix, I bet those are a treat to read.
Reading angry boomer Linux comments is one of my most favorite hobbies
Wayland on an Intel iGPU runs flawlessly and has for several years. However, that’s a matter of drivers. AMD is in the forefront regarding having dGPU support, while NVIDIA is playing catch-up.
In any case, the future is bright.
Wayland doesn’t support Nvidia GPUs yet
My nVidia GPU works with the propietary driver
Nouveau is functional… Probably
FWIW, I’m typing this on the latest GNOME, on wayland, on nvidia proprietary drivers; and it works just fine — EXCEPT for suspend & resume, which is annoying to be sure; but on 2 screens with different refresh rates & different dpi ratios I at least don’t run into some of the weird behavior I do run into using X11.
I used to be an Xfce purist; but this particular setup is even less taxing on the GPU (GTX 970) compared to Xfce’s standard compositor (around 20W on light usage, vs. 35+W); & and the font rendering is slighly better, which is a huge factor AFAIC.
Hey there, what tool do you use to find power usage? Thanks
Uh reading the article, pretty sure the author would phrase it as “Nvidia GPUs don’t support Wayland yet” and that author would be absolutely right.
Fuck You NVIDIA
Soo support for something like synergy would be great!
fucking what synergy doesn’t work on Wayland? welp. I use that daily and no, that’s not optional, its rather critical for my setup
Input Leap (fork of a fork of synergy) supports Wayland under gnome, although it seems there are a few bugs remaining.
Nate Graham acknowledges current gaps in Wayland support but on the matter of “Wayland breaks everything” isn’t really the right perspective
That’s rather disingenuous. It’s meant to be a replacement for X11. So it does break things.
But not “everything”, which is the point.
It’s not intended as a drop in replacement.
Backwards compatibility forever sounds great, but the technical debt eventually becomes a giant fucking limitation on improvement. They chose not to stay backwards compatible for a reason.
I agree that at some point you have to be able to ditch technical debt, but you still should be able to do more or less the same things with the new system as with the old system and that’s currently still not the case.
The problem is that the architecture of Wayland and the organization around it themselves impose limitations that have a chilling effect on development for it. One issue is that Wayland has been deliberately left very slim, leaving a lot of complexity and implementation details up to the compositor. A compositor can be seen as something that approaches the size and complexity of an entire X display server. This means that if someone wants to create a window manager, they have to implement a whole compositor first. So instead of writing window manager code, which is what the developer is probably the most interested in, they are spending most of their time implementing the compositor.
Naturally this also leads to a lot of duplication of effort. For example: GNOME, KDE and the window managers that have implemented a wayland version each have their own compositor that by and large does the same thing.
Another issue is the standardization of the protocols and interfaces that the different compositors use, or lack thereof. There is a steering group containing the major stakeholders that votes on proposed extensions, but good proposals often get shot down because the major stakeholders can’t agree on it and sometimes ego or principles gets in the way. And then you have cases where one compositor just goes their own way and implements something regardless of what the others do.
For example, as a result of this there’s still no standard screen capture API, so if you want to do things like screenshots, remote desktop, desktop streaming, … whether or not you can do that, and with which tool, depends on the compositor you use. Another example: they’re currently still bickering over whether or not an application should be allowed to place windows with absolute coordinates, and how that should be implemented. We’re currently 15 years after initial release of Wayland…
In my opinion, this is all completely backwards. Both in an organizational and technical sense way too much has been left up to the individual compositors that should have been a core part of Wayland itself.
Unfortunately, it’s all too late to fix this. We’re 15 years into Wayland development, and the flawed architecture has been set in stone. Wayland isn’t going to go away soon either, too many parties are invested in it. So for me the reasonable thing to do is to wait and stick with X11 until the dust settles and something emerges on the other side that is better than what I currently have.
This means that if someone wants to create a window manager, they have to implement a whole compositor first. So instead of writing window manager code, which is what the developer is probably the most interested in, they are spending most of their time implementing the compositor.
wlroots has existed for almost 7 years and this misconception is still repeated.
I know wlroots exists. It’s a library that helps you implement a compositor (i.e. does some of the heavy lifting), but at the end of the day the window manager developer is still implementing a compositor and is responsible for maintaining their compositor.
The mere fact that wlroots, and other efforts like louvre, are necessary at all actually prove my point that it was an idiotic design to push everything off into “compositors”.
It’s not intended as a drop in replacement.
… Which is why it “breaks everything”
It’s meant as a replacement, but not necessarily a backwards compatible one. Not everything X11 can do will be possible in Wayland, and not everything Wayland can do will be possible in X11.
In most cases, Wayland doesn’t break anything, it just has a different API to accomplish the same task.
It’s meant as a replacement, but not necessarily a backwards compatible one.
Yes, I know. Which is why it “breaks everything”.
As railways were a replacement for canals.
It was not the railways that broke the barge. But the companies expecting to gain the advantages without adapting there transportation.
Replace not upgrade.
PS i still use canals. Bur do not blame the raIlway for not fitting my boat.
Railways are not a “replacement” for canals.
Lol. Learn your history.
In the UK railways very much were a replacement for canals.
Both being built to transport good accross the nation.
Lol. Learn your history.
Don’t be shitty.
Yeah sorry. But when you look at the events building europeen railways. More so in the UK as we had a huge canal system built in a few decades. But most of Europe denser areas.
Railways were very much a replacement for the to slow canal system.
Canals built a huge industry allowing manufacturers to ship goods to cities while shipping resources from the mines and farms etc.
But industries like meat fish milk and strongly enough market gardening (fresh flowers) were very limited to local areas before the railways. Took off hugely when the railways intentionally set up in direct competition to the canals.
Canals survived for a while moving the slower stuff. But started needing to redesign to support bigger and more boats faster. Before finally closing down.
The UK and most of Europe rebuilt/renovated them as a leasure activity from the 1950s. But most of the late 1800 to early 1900s railways vcompanies actually worked to replace and put canal companies out of business.
Passenger rail really was not a big thing untill about the 1920s.
We’re getting well away from the topic now. It depends on what you mean by “replace”. Railways and canals exist side-by-side as different solutions to similar problems - sure. And some railways have replaced some canals. But the panama canal will not be replaced by a railroad for example. It couldn’t do the same job. The pros/cons of each option depends on many factors.
The analogy is poor for comparing software. Linux distros will likely replace X11 with Wayland over time. To do the same thing that X11 was doing. It will be replaced “in place”. The very same thing you were using with X11 will now need to work on Wayland. This would be like running your barges on the railroad? Maybe? Depending on how you squint?
I wouldn’t expect my barge to work on the railroad. I do expect that Firefox will run on Wayland after having used it on X11 for 20 years.
barges just haven’t been ported to railways yet
Duh. But you do understand what purpose the metaphor serves?
Yes. And it’s a bad analogy. Nobody is expecting you to be able to take a barge on railways. But existing linux applications are being expected to run on Wayland. As I said - railways didn’t replace canals - they’re different types of things.
Within the last 10 years and the next 5 years, software using old hacks instead of GUI toolkits are expected to switch, yes.
People can choose to continue to use X11 until KDE Plasma 6 hits Debian stable.
I don’t see a problem. Nobody forces Wayland onto anyone yet, except for bleeding edge distributions like Fedora. And unless you’ve been severely misled, you should know what you signed up for when you installed Fedora.
I don’t see a problem.
I didn’t say there was a problem. I’m saying it’s pretty disingenuous to act like Wayland isn’t intended as a replacement for X11. All of which you seem to agree with. As you say “nobody forces Wayland onto anyone yet” (emphasis mine).
Also - I just love how your comment is written like a politician would have written it. “Sure you can use the dirty old X11 if you really want to, or you can use the nice new God-fearing Wayland”.
If you bring the two parts of your comment together and dial back the assumptions of bad faith, you’ll get a consistent picture:
Wayland is a blank slate replacement for how to do window management on Linux. At some point it’ll become the standard for software that’s new or maintained. Unmaintained software that doesn’t talk to the internet and is therefore safe to run even with security holes will continue to be supported via XWayland. The giant scope and API surface is part of the reason why it’s deprecated. Maintainers are expected to target the new way to do things going forward, because there are people able and willing to maintain that support (many of those people former X11 maintainers who are looking forward to stop having to deal with that legacy behemoth)
That’s the state of things I wanted to express. Not my opinion, no agenda, just how I understand the situation.
Trying to gaslight others? nice
No, they’re discussing the way forward and what they think makes sense. In fact, they’re even clearly stating that there will be pain, because Wayland intentionally does less than X11. And they’re encouraging people with unsolved pain points to speak up.
Wayland developer says X11 is bad, not Wayland
Nobody, other than you and them, cares. Have a good day.
Notably absent: X11 developer saying Wayland is bad, not X11.
Mostly they are the same people.
Well, yes, except that those X11 developers agree that Wayland is better.
This is the best summary I could come up with:
Well known KDE developer Nate Graham is out with a blog post today outlining his latest Wayland thoughts, how X11 is a bad platform, and the recent topic of “Wayland breaking everything” isn’t really accurate.
Nate Graham acknowledges current gaps in Wayland support but on the matter of “Wayland breaks everything” isn’t really the right perspective: "Look, if I said, “Linux breaks Photoshop; you should keep using Windows!” I know how you’d respond, right?
You’d say “Wait a minute, the problem is that Photoshop doesn’t support Linux!” And you’d be right.
Because there’s nothing Linux can do to ‘un-break’ Photoshop; Adobe needs to port their software, and they simply haven’t done so yet.
This porting is necessary because Wayland is designed to target a future that doesn’t include 100% drop-in compatibility with everything we did in the past, because it turns out that a lot of those things don’t make sense anymore.
For the ones that do, a compatibility layer (XWayland) is already provided, and anything needing deeper system integration generally has a path forward (Portals and Wayland protocols and PipeWire) or is being actively worked on.
The original article contains 395 words, the summary contains 187 words. Saved 53%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!
Scram, tin man.
I don’t see why we need convincing that Wayland’s better. Most Linux users either use it currently or are possibly looking to switch in the future. The other people who are not are likely going to use X for eternity
I think real X11 fanboys are almost non-existent. Wayland wouldn’t be so rejected if it wasn’t that it still has a lot of compatibility issues, I think most people just want everything to work and don’t care whose fault it is.
I remember some 10-15 years ago when I’d look at the y windows website every couple of months hoping for some news of progress, simply because I was sick of x11 being so crappy. I hated it, it was so fiddly, it didn’t work right, I just wanted something that worked.
So you can imagine how happy I was when Wayland started taking off. Here was the promise of something better, something that just worked, it sounded amazing. And yet, today I’m still running xorg and I will be for the foreseeable future.The reason is simply that in the time passed xorg just became usable, I don’t have to think about it, it works reliability, it has all the features I need and I hardly ever have to touch it. Meanwhile, I log into my Wayland session and instantly 3 or 4 of the applications I use daily either don’t work or act weird. I go and try and fix the issues and I’m told to just accept it, or that I actually don’t exist because Wayland works perfectly for everyone. And I’m not even using an Nvidia card, just plain Radeon.
So I quit and go back to what works. Maybe in a couple of years, until then: no thanks.
Yeah I don’t get why some people would think sticking to X is fanboyism. Nobody likes X, let alone love it. Most people’s relation to X is pragmatic, it’s “it works and does everything I need”.
If anything, fanboyism is telling people they have to use Wayland when it doesn’t yet work for what they need it to do.
Just keep improving the damn thing and people will switch when it’s ready. There’s no convincing needed.
exactly this, I’ll use it when it works with no questions asked. I.e: when it becomes invisible to me as an enduser
as for now, it isn’t, far from it
Really looking forward to the day nvidia drivers properly support wayland. Getting tons of bugs, stutters, and general usability issues with plasma wayland on my 3060. X11 just works on the other hand, even with multiple monitors running at different refresh rates (something a friend of mine said X11 doesn’t work well with). But I want all the nice benefits wayland offers.
