LeFantome

Sorry to have not gotten back to this.

I did not advocate for high earners (or for anybody actually). Your comment has nothing to do with mine.

I made no value judgements at all, did not take a political side, and I certainly did not clutch any pearls.

What I said, and tried to demonstrate, is that a statement (a mathematical calculation - not an opinion) was reasonably accurate.

I do advocate for accuracy and rationality though. Fact free politics bothers me (no matter the source or the target). So, your comment would certainly make me reach for my pearls if I had any.

There are many other taxes. There are luxury taxes, payroll taxes, land transfer taxes, estate taxes, import duties, tariffs, and many excise taxes just as examples. There are a lot of “registrations” and tolls that are really just taxes. And the GST and often Provincial taxes are not just charged to the end consumer but in fact multiple times along the supply-chain in practice.

If you live in BC, your property tax is likely more than you suggest. If you drink, your sales tax will be as well. If you rent, how much are you paying to cover your landlords income tax? And again, there are many other taxes. Again using BC, gasoline tax is 37 cents a litre of tax before you tack on the GST. That can be 50%. And the tax on cigarettes can be 250%. What is your total tax rate if you spend your $88k “after-tax” income on gas and cigs?

Ontario slashed their liquor tax in half. Now it is only 30%.

I am not sure that saying 50% is propaganda and then calculating it to be 42% is a total slam dunk anyway. But it is also far from the worst case scenario as you left a lot of stuff out.

And, if it was 42%, you land on June 8 which is exactly when the Fraser Institute says tax freedom day is anyway. Those lying bastards!

But I get your point.

And I am quite happy with the way Canada manages taxation (though perhaps not spending). I am not trying to scare anybody into anything.

I was in Ottawa for Canada Day. I wish we had your traffic.

Disparagated? I assume you mean disparaging but that does not really track to the copium comment.

I know I am coming off a bit harsh. I am just tired of Xorg fans going off about how Wayland is not ready when it is already the most popular desktop Linux display server.

I don’t like systemd but I would not be expected to be taken very seriously if I wrote an article saying that people will never use it when 90% of Linux desktops are systemd based.

Or perhaps in should write an article about how nobody clang is not ready because I have a use case it does not fit.

And the list of things that Wayland can do that Xorg cannot is longer than the reverse at this point. So, a list of things you prefer about Xorg is just a personal preference at best at this point. Trying to argue that Wayland is “not ready” when it is both more advanced and more popular should be called out for what it is.

Shouting that the guy crossing the finish line ahead of you does not stand a chance just sounds stupid. And that is what this article is doing.

Ya, I am not going to defend how Wayland has been rolled out.

I think competing implementations is a good thing. But it would have been nice if the reference implementation was usable early on. Nobody ever used Weston. If you did, you came away thinking Wayland did not work. A reference implementation that worked and that others could build real compositors from would have been welcome.

Instead, the big desktops like GNOME and KDE created their own compositors but not in a way that others could really reuse.

It was not until Sway (not even a great compositor) created wlroots that things got better. There are now many wlroots based compositors. And Smithay on Rust is great. The main driver for Smithay has been COSMIC but Niri used it to create a compositor quickly. And now there are Louvre, mir, SWC, aquamarine (used for Hyprland), and other compositor toolkits like the one XFCE is creating.

Both KDE and GNOME support most of the same standards now, and wlroots and smithay are not far behind. Bringing back the browser analogy, these are like blink, gecko, and WebKit—engines that other project can use to create a browser without having to do all the hard work of creating a browser.

In the end, building a new compositor on one of these foundations is going to resemble what it took to build a window manager for X11. And your new compositor will be pretty standards compliant because your engine is.

In Wayland, there is the core display server but also the extension protocols implemented as XDG desktop portal and the like. You can mix and match the core toolkit and portals. Using Niri as an example again, it uses Smithay for the compositor but combines that with the XDG stuff from GNOME. Projects like wlroots give you both sides (eg. there is a xdg-desktop-portal-wlr).

In a couple of years, the top toolkits will be mature and the compositors built with them will support a complete and common set of standards. So, we will be a good place.

But the Wayland architecture will mean that some new and better compositor library will be able to emerge and new and better compositors can be built from it. And that will drive all the others to improve. We will not have just the one universal but ancient implementation like we did with X11.

Back to the browser analogy, it is great that Chromium (blink) and Firefox based browsers exist and that we have so many browsers to choose from. There are very few web engines but they are mature and standards compliant. The engines compete with each other which drives them to be better and all the browsers benefit. But it is also great the Ladybird can come around and compete directly with an entirely new engine from scratch. This is what Wayland will look like in a couple of years.

It is not obvious from the list above but no bcachefs work gas been pulled in.

X11 and Wayland are both protocols.

Xorg is a display server. In Wayland, your compositor is the display server.

“I have run graphical multi-seat systems using x11. Something like that will never be possible in the same way for Wayland”

I have to give you this one. Wayland is not designed to be multi-seat. I do not know about “never” but you are right that multi-seat is a design difference.

My mind goes to this project again: https://github.com/wayland-transpositor/wprs

But wprs only runs one compositor so it does not inherently address multi-seat. Support for that would need to be added.

Let me be clear, I am not here to defend the Wayland standards process. The GNOME guys in particular are a nightmare and heavily resist everything they do not themselves need. If what you want to complain about are some of the people “in Wayland”, I am on your side.

That said, xdg-desktop-portal and DBUS are part of the Wayland world as they are part of the freedesktop.org standard. Red Hat has a vision for the Linux platform. This is it.

But this is like saying the web is not just HTML anymore because it also requires JavaScript. Everybody is on board with dbus. It is how you do IPC to sandboxed Flatpak apps too..

Mint is awesome. There is absolutely nothing wrong with using Mint on Xorg today. I converted somebody to Linux recently and I put them on Mint (X11). There are not that many Wayland only apps yet. And if you don’t use them yet, you won’t miss them.

Please just don’t post “Wayland is not ready” articles because Cinnamon is not ready (does not fully support Wayland yet).

Cinnamon will go Wayland though. When they are ready, they will switch you over. At some point, they will drop support for Xorg.

Remind me 2030 if these issues I have get fixed:

You want me to track the progress of 4 bugs in Sway? Such a powerful argument. How about don’t use Sway?

One issue the wayland proponents fail to notice is that the ecosystem itself is fragmented

I did not fail to notice. I have another post here comparing compositors to web browsers. There is more than one by design. Long term, it is absolutely one of Wayland’s strengths. But ya, your experience is only going to be as good as the browser you choose.

For tiler lovers, Niri and Hyprland are both great. COSMIC is looking good but still Alpha. Plasma 6 is perhaps the best Wayland compositor at the moment.

why don't you stop using linux and move to windows?

Hilarious. Linux has been my primary desktop since the 90’s. You probably need to get off my lawn.

https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/12to11-git

Even more hilarious. Looks like you found an even crappier Wayland compositor than Sway.

Amongst the long list of broken things in 12to11, my favourite is this: “has not been tested on window (and compositing) managers other than GNOME Shell”. GNOME is a Wayland first and soon to be Wayland only project. A project clinging to Wayland on X on GNOME is a perfect metaphor for the point I am making. Thank you for making my point so well.

By 2030, Xorg will be in the AUR and the only x server in the core Arch repos will be Wayback (Xwayland on Wayland).

Sounds like you will be using 12to11 to run Wayland apps on i3 on XWayland on Wayback (Wayland on X on Wayland). Good times.

You seem to think I am telling you to use Wayland though.I don’t care what you use. My point is that everybody else is happy leaving you behind. Keep using X. You can switch to the Dillo browser too if you want. LMAO.

Very subtle “Arch, BTW”, BTW. Nice.

For everybody else, here is the project you linked to. It is a fun little project.

https://git.linuxping.win/12to11/12to11

They have different goals

I am not sure about that. They have different designs for sure. Mostly because one was designed 25 years later. I guess you mean they have different goals because Xorg did not incorporate some goals in its design (like security). But is it a goal of Xorg to be insecure? That feels like a stretch.

There are design goals in X11 that are not included in Wayland. Take asking the display server to draw primitive shapes for you as an example. But modern X11 apps do not do that either. That is not how things like Qt and GTK work. So, more of a “25 years later” thing than a true difference in goals. The “compositor” approach. The DDX layer. These are more of a reflection of “how things work today” on both systems than they are differences in goals.

Perhaps you mean things like “network transparency” as I hear that one a lot. Wayland’s design is to have a simple core that can be extended. But the same capabilities exist for Wayland. For example:

https://www.mankier.com/1/waypipe

or even better:

https://github.com/wayland-transpositor/wprs

What goal does Xorg have that Wayland does not? Again, other than poor security (not a goal).

The lack of security in Xorg makes many things easier. Wayland apps run in a sandbox which makes some things harder. Many complaints I see ultimately boil down to this difference. Flatpaks are also sandboxed and a lot of the solutions on Wayland are similar (eg. XDG desktop portal). But again, am not sure crap security was really a “goal” of Xorg. It is simply convenient.

Because of security, things have to be explicitly supported on Wayland while X11 apps can just do them. There is no official way to capture a screenshot on X11 even after 40 years. But any X11 app can do it pretty easily as all apps have access to the entire display (even contents of other windows). On Wayland, there is a protocol for screen capture. There has to be, or it would not be possible. The same is true for many other features. And, I fully admit, some protocols for Wayland to do things done by some x11 apps do not exist yet (or are not yet widely supported by compositors or apps).

But again, I do not really see “poor security” as an x11 design goal. It was simply born in an era where that did not matter as much. Projects that want to modernize X11, like Xlibre, will have to break things on X too. Time will tell what that looks like.

Even if 90% of us don't need X11 for legacy software. It will still be here.

I most agree with you. The Xlibre project may become popular and do something to make X11 popular again. Who knows?

And I just argued on a forum yesterday that Xorg will keep working for 20 years at least. But a lot of smart people claimed I was wrong about it being able to support new hardware. But I think Xorg is likely to build and run for decades yet.

But the X server implementation that is likely to last the longest is Xwayland. And with Wayback, the “stand-alone” X server that many distros will bundle will be Xwayland running on Wayback (Wayland) and not Xorg.

As I have said elsewhere though, few people will be daily driving an X server (Xorg, Xlibre, or Wayback) simply because many desirable applications will require Wayland.

And what will be the x11 only applications that will make people run an X server to use them? Xeyes? Xfig?

I think even running Xwayland will be pretty niche. X11 is going to be a software preservation project. You can boot up OpenLook, CDE, Trinity, or i3 for the memories (and then go back to Wayland for the apps you need).

I could be wrong. Time will tell. Within a couple of years after the release of GTK5 at the latest, we will know. By 2030 maybe.