dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
2521
share rss forum feed


markofmayhem
Why not now?
Premium
join:2004-04-08
Pittsburgh, PA
kudos:5
reply to howardfine

Re: Wayland 1.0 Officially Released



howardfine

join:2002-08-09
Saint Louis, MO
I don't think that's the same thing. On my notebook I want to ssh -Y 'openoffice' and run OO on my notebook through my office machine from anywhere. Don't have time to follow the video but he's doing a lot more work than I have to do with X.


Maxo
Your tax dollars at work.
Premium,VIP
join:2002-11-04
Tallahassee, FL
said by howardfine:

I don't think that's the same thing. On my notebook I want to ssh -Y 'openoffice' and run OO on my notebook through my office machine from anywhere. Don't have time to follow the video but he's doing a lot more work than I have to do with X.

When thin-client tools are stable in Wayland I hope they do a better job than X. The X network protocol is quite expensive making it mostly useless over the Internet.
--
"Padre, nobody said war was fun now bowl!" - Sherman T Potter

»maxolasersquad.com/

»maxolasersquad.blogspot.com

»www.facebook.com/maxolasersquad


howardfine

join:2002-08-09
Saint Louis, MO
Reviews:
·AT&T Southwest
said by Maxo:

The X network protocol is quite expensive making it mostly useless over the Internet.

As one who uses it every time I'm on the road, I argue that's not true. More importantly, X can do it. Wayland cannot.


markofmayhem
Why not now?
Premium
join:2004-04-08
Pittsburgh, PA
kudos:5
said by howardfine:

said by Maxo:

The X network protocol is quite expensive making it mostly useless over the Internet.

As one who uses it every time I'm on the road, I argue that's not true. More importantly, X can do it. Wayland cannot.

Wayland can't tie your shoes either... I'm not quite understanding the point here, at all. Wayland also doesn't do sound or defragment a filesystem. Wayland is an API and protocol between clients and a compositor. The client can be local or remote. The compositor can be local or remote. Use whatever network protocol you wish, VNC/NX/XDMCP, blah, blah, blah... go wild. Wayland will connect the client and compositor for all of it.
--
Show off that hardware: join Team Discovery and Team Helix


Maxo
Your tax dollars at work.
Premium,VIP
join:2002-11-04
Tallahassee, FL
said by markofmayhem:

Wayland can't tie your shoes either... I'm not quite understanding the point here, at all. Wayland also doesn't do sound or defragment a filesystem.

And given that this is V1.0.0 that nobody actually expects to see in any real production environment, how much can one expect from it. Right now there is only the promise of a stable API that can be coded against without fear of constant breakage from a shifting protocol.
It is well understood that as we see Wayland trickle into distros, we will still be seeing X shipping for the foreseeable future because nobody expects that Wayland can reasonably replace X today. So pointing out that Wayland is not a good replacement for X today is not a criticism, as even the most avid of Wayland supporters acknowledge this.
--
"Padre, nobody said war was fun now bowl!" - Sherman T Potter

»maxolasersquad.com/

»maxolasersquad.blogspot.com

»www.facebook.com/maxolasersquad

TuxRaiderPen

join:2009-09-19
reply to KodiacZiller
said by KodiacZiller:
Except X sucks where security is concerned.
So if you need a new lock on your house... you build a whole new house?

No. That is not a means to justify a total change in the system.

Improve, enhance or correct the issue.. not throw the baby out with the bath water.

This boils down to:

solution looking for a problem.. I always see a litany of response about how this going to solve everything from the Linux desktop to world hunger, gasoline prices in the US, and peace in the mideast... No it its not. Its just more headaches to deal with and YET ANOTHER fork in the road to cause more hold back on acceptance of Linux corporate and personal.

coders who just don't want to conform and work on X because maybe the rules are more rigid than their accustom to, and their ideas were rejected. Welcome to the real world.

You want to rewrite X and refactor to fix 20 years worth of development and add features, or improve, I am all for it. BUT

It will still BE X and 100% backward compatible! That includes network transparency aka XDMCP, remote X via SSH... All those whippersnapper coders touting cloud computing... well Sonny We've been there done that DECADES ago! Just because maybe you were not alive or around to know it is not my problem to teach you the history of computing. Thin computing aka cloud has been around a long time. And its technology, XDMCP, remote X are things I use and cloud computing rely on daily.

This is more wasted coding time that could be better utilized elsewhere in the Linux chain.
--
1311393600 - Back to Black.....Black....Black....


howardfine

join:2002-08-09
Saint Louis, MO
+2


Maxo
Your tax dollars at work.
Premium,VIP
join:2002-11-04
Tallahassee, FL

1 recommendation

reply to TuxRaiderPen
Often time, in software development, it is easier to rebuild a system than it is to continue patching it. Google hoped to get Firefox in a good state to enable the type of rapid development they wanted to see in browsers. Eventually they realized it was easier to build a new browser from scratch than it would be to get Firefox's codebase in proper order. That's why we have Chrome/Chromium.
At work we are doing the same thing. We've rebuilt our ordering, inventory, billing, and invoicing systems from scratch. Sometimes a new project that can work alongside the existing project is the best way forward.
--
"Padre, nobody said war was fun now bowl!" - Sherman T Potter

»maxolasersquad.com/

»maxolasersquad.blogspot.com

»www.facebook.com/maxolasersquad


howardfine

join:2002-08-09
Saint Louis, MO

1 recommendation

But they didn't break the web in the process. Wayland breaks compatibility.

grunze510

join:2009-02-14
Cote Saint-Luc, QC
kudos:1
said by howardfine:

But they didn't break the web in the process. Wayland breaks compatibility.

Doesn't Wayland have a compatibility layer for X? Also, I don't think distros would pick it up as default until it's ready even though it reached 1.0 . Not to mention that we've hardly seen any info on Wayland for a while, so I don't think it'll get used for a while. Give it time.

GraysonPeddi
Grayson Peddie

join:2010-06-28
Tallahassee, FL

1 recommendation

reply to Cabal
Wayland is a very controversial subject to talk about it and it always don't end, do they?

»www.h-online.com/open/news/item/···638.html


--
Phone: Yealink SIP-T22P + CSipSimple in Optimus V
Phone System: Asterisk 10.1; Server: Debian Sid+Exp

I'm in heaven with VoIP except for 3G wireless.

tld

join:2002-12-19
reply to howardfine
said by howardfine:

said by Maxo:

The X network protocol is quite expensive making it mostly useless over the Internet.

As one who uses it every time I'm on the road, I argue that's not true. More importantly, X can do it. Wayland cannot.

Agreed. I do this all the time on both my LAN and over the Internet. The great thing about it is that it allows you to run graphical programs on headless machines that aren't even running X themselves. I do this with my MythTV backend all the time. I'd miss it for sure.


markofmayhem
Why not now?
Premium
join:2004-04-08
Pittsburgh, PA
kudos:5
said by tld:

said by howardfine:

said by Maxo:

The X network protocol is quite expensive making it mostly useless over the Internet.

As one who uses it every time I'm on the road, I argue that's not true. More importantly, X can do it. Wayland cannot.

I'd miss it for sure.

No you wouldn't miss it... it isn't going anywhere!

Wayland does not replace X, it replaces the display module of the X server that communicates between client and compositor. Pictures above for those having trouble reading that sentence over the last 2 years.
--
Show off that hardware: join Team Discovery and Team Helix

GraysonPeddi
Grayson Peddie

join:2010-06-28
Tallahassee, FL
reply to tld
What pictures are you referring to?

(Thought I'm replying to markofmayhem but it mentioned "tld." Whoops.)


markofmayhem
Why not now?
Premium
join:2004-04-08
Pittsburgh, PA
kudos:5
said by GraysonPeddi:

What pictures are you referring to?

(Thought I'm replying to markofmayhem but it mentioned "tld." Whoops.)

Yours.

This may help as well, it has pictures and a video:
»vignatti.wordpress.com/2012/06/1···wayland/

And this, which explains nicely how Wayland is designed to be alongside X, not replacing it; it also dives into the "Intel only" problem (no pics or vids, sorry):
»arstechnica.com/information-tech···wayland/
--
Show off that hardware: join Team Discovery and Team Helix


markofmayhem
Why not now?
Premium
join:2004-04-08
Pittsburgh, PA
kudos:5
reply to TuxRaiderPen
said by TuxRaiderPen:

said by KodiacZiller:
Except X sucks where security is concerned.
So if you need a new lock on your house... you build a whole new house?

Wayland is a new lock and paint on the front door. Why should Wayland have to defend itself from the stupidity of those who see a different colored door and claim it is a whole new house?

BUZZZZ!!! DING DING DING, lack of wisdom on the topic warning!
--
Show off that hardware: join Team Discovery and Team Helix

TuxRaiderPen

join:2009-09-19
reply to grunze510
said by grunze510:
Doesn't Wayland have a compatibility layer for X? Also, I don't think distros would pick it up as default until it's ready even though it reached 1.0 . Not to mention that we've hardly seen any info on Wayland for a while, so I don't think it'll get used for a while.
Another layer to be broken, setup, bugs...etc... just more hassles for users and more problems that wouldn't exist to start.

No thanks.

X, please.

said by grunze510:
Give it time.
No thanks. I've rejected it to start. No need for it.
--
1311393600 - Back to Black.....Black....Black....

TuxRaiderPen

join:2009-09-19
reply to Maxo
said by Maxo:
Often time, in software development, it is easier to rebuild a system than it is to continue patching it.
Again, I've said if you want to rebuild X to be X Super Edition, great I am all for it... BUT I WANT X, not waynonsense ALL 100% of X, and that includes XDMCP, you may not use it but several on this thread do, and all the buzz word cloud computing does...

And no hokey add on layers to cause more problems and troubleshoot...

You still have to be compatible with your previous system , and if your not your asking for trouble in most cases.

said by Maxo:
Google hoped to get Firefox in a good state to enable the type of rapid development they wanted to see in browsers. Eventually they realized it was easier to build a new browser from scratch than it would be to get Firefox's codebase in proper order. That's why we have Chrome/Chromium.
Wrong programs to mention to me, I despise and find neither useful.

google only needed to change things due to their eating at the ECMAscript buffet and using bleeding edge code that browsers may not be as current on... I only use Konqueror and if you lie to google it everything works quite nicely using the KHTML engine. So google knock of your BS with the messages, I don't care! I know what your up to and its worse than ms and their games with a browser !

said by Maxo:
At work we are doing the same thing. We've rebuilt our ordering, inventory, billing, and invoicing systems from scratch. Sometimes a new project that can work alongside the existing project is the best way forward.
Did some thing with same sort of items as well, but it didn't break the current system nor did it require any changes to software. And this is really not the same thing... these systems are not systems that other programs rely on to put their interface on the screen etc.. X is a key part of that.. In other words you don't break it to move forward.

This really is just going to push Linux backwards after decades of progress this could entirely erradicate it one fell swoop.

No thanks. KDE based on X, only please.

More solutions looking for problems...again.
--
1311393600 - Back to Black.....Black....Black....

GraysonPeddi
Grayson Peddie

join:2010-06-28
Tallahassee, FL

2 edits
--retracted--


howardfine

join:2002-08-09
Saint Louis, MO
I wouldn't be talking like that when, by your question, you show you haven't been following along and don't know all the issues.

TuxRaiderPen

join:2009-09-19
reply to GraysonPeddi
said by GraysonPeddi:
How can Wayland be so controversial? What is the problem here in the forum?
If you have to ask that question...well.....
--
1311393600 - Back to Black.....Black....Black....