this post was submitted on 24 Feb 2025
73 points (97.4% liked)

Linux

6162 readers
181 users here now

A community for everything relating to the GNU/Linux operating system

Also check out:

Original icon base courtesy of [email protected] and The GIMP

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] -2 points 2 days ago (4 children)

Wayland was such a bad implementation and execution from the start. Almost 2 decades passed and it's still not usable. Xorg with all its faults is still much more usable and the architecture, though bad, makes much more sense than what wayland is doing.

Downvote me all you want.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Wayland works just fine for me which xoeg doesn't

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 day ago

Curious why Xorg doesn't work for you?

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 day ago

There was no reason to rush, because x.org still worked... the point was to create an excellent from the ground up implementation, that takes tons of time.

Why would they rush it out if there's something that already works fine? That'd completely defeat the purpose of it.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

Compiz and XGL came out in 2006 and showed the way. Then this overengineered mess started.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 day ago

Except it's a nonsense point, x.org working is precisely why there was no reason to rush it out. They made an EXCELLENT implementation rather than the MVP that x.org is.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 days ago

Can't downvoted truth.