"No" -Xorg
Hey Xorg, it's 2025 and people have really powerful GPUs so fancy-smanchy effects can be implemented that use like 1% of a GPU's horsepower but would have been considered impossible fantasy beyond the power of every supercomputer in the world combined when you were written, can you implement something to handle stuff like that?
"No" -Xorg
Hey Xorg, your code is so insecure that any instance of it should be considered a critical vulnerability of the highest severity level will you let more than the dozen or so people you have work on it?
"No" -Xorg
Hey Xorg why do my windows get all jaggedy and messed up when I wiggle that around?
"No, uh, I mean, that's called screen tearing and it's a feature" -Xorg
Hey Xorg I have three monitors and I want to run them at different resolutions, refresh rates, and fractional scaling levels. Can I do tha..
"What the hell kind of frame buffer do you have that lets you do that?" -Xorg
Hey Xorg I was going to ask if I could do that without touching any config files or using the command line because I ain't got time for that. Wait. Frame buffer? Is this 1993? Are you developing on a single headed TurboGX-equipped Sun SparcStation running the SPARC port of Linux and you have absolutely no clue about either the state of the art or the march of progress?
"Yes" -Xorg
"Wait, why are people abandoning me?" -Xorg
Yes. That's correct. You are correct. It is no longer fit for purpose and hasn't been for a long time. But inertia.
> the only way to fix it requires breaking all clients
Do it.
Rip the OpenVMS, SVR4, and HP/UX roots out of the ground and throw them in the trash, next to telnet and SysV filesystem support in the kernel.
>
>Do it.
You get Wayland that way. (Wayland actually started out as X12)
DaSHacka•7mo ago
AbuAssar•7mo ago
dTal•7mo ago
Also, time is in any case less relevant that developer hours. Were I feeling snarkier, I might point out that GNU/Hurd was first released in 1990 - perhaps we can finally switch to that...
mystified5016•7mo ago
I don't understand why anyone thinks this is a good thing. It's been THIRTEEN YEARS and Wayland is not even close to a viable replacement for X.
goosedragons•7mo ago
I just don't get it.
rcxdude•7mo ago
Expurple•7mo ago
The presenter (an X11 dev) argues that it was sorta already the case. That, nowadays, X11 WMs are thick, do much of the work themselves, don't use most of the X server's capabilities, and it's just a weird man in the middle between applications and the WM.
I don't have the experience to confirm or deny this, though
opan•7mo ago
The only thing I've heard isn't working in the last year or two is stuff related to accessibility for blind users. Screen readers and related software aren't working as well as they should yet. I don't mean to dismiss that as unserious, by the way, though I would wager that the vast majority of people don't use/need those features and should've been fine to switch over years ago. I hope accessibility improves ASAP as well for those that need it (and sorry if you're one of those people).
AnonymousPlanet•7mo ago
Kicad, e.g., reports problems related to this. To quote https://www.kicad.org/blog/2025/06/KiCad-and-Wayland-Support...
> These problems exist because Wayland’s design omits basic functionality that desktop applications for X11, Windows and macOS have relied on for decades—things like being able to position windows or warp the mouse cursor. This functionality was omitted by design, not oversight.
Wayland might work for your or my personal selection of work cases, and currently my stance is "when it's done it's done, let's wait and see". But it might also end Linux support for entire classes of software and use cases.
tomkarho•7mo ago
nixosbestos•7mo ago
I'm sitting on my porch just absolutely cackling. Y'all are hilarious.