Weird because Wayland is enabled by default, if Firefox detects that your system is ready.

  • Lionel C-R@lemmy.coupou.fr
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    16
    ·
    3 years ago

    Maybe that’s a stupid question (some might say there’s no such thing), but why would I run Wayland?

    It looks like I would have to jump through hoops whereas x11 just works. I’m not being sarcastic or ironical, just genuinely wondering.

    • Ephera
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      3 years ago

      For me, it’s that everything feels just slightly smoother, applications open somewhat quicker and typing feels more ‘direct’ (less latency).

      Certainly nothing revolutionary for now, so if you actually have to jump through many hoops, I wouldn’t bother.
      My distro pre-installs a Wayland session for my DE, so to switch, I just have to log out, select the other session and log back in.

      • Tiuku@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        edit-2
        3 years ago

        Yeah easy switching back and forth makes the transition smooth. I use Wayland 99% of the time, but if I happen to run into problems I can just logout and start X.

        • Ephera
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          3 years ago

          Good point. I’ve certainly had my moments where some application behaved slightly differently and it annoyed me, so I simply went back to X11 until that was fixed or I had a workaround or didn’t need to use that application anymore.

    • kevincox
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 years ago

      It looks like I would have to jump through hoops whereas x11 just works.

      If you have to jump through hoops I probably wouldn’t bother. Most distros are shipping it by default so I would just wait until that happens.

      Some benefits that I can think of off the top of my head:

      • Top quality high and mixed resolution support.
      • Tear free rendering and capturing.
      • (Small) improved performance.
      • Games are much better behaved. I can reliably window, maximize and full-screen them. They also never mess with the display resolution.
      • Seems to have less windows (especially hover tool tips) just hanging around. I guess the compositor can close these at the right time under Wayland.
      • Proper secure screen locking. (I think GNOME + GDM can do something safe on X but most display managers + lock screens can’t cooperate well enough to manage this.)

      Honestly it is nothing major (except the mixed dpi stuff) but a nice step up. And if the X devs say that X is unmaintainable and this is going to lead to many improvements and be able to be maintained for the next age of displays on Linux I’m happy to make the switch now that it is the default and I am not aware of any problems for my workflow.

    • Lionel C-R@lemmy.coupou.fr
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      3 years ago

      Thanks for those answers.

      I use I3wm and don’t play games on my gnu/linux computers so for now I think I’ll stick with it but it seems sway would be the way to go for me if I was ready.

  • daojones
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    3 years ago

    Yeah it’s going to take a while for people to move over to Wayland.

  • Evan
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    3 years ago

    I’m not using wayland because I need to screenshare

      • Evan
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 years ago

        Not positive about OBS, it’s mostly support in software I use

          • Ephera
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            3 years ago

            I think, they’re saying that they have to use a certain video chat client for their job, and that video chat client doesn’t support screen sharing on Wayland yet, even if Wayland itself would be ready for it.

          • keegomatic
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            3 years ago

            “Not positive” in this context means “unsure” (i.e., the above commenter is unsure about whether or not OBS works in Wayland, but they rely on some other software which they know is incompatible with Wayland)

  • Ephera
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    3 years ago

    Hmm, do you think that more than 10% of desktop Linux users are on Wayland?

    • CarrotsHaveEars
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      3 years ago

      I think a better question would be, ‘Aren’t you mad that about 90% of Linux desktop still don’t run Wayland?’

      • Kromonos@fapsi.be
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        3 years ago

        Why so negative? I think about something like “Nearly 10% of Linux systems already use Wayland”.

        • kevincox
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          3 years ago

          I agree, 10% is huge. I only started using Wayland a handful of years ago and I would consider myself a somewhat early adopter of technology. Just about transition will follow a roughly sigmoid adoption curve. The first tiny fraction will switch soon, then the early adopters. Now we are at the point where most major distros are all shipping it by default and LTS releases where it wasn’t the default are dropping out of support. There are still a couple of big blockers such as some graphics drivers but when those drop even more people will transition by default. 10% is significantly more than just early adopters so I would expect that as more and more people fall into the “enabled by default” category the number will steadily rise to 90% over the next 3-5 years. Then it will slow down as the final blockers are eliminated and the resistors finally give in.

        • joojmachine
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          3 years ago

          right? it went from fedora being the only distro putting proper effort into using and supporting it to more and more distros using it as the standard

  • Alfenstein
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    3 years ago

    I couldn’t run signal or bitwarden when I used Wayland. (Some electron bug). And also CS:GO.

  • NathanUp
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    3 years ago

    I wish my machine didn’t have an Nvidia GPU so I could use it.

  • const_void
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    3 years ago

    Scaling on Wayland doesn’t work for me so X11 is here to stay until that gets fixed

  • Kookaburra
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    3 years ago

    I wish I could use Wayland but the software I use to work, which needs to take screenshots of my desktop, can’t take any screenshots from it (on my case, using Sway). And the company who made it give zero fs to find a fix to it.

      • Kookaburra
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        3 years ago

        No, Upwork. I have only tested it on Sway, not sure if on GNOME that behavior changes.

  • Fisch
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    3 years ago

    The only reason I’m not using Wayland is because I need an uncapped framerate for osu!, which isn’t possible right now on Wayland