Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 31

Thread: Wayland: A New X Server For Linux

  1. #21
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    233

    Default

    The author of Wayland says in his blog:

    Phoronix ran an article about Wayland and slashdot in turn picked it up. They got the headline wrong, though, it's not a new X server, it's a tiny display server + compositing manager.
    So it's not "Quartz for Linux", and it won't be a short time replacement for Xserver.

  2. #22
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    404

    Default

    Looks like little more than a toy at present, but the idea is certainly a good one. I'm not sure about doing all rendering client-side, but that probably works well for some applications. I watch with interest.

  3. #23
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    4

    Default

    By the way for those who think this development will take a long time, I think you're wrong. Don't forget that a lot of people who try to get a rewrite of software they do it from binary only releases... Now Xorg is actually an open and documented system so it's going to take much less time than what you think. Take an example of Nvidia/Nouveau vs Bittorrent clients (At what rate they are developed).

  4. #24
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    404

    Default

    That's not really comparable in terms of complexity...

  5. #25
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Third Rock from the Sun
    Posts
    6,584

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by TechMage89 View Post
    That's not really comparable in terms of complexity...
    ditto, Hell it takes a long time for FOSS friendly wifi chipsets to get proper support (ie ralink) which is far more complex then a BT client but doesn't come close to the complexity of a X server.

  6. #26
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Mexico City, Mexico
    Posts
    900

    Default

    I also do not think this will take as long as it has taken the XServer to evolve to its present form for Wayland to either evolve to the same degree of complexity/features/support. However realistically speaking, I don't see Wayland taking over the XServer in less than 5 years time-frame, could take even longer. However, recent tilts into the development of FLOSS software has been blazing fast. Take Compiz for instance, it has taken distros to enable it by default (Ubuntu 8.10 and others) over two years, and its been under development for at least four years (that I know of, anyway), so from inception to deployment of this rather "useless" piece of desktop bling it has been about 4-5 years. I see a similar path for Wayland. It could be faster due to the interest and momentum generated by these other projects.

  7. #27
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    PL
    Posts
    911

    Default

    I see a similar path for Wayland. It could be faster due to the interest and momentum generated by these other projects.
    the interest from small, embedded distros might do the trick. it's quite a big market, after all (although not everybody on that market needs X).

    take damn small linux, for instance. they use Xvesa right now. (i don't know about slitaz, perhaps they use the same thing). distributions targeted for old hardware (e.g. deli linux) are more likely to use kdrive, Xvesa and similar smaller servers instead of full xorg.

    if there would be a better X server with similar disk/memory footprint some of those distributions would definitely take it for a spin.

  8. #28
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    32

    Default

    And Wayland just became the default X server in the latest Ubuntu on top of Unity.

  9. #29
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Toronto-ish
    Posts
    7,514

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SarahKH View Post
    And Wayland just became the default X server in the latest Ubuntu on top of Unity.
    My understanding was that Mark Shuttleworth blogged about possibly using Wayland under Unity a year from now... I don't believe it is the default "anything" today.

    BTW I think this has been mentioned before, but Wayland is not an X server in any respect... it is a smaller, simpler *display* server which can occupy a similar spot in the graphics stack as long as your applications or toolkits can run over Wayland.

    If you want X functionality (eg network extensible display protocols) and support for X applications the idea is that you would run X *over* Wayland.

  10. #30
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    55

    Default Think About Why It Takes So Long

    Quote Originally Posted by deanjo View Post
    ditto, Hell it takes a long time for FOSS friendly wifi chipsets to get proper support (ie ralink) which is far more complex then a BT client but doesn't come close to the complexity of a X server.
    The very reason it takes so long for FOSS-friendly hardware to be supported properly is because FOSS is still not as large a priority as even OS X, let alone Windows - and that is entirely due to marketshare and (perceived) complexity of FOSS on the desktop. (Yes; I did say "perceived complexity" - not all FOSS distributions are difficult to install compared to OS X or Windows; in fact, some are actually *easier* to install than even Windows or OS X.)

    I *have* a Ralink-based USB stick, which is directly supported by every OS I've thrown at it - not exactly typical.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •