Just as manufacturers respond to market forces Xorg, Wayland etc are responging to free forces of open source. Free programs tend to appaer on places where they are needed and where conditions are favorable. Limiting one of their most fundamental principle ( freedom of change) would mean killing the project.
Also, closed drivers show now and again that even if they can be useful solution for some purposes, they fail miserably across the board as one-size-fits-all solution.
Since manufacturers can not predict all possible usefull roles for their product ( and even if they could , they don't care to) so they opt for least common denominator.
Anyone outside that is basically screwed.
This is why wee need that freedom. Even if we don't want to use particualr open source product, data and source on which is based enable us to roll our own...
With fixed ABI, how would things like Wayland ( or even mroe radical) be possible ?
Developer and end-user are not mutually exclusive roles.
There are few distro's that are community ran and also let the community dictate the direction of the distro. For example:And something tells me that the rest tries to follow suit but when they fail they say that they don't care about the end user but the developer.
A lot of distros don't really do much in development but simply repackage. Most of your development work for linux comes from commercial entities that are not interested in the desktop market. For example: http://www.tuxradar.com/content/red-...-desktop-linux Instead they concentrate their development on where the money is which is big enterprise.I mean there are plenty of distros that focus on the end user because they want linux to gain mass acceptance (which is also the goal of linus torvalds from what I heard).
The number one reason is because the desktop market is far less profitable then the mobile/embedded/enterprise market and given their limited resources that is what they concentrate on for their development work.The reason devs are #1 is because of people like you who think that somehow linux doesn't want to be on all computers and use it as an excuse to not improve their software.
Canonical did introduce many end-user interesting projects: software center (much more comfortable to find and discuss software), jockey (to autofetch drivers), automatic Xorg restarts (to eliminate "CLI suprise" in case of bad drivers), upstart (before systemd was born), networkmanager (this is clearly userfriendly) early adoption of PulseAudio (with funny effects).
They do develop much less inkernel, but they do work on integration and desktop consistency. And they have not misused their lead/semi-lead position to prevent other distributions to profit from their efforts, as of today.