Oh God no. If we are going to stuff up our modern display server with hacky abstraction layer upon hacky abstraction layer, just so we can sub-optimally run the apps that now run acceptably everywhere because of X.org, then please, please, please, stop building replacement display servers. We're better off with X.org alone.
And the "What about having WaylandMir and MirWayland" is exactly the illustration of why Mir is such a stupid idea in the first place, it creates tension and technical problems where there need be none. If Canonical had poured the same amount of money and effort into Wayland, they would be running Ubuntu Touch upon Wayland already and they would be assured of being able to run all FOSS apps that currently run on X.org.
Now Canonical is taking a Microsoftian gamble that more developers will target Mir than Wayland and that they will come up on top because they have the larger application catalog and users will be enticed to solely use Ubuntu. I think that will prove to be a pipe dream, but hey, it's a ballsy move and it'll make a great story for the youngsters if they want to know what came before Wayland.
You don't know what people will use. I'm not defending MIR here, but I think it's too early to make such judgments.Smartphone manufacturers won't.
Other embedded device manufacturers won't.
Not sure about GNOME3 or XFCE, but i bet they aren't crazy about it either.
Which means Canonical does control Mir, because they're the only ones who can re-release it in a license that people will use.
I agree that it would (probably) have been the better technical choice, to stick with Wayland and just work on it, but I guess, Mir was more of a political decision. However, now Mir's there (more or less) and it's unlikely that Canonical will change it's mind - it's also unlikely that Wayland will be dropped, so MirWayland/WaylandMir seems the only way to prevent Ubuntu-exclusives. Furthermore, I wouldn't be too worried about the overhead, since, according to XMir and XWayland, it doesn't seem to be that big (count in the early-days-factor of Mir).
Last edited by alexThunder; 07-01-2013 at 11:39 AM.
If I have fast code in one folder and copies it to a different folder the copy won't be slower.
The facts is:
Mir is missing some important pieces for performance right now.
XMir emulated a full desktop environment while XWayland only emulated the benchmarked app.
The test where run on different hardware.
A. These test arent comparable at all as they where run in very different way measuring different stuff.
B It's stupid to measure Mir perfomance right now except for seeing how different changes affect the performance.
Also, should be noted that in the case Canonical maintains this Mir over Wayland for the sake of contributing, then they'd probably be better of implementing Mir as a Wayland compositor and that's it. Which would have been probably the sane thing to do from day zero.
In the same way, for Wayland on Mir you'd need this stable API, but Wayland on Mir is more likely to be done by Canonical than by the rest of the community, and since Canonical (and it's community) are the ones who can break the API, they can as well spread the changes to Wayland on Mir on the same move.
*However*, as long as Mir is Unity only, one can hope whoever codes for Mir will code for Unity, and will do so by targeting Qt (what one should hope, since Mir's API will not be stable, is that they wouldn't target Unity directly, but Qt. Mir's API being unstable kind of warrants nobody will directly target it). If it's done this way, every app coded for Mir will work out of the box on Wayland, as long as you have Qt installed.
Sometimes faster comes with crashes, and stable implies slower. How would you define 'better' there? The faster, or the more reliable? Depends on your priorities and the specific use case. It's not the same if a video keeps crashing (it really breaks the atmosphere a movie might be trying to set) but the time it works can put 600FPS on screen, than a web browser which is stable as hell but takes a minute to load each message on an IRC window. Both cases are shitty as hell, even when in one aspect are DA BEST.
On the other hand, what is compared is what will be relevant for the user. The comparison itself is bad for said reasons, but that doesn't change a bit what the end user will perceive. XMir will be running the desktops in 13.10 and 14.04, which is a LTS. IMO, this is nonsense. On Wayland, there's no plans of releasing a distro with it until there's a working native DE on it, and XWayland is, in consequence, meant only for unsupported *single* applications, and this is what Wayland users will see.
I agree on the point that it's stupid to compare performance right now, though.
But anyway, I'm confident that in due time, Wayland will wipe the floor with Mir.
Right, but that's only said by the ubuntu fanboys who swallow everything Shuttleworth ejaculates...It should also be noted that ubuntu's first "mir releases" are just xmir running unity 7, canonical certainly won't be releasing desktop ubuntu with a "mir native desktop" any time soon either. I'm so sick of this ridiculous FUD that wayland will never be ready and that no one plans to adopt it. it is NOT TRUE.