Screen color calibration, no nvidia support (not their fault, but that doesn’t solve the problem, does it), HDR (KDE has it in beta, but no one else does)…
I’m sorry, it’s an unfinished product (unlike, let’s say PipeWire, which is why it was quickly addopted). X.org devs went 180 regarding development of Wayland vs X.org. It had a bad foundation to begin with, not enough supported protocols… everything after that is just patching the obvious.
They should have ditched Wayland 15 years ago and start from scratch when they saw how poor the standard was regarding protocols. If X.org was too big and heavy, Wayland went in the complete opposite direction. A middle ground should have been made, and adoption would have been quicker and more stable.
Yeah, but they obviously missed a few key features of X.org.
They’re still working on it, and if it’s been a while since you last checked they may have already implemented the ones you wanted.
Hm… OK will check 👍.
Like what? A broken protocol from 70 years ago?
Not exactly 70, but still, it does have features that Wayland still lacks.
Name one from the top of your head.
Screen color calibration, no nvidia support (not their fault, but that doesn’t solve the problem, does it), HDR (KDE has it in beta, but no one else does)…
I’m sorry, it’s an unfinished product (unlike, let’s say PipeWire, which is why it was quickly addopted). X.org devs went 180 regarding development of Wayland vs X.org. It had a bad foundation to begin with, not enough supported protocols… everything after that is just patching the obvious.
They should have ditched Wayland 15 years ago and start from scratch when they saw how poor the standard was regarding protocols. If X.org was too big and heavy, Wayland went in the complete opposite direction. A middle ground should have been made, and adoption would have been quicker and more stable.