I think the problem with btrfs is that it entered the spotlight way to early. With Wayland there was time to work on a lot of the kinks before everyone started seriously switching.

On btrfs a bunch of people switched blindly and then lost data. This caused many to have a bad impression of btrfs. These days it is significantly better but because there was so much fear there is less attention paid to it and it is less widely used.

    • hummus273@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      18 hours ago

      X’s network transparency is overrated IMHO. Since ages most data on desktops is sent via shared memory to the X server (MIT-SHM extension) otherwise the performance would suck. This does not work over the network and so X over the network is actually quite slow. Waypipe works way better for me than SSH X forwarding.

        • hummus273@feddit.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          18 hours ago

          Not having any lag is physically impossible. You don’t notice it maybe. But if I open Firefox with X forwarding on the same network (1gbe) it is very noticeable for me.

      • nanook@friendica.eskimo.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        18 hours ago

        @hummus273 It’s overrated because you don’t use it, I frequently do. If all you want to do is emulate Windows than Wayland is fine. If you need network functionality it is not.

        • hummus273@feddit.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          18 hours ago

          You assume I’m not using it. On the contrary, I use it a lot at work. We have some old TK interfaces. They take ages to load over the network. The interfaces load much faster when using Xvnc running on the remote machine rather than X forwarding (but it is not as convenient).

          • nanook@friendica.eskimo.com
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            17 hours ago

            @hummus273 Xvnc does not allow you to display individual applications only an entire desktop. I’m monitoring about 20 different computers doing different things and for me it is a significant advantage not to have to bring up a whole desktop but to be able to launch a single graphical application on my existing desktop.

            I don’t really understand the degree of emotional attachment people have to one solution or another. For me it’s a simple application case, for me Wayland is not desirable, not only does it not network, but the embedded X-server as part of the kernel works very effectively by avoiding the kernel/userland switches an ordinary X server would require.

            So for my use case, Wayland is NOT a replacement and so I have to object to people arguing that it is a full replacement for X, it is not.

            • hummus273@feddit.org
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              17 hours ago

              @hummus273 Xvnc does not allow you to display individual applications only an entire desktop. I’m monitoring about 20 different computers doing different things and for me it is a significant advantage not to have to bring up a whole desktop but to be able to launch a single graphical application on my existing desktop.

              Yes, that is what I meant with not as convenient.

              I don’t really understand the degree of emotional attachment people have to one solution or another. For me it’s a simple application case, for me Wayland is not desirable, not only does it not network

              Your use case is covered by waypipe (which in my tests is much more responsive than X11 forwarding).

              the embedded X-server as part of the kernel works very effectively by avoiding the kernel/userland switches an ordinary X server would require.

              I think you are confusing stuff here. Which kernel has an embedded X server?

              So for my use case, Wayland is NOT a replacement and so I have to object to people arguing that it is a full replacement for X, it is not.

              What part of your use case is not covered by waypipe?

              • nanook@friendica.eskimo.com
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                17 hours ago

                @hummus273 Waypipe would involve a lot of userland / kernel exchanges avoided by using the kernel based mode setting Xserver. It happens to work well with my hardware. And I don’t see any noticeable latency issues and not all apps work with Wayland hence I have no motivation to change to Wayland and every motivation to avoid it. Sorry if that gets someone’s panties in a wad.

                • hummus273@feddit.org
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  16 hours ago

                  Waypipe has nothing to do with the kernel mode setting driver. The X server code does not run in the kernel. Wayland compositors use kernel modesetting for mode changes, so not sure what your point is? Not saying you need to switch to Wayland, just saying that it covers the use case you described as impossible with Wayland.

                  • nanook@friendica.eskimo.com
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    16 hours ago

                    @hummus273 Yes actually in my case it does. The kernel has an X-server built in but ONLY for Intel graphics and I happen to have Intel graphics. Sorry if you’re not familiar enough with X or the kernel to know that but that is a fact.

    • Possibly linux@lemmy.zipOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      21 hours ago

      Wayland as a protocol that apps use to talk to the desktop. It doesn’t use network at all really.

      You need something like freeRDP for network access.

      • nanook@friendica.eskimo.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        7
        ·
        21 hours ago

        @possiblylinux127 It is touted as a replacement for X-windows but the PRIMARY ADVANTAGE of X-windows is that you can run a program on one machine and display it on anther making Wayland completely useless in a networked context.

        • Possibly linux@lemmy.zipOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          19 hours ago

          It is not trying to be a one to one replacement. It is a totally different thing. You are wanting a motorcycle to replace your 2002 pickup truck.

          Also X forwarding is broken for most stuff. It probably will work but it will run poorly and use lots of bandwidth. This is because there are layers and layers of work arounds to make modern hardware and software work on it. The X protocol was intended for mainframes in the 80’s. It should’ve died long ago.