> Wayland is still being rolled out, it hasn't even managed to be the default compositor on any major Linux distros yet (though I heard that Fedora may choose to default to Wayland for its next release).
This is true on desktop systems. It's already running fine and dandy on many embedded systems, and it has been for a fairly long time. I have at least four or five boards in my office that are running it, for production purposes, i.e. real-life devices.
Certainly it's going to see more adoption, including by KDE. But at the moment, its support in the desktop world is pretty much limited to Gnome and, uh, that i3-like compositor, I forgot its name.
> What are you talking about? There's no closed source bias with Wayland.
With Wayland itself, no, certainly.
But one of the things that intrigues me is that somehow people would have you think that the open source community -- historically, one of the most security-conscious -- has managed to turn a blind eye to this elephant in the room, a frickin' walking keylogger, throughout the troubled 1990s and 2000s. You think we just somehow missed this disaster waiting to happen, and it took us 20 years to come with a contingency plan?
It is not the only factor, nor the dominating one, but one of the significant reasons why some companies like Wayland is that it saves them a lot of headaches, including (potential) legal ones involved in selling equipment that has to run third party/OEM/crapware programs. Users of these systems may, and often will, input sensible stuff on their devices. You don't want every company who publishes an application to the app store to be able to read everything.
Truth is, this has simply not been a major concern so far. It is becoming.
I don't mean to say it's a bad thing, and like I said in my previous post, I certainly can't wait for when X11 will become history, but I think we need to keep a close eye on what's happening. It's important to understand that a need for device, software and user data control is a major driving factor behind much of today's technology, and it's worth keeping an eye on.
This is true on desktop systems. It's already running fine and dandy on many embedded systems, and it has been for a fairly long time. I have at least four or five boards in my office that are running it, for production purposes, i.e. real-life devices.
Certainly it's going to see more adoption, including by KDE. But at the moment, its support in the desktop world is pretty much limited to Gnome and, uh, that i3-like compositor, I forgot its name.
> What are you talking about? There's no closed source bias with Wayland.
With Wayland itself, no, certainly.
But one of the things that intrigues me is that somehow people would have you think that the open source community -- historically, one of the most security-conscious -- has managed to turn a blind eye to this elephant in the room, a frickin' walking keylogger, throughout the troubled 1990s and 2000s. You think we just somehow missed this disaster waiting to happen, and it took us 20 years to come with a contingency plan?
It is not the only factor, nor the dominating one, but one of the significant reasons why some companies like Wayland is that it saves them a lot of headaches, including (potential) legal ones involved in selling equipment that has to run third party/OEM/crapware programs. Users of these systems may, and often will, input sensible stuff on their devices. You don't want every company who publishes an application to the app store to be able to read everything.
Truth is, this has simply not been a major concern so far. It is becoming.
I don't mean to say it's a bad thing, and like I said in my previous post, I certainly can't wait for when X11 will become history, but I think we need to keep a close eye on what's happening. It's important to understand that a need for device, software and user data control is a major driving factor behind much of today's technology, and it's worth keeping an eye on.