That the guy is pissed of doesn't mean the conversation isn't constructive or respectful.
The problems I'm observing myself on Wayland seem diverse and relevant: - Plainly worse performance. - Random jitter on the desktop. - Windows not being decorated, glitchy when grabbed. - Windows not raising. - No full-screen application preserves aspect ratio (Sauterbraten, Super Tux Kart) . - Full-screen applications leaving black borders in the left and low side of the screen (Darkmod). - Clicking on the VirtualBox toolbar freezes the entire desktop. - Recording the desktop makes a huge slow-down on animations on highly capable hardware (OBS) - Windows that have transparencies now painted black (DisplayCal). - Windows that under certain circumstances can't be grabbed (Steam). Having the applications not isolated, both in the display server and the packaging, is an advantage not a drawback. As applications on Linux are meant to colaborare, not be separated tools like on a phone. Having the display protocol specification and the code being a single software, is an advantage not a drawback. It allows capturing and standardizing all kinds of details you discover LATER on in a single place, for every other desktop. My feeling is this: something like Wayland was quite needed but, at the same time, it is quite contaminated by the narrow way of thinking of their creators: GNOME. GNOME and RedHat are Apple wannabes, but without contextualizing decisions. They copied the weaknesses of the Apple model, in a context it fits even worse. And they NEVER listen. Maybe you can straight Wayland up, but it isn't without its... drawbacks. On Mon, Feb 2, 2026 at 4:49 PM David Edmundson <[email protected]> wrote: > >This is a selfish waste of my time and constructive. > > *and not constructive >
