Now consider that most enterprises are about five years behind that. Takes a few years before what’s available in Fedora trickles down to RHEL, and a few more years before it’s rolled out to clients. Ubuntu is on a similar timeline.
The fixes you got two years ago might be rolled out in 3 years in these places. Oh, and these are the people forking up much of the money for the Wayland development efforts. The current state of Wayland if you pay for it is kinda meh.
RHEL 9 defaulted to Wayland in 2022. RHEL 10 will not even include Xorg.
I agree that businesses lag, often by years. So the fact that RHEL is so far along in the Wayland transition kind of shows how out-of-date the anti-Wayland rhetoric is.
Exactly my point. The issues people consider ”solved” with wayland today will be solved in production in 3-5 years.
People are still running RHEL 7, and Wayland in RHEL 9 isn’t that polished. In 4-5 years when RHEL 10 lands, it might start to be usable. Oh right, then we need another few years for vendors to port garbage software that’s absolutely mission critical and barely works on Xorg, sure as fuck won’t work in xwayland. I’m betting several large RHEL-clients will either remain on RHEL8 far past EOL or just switch to alternative distros.
Basically, Xorg might be dead, but in some (paying commercial) contexts, Wayland won’t be a viable option within the next 5-10 years.
Well, we’re currently in the process of porting apps away from Windows Server 2012 and CentOS 7.
What you’re describing is just how the industry works, not specific to Wayland.
Those are terribly run enterprises. I work for a giant multinational that is widely considered to be obsolete tech-wise … I’m on fedora 42 on my work laptop. The team responsible for vetting, security and customising the deployment was ready day one.
Its 3-4 people catering for the ~2-3000 users that use the os internally.
I get the need for stability and repeatability in enterprise. I’m a sysadmin for more than 20 years.
That 3 year timeline could maybe move up a bit, even windows deployments are more or less up to date. Why would’t linux be?
Lastly, the more resistance to wayland, the longer it will take for it to reach a level of polish to where even you would aprove of.
When the switch became inevitable (distros defaulting, dropping x11), I installed it, lived with its crappy issues back then, reported said issues and moved on with my day.
Edit: I will say, one thing I still hate about wayland is the sleep behaviour. The 2 x11 systems I still use work well for this, none of my wayland systems want to wake up from sleep nicely.
Now consider that most enterprises are about five years behind that. Takes a few years before what’s available in Fedora trickles down to RHEL, and a few more years before it’s rolled out to clients. Ubuntu is on a similar timeline.
The fixes you got two years ago might be rolled out in 3 years in these places. Oh, and these are the people forking up much of the money for the Wayland development efforts. The current state of Wayland if you pay for it is kinda meh.
RHEL 9 defaulted to Wayland in 2022. RHEL 10 will not even include Xorg.
I agree that businesses lag, often by years. So the fact that RHEL is so far along in the Wayland transition kind of shows how out-of-date the anti-Wayland rhetoric is.
Exactly my point. The issues people consider ”solved” with wayland today will be solved in production in 3-5 years.
People are still running RHEL 7, and Wayland in RHEL 9 isn’t that polished. In 4-5 years when RHEL 10 lands, it might start to be usable. Oh right, then we need another few years for vendors to port garbage software that’s absolutely mission critical and barely works on Xorg, sure as fuck won’t work in xwayland. I’m betting several large RHEL-clients will either remain on RHEL8 far past EOL or just switch to alternative distros.
Basically, Xorg might be dead, but in some (paying commercial) contexts, Wayland won’t be a viable option within the next 5-10 years.
What you’re describing aren’t issues with Wayland.
Your complaints are that you’re using old versions and poorly designed software.
Those aren’t Wayland issues they’re poor management and lack of investment
Well, we’re currently in the process of porting apps away from Windows Server 2012 and CentOS 7.
What you’re describing is just how the industry works, not specific to Wayland.
Those are terribly run enterprises. I work for a giant multinational that is widely considered to be obsolete tech-wise … I’m on fedora 42 on my work laptop. The team responsible for vetting, security and customising the deployment was ready day one.
Its 3-4 people catering for the ~2-3000 users that use the os internally.
I get the need for stability and repeatability in enterprise. I’m a sysadmin for more than 20 years. That 3 year timeline could maybe move up a bit, even windows deployments are more or less up to date. Why would’t linux be?
Lastly, the more resistance to wayland, the longer it will take for it to reach a level of polish to where even you would aprove of.
When the switch became inevitable (distros defaulting, dropping x11), I installed it, lived with its crappy issues back then, reported said issues and moved on with my day.
Edit: I will say, one thing I still hate about wayland is the sleep behaviour. The 2 x11 systems I still use work well for this, none of my wayland systems want to wake up from sleep nicely.