My main issue with Wayland is the fragmentation. Abstract protocol which could be implemented by particular DE/WM means nothing to a user which now doesn’t have a guarantee that their tools will work under all environments. For example, some screengrab utility could work under Gnome, but will not work under wl-roots based WM just because the relevant protocol is not supported there. That’s a major drawback to me, we lose flexibility and kinda forced to use mainstream DEs where they have enough devcapacity to support most of the features from Wayland protocols. Contrary to X.Org where most of the functionality is implemented by server itself and protocol exposed to the clients is way simpler.
I have a T580 with nVidia graphics. Repairability is great. You can find a manual with step-by-step instructions for every part online.
But the thermals in that thing are awful. Especially on Linux and doubly so with the GPU. It has some stupid on-lap detection which heavily throttles the system to not burn the user. Up until a few years ago there wasn’t a driver for Linux so it always defaulted to on-lap-mode. But even worse, the GPU has some hardcoded 70° limit and it throttles down to the lowest clockrate when it reaches that. And it reaches that quickly because CPU and GPU share a heatpipe.
Nowadays I just run it on the integrated Intel graphics on Wayland and it’s great. But it would be cool if I could use the GPU that is at least theoretically able to run Doom 2016 at 30 fps. But practically it struggles with Quake 3.
It’s just a shame that you probably won’t know about these kinds of problems on a new laptop because people only notice them after a few months to years.
Does Wayland allow for the running of a program on a big powerful server (where many users live) and display on a smaller desktop machine that is only providing a screen and keyboard? If not, are they working on that? If it does not and they are not working on it, is it even possible under the way that Wayland works?
Waypipe is not Wayland. Wayland does not natively support this workflow, which is why Waypipe was created. Please don’t confuse the two as being one thing.
You are giving me the impression that Waypipe is an extension to Wayland like XRANDR is to the X11 protocol. I didn’t get that impression from the blogpost. I’m not trying to place value on them being an extension or a separate tool. I’m just trying to figure out if it was a shortheaded response or if Waypipe is an extension to the Wayland protocol.
This may be “moving the goal posts”, if so I apologize in advance. With Waypipe can I have local windows and remote windows on my laptop? Will Waypipe work over a VPN (Tailscale is a VPN right?)
It’s just clickbait like most of his videos, I never really liked Chriss’ videos, the tip of the iceberg was when he told people to disable kernel mitigation for a presumable performance boost (I tested it with disconnected network, it was like 2% on my machine), which is just plain dumb.
Use whatever distro you like, just know that you don’t have to distrohop for some program (DE or WM or whatever). I personally use endeavour, simply because I’ve used arch (and derivatives) for a while now and endeavour is just arch with sensible defaults and a lot of the configuration one would do anyway already done.
yeah i guess this one didnt scream clickbait as much as the other videos of his. I got some in my feed afterwards and quickly realised that this guy doesnt shy away from using clickbait titles.
What is DE or WM? Is it actually that easy to change distro? Dont you have to basically install everything again from scratch? I read somewhere that you can seperate your directories on your SSD so that you can just change the kernel but i dont know how easy or true that is
DE is desktop environment (like gnome, kde, xfce,…) And WM is window manager (like i3, sway, xmonad,…) Which is just a slim version of a de, they usually don’t include things like guis for settings, file managers, … and you just pick what you like and use that. The window manager is responsible for placing the windows in your workspace and most standalone wms are tiling, so they use your monitor space efficiently instead of putting floating windows all over the place. Basically the DE (or WM) is what you interact with most on your PC and a lot of beginners distrohop just to use a different DE when in reality you can just install the other de on your existing system, log out and select the new DE in your login screen.
The biggest differences between distros nowadays are their release cycles and their package managers (and the tepos they’re using, like Ubuntu and Debian both use apt, but have separate repos)
And no you can’t really change distro without reinstalling, you can change kernels tho, every distro will update their kernels from time to time and it’s just a matter of install the new package and reboot into the new kernel.
With separate directories you probably mean partitions, which I’d also say it’s advisable to have your /home partition separated from your / partition. That way if you ever have to reinstall or want to change distro you can just install into the root partition and afterwards add your old/home partition to /etc/fstab and keep all you’re user data and configuration
interesting, so every DE has a WM or are can only one of them at a time be used? And if you use a WM you have to install guis, file managers yourself? I think the only thing i would want is a DE/WM that has tabs for folders. I think its a neat feature to have
The basic GUI experience in X is provided by the window manager. It controls how your windows are placed ( eg. Tiling vs Stacking / Floating ), how they are decorated ( eg. Max / Min / Close buttons ), and how they behave ( eg. Click to focus ). In X, the window manager runs as an application on the X server. You can only use one at a time.
In Wayland, the “window manager” is the display-server too and is called a compositor. For smaller projects, there are compositor libraries that provide similar capabilities to what the X server did so that these projects can concentrate on the “window manager” part. You can think of a Wayland compositor as equivalent to an X window manager ).
A Desktop Environment comes with a window manager ( or compositor ) and adds other tools that run alongside ( or on top of ) the window manager to provide a full user experience. This may include panels ( eg. think Windows start button, icon bar, and status tray ), docks ( like MacOS ), global menus, notification applets, and the desktop surface itself ( eg. are there icons or other features on the desktop ). A DE usually comes with a standard set of basic applications like a file manager, image viewer, document viewer, media player, and the like.
If you start with a basic window manager then yes you have to add all this other stuff yourself. Of course you may not want some of it and so can have a much lighter experience. You can also just choose tools that you like. Of course, they may not match visually or work perfectly together.
If you use a DE, the experience is curated for you and everything is more likely to work well out of the box. That said, nothing stops you from swapping out whatever components you want. You can even use a different window manager than the DE default.
While I admit most of my arch reinstalls are mostly the same,I feel that archinstall script is genuinely good now with most defaults I need. The rest I can just add it in the installer extra packages or chroot post install (which is offered as a choice at the end).
I just could never bring myself to use distros that are technically the same distro with calamares slapped in top and whatnot. I mean ‘pacman -S {packages}’ is straightforward enough for me.
Yeah, people are trying to make Wayland work so hard… Thanks to the open source community behind it but let’s be honest: Wayland is badly designed and coded.
After 10 years I can still not share my screen easily, always need to switch to X11.
Wayland are for little hobbyist kids who want to have fun with Linux, not people who need to do actual stuff.
If Wayland was doing half of the work it should be doing then we would adopt it. But it’s just bad software and brining all of Linux down with it.
Wayland is not poorly designed or coded, screensharing works perfectly as long as the apps properly support wayland.
That’s not a problem with waylands design or code, that’s a problem with apps design or code, the thing you may want to take issue with is the notion that we could change things like this while still being poorly supported generally.
I was very sad when KDE reintroduced the concept of “primary screen”.
It used to just be the current screen, which meant that when I wanted to game or watch something on my projector, I just dragged steam or the folder with movies to the projector screen, then launched whatever I wanted, and it appeared on the screen I wanted it on.
Now I have to jerryrig kwin and a custom steam-in-gamescope Launcher to have games launch there. As a side effect, steam thinks my PC is a steam deck and therefore can’t be exited from inside of it, I have to right click the tray icon.
Horribly kludgy compared to “click launch game button on screen x, game opens on screen x”
linux
Active
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.