You’re not arguing with the original poster. Someone definitely lacks reading comprehension skills and is irrationally fixated on proving themselves right at all times, but it ain’t me. You created a straw men and presented it at “either this or that”, false dichotomy. Again, supporting those who don’t want or can’t drive doesn’t infringe upon the rights of car owners and those who do want to drive. This is not an oppressor-oprressed dynamic. That’s classic victimization. We can help and accommodate to the needs of minorities without having to disregard the needs of the majority. At least learn your moral arguments right.
Making life easier for those who can’t or doesn’t want to drive detracts nothing from those who can. In fact it is beneficial for those who want to drive to have denser cities, and better public transport. It means safer streets, less traffic and lower insurance premiums. Yours is a false dichotomy.
This is one of the main cores behind the anti car and fifteen minutes city concepts. I’m currently facing the choice. Should I buy a car? Because, though I currently move and live without, using a car for commute would be a net personal gain. Biking is not an option, there is no infrastructure nor protections for moving on a bicycle in my city. I have to commute 50km each way, my job is not possible to be done from home, moving closer to work is financially prohibitive. Any new job would be near the same exact geographic area. A car would reclaim almost 3 hours of my day and multiply my options for leisure 10 fold for relatively cheaper. I hate to have to face that dilemma.
Feature parity, maybe not, but use cases, definitely is the goal.
I’m just saying that if users have to run X compatibility portals to get basic functionality for every day tasks, then something is not fully baked yet. There’s nothing wrong with that. But apparently pointing it out is some sort of herecy.
“Unlike X” doesn’t support your argument. If X11 is barely mantained, is on purpose. X11 and Wayland are not in competition, one is the rewrite of the former. They literally have no rush to push Wayland to main stage until it can do all that X11 does, including the annoying edge use cases. Because if X11 does it and Wayland doesn’t, then people would just continue to use X11. No brainer. They need more time, that’s fine, we can all do with being a bit more nicer and gentler. There’s no rush to push adoption
Most of those are perfectly ready for every day use without issues today. All are alternatives that bring new features and specific use cases, solving new problems, or solving old problems in innovative ways. Wayland is an active replacement to an existing technology, as the old X is expected to just not exist anymore at some point in the future. BTRFS isn’t intended to replace Ext4 wholesale, Flatpaks doesn’t intend to replace apt/pacman/etc., Pipewire does the same that Pulse and Jack but Pulse and Jack won’t stop existing. Adwaita existing doesn’t mean that you can’t use QT or GTK in your projects. That’s the difference.
As a result Wayland has the burden to actually fulfill and comply with all the features and use cases that X11 already does, with all the new security improvements on top. That’s a tall order, and until it can do so, it will be undercooked and under adopted, because they set themselves up to that bar, nobody but them is responsible for this. Is the ancient “let’s rewrite from scratch” trap that all dev teams fall on at least once in their lives. It isn’t impossible, but it always takes way longer than the optimist project managers anticipate.
You do know that the people who make Wayland are the exact same people who made and maintained X, right? Like, they are intentionally abandoning X in order to make Wayland, and eventually X will just be actually XWayland as compatibility to transition to only Wayland.
Does multi-monitor sets work yet? Does it still randomly crashes when logging out? Does it have support for touch monitors already? Is Pipewire support ready? Is the Compose key still broken? Does it handle internationalization better now? Does accessibility software like on screen keyboards and screen readers already work on it?
I love Wayland, BTW, the more secure ecosystem is a net positive. But we can’t pretend it isn’t a lot of effort for something that has no tangible difference or immediate advantage for the end user, is extra work for developers and currently has a higher potential for errors, malfunctions and missing features that are taken for granted. Again, it’s a worthy endeavor to improve something that already works, but that also means there’s no rush. We can afford to wait.
Unrelated, this meme always reminds me of the story of that one drug addict who stole a friend’s phone to sell it to buy drugs. And when the friend in distress tells them they lost their phone, they help him look for it. It’s hilarious and sad at the same time.
It’s an ancient concept, depicted several times over history. The oldest one is an old Chinese tale (and related paintings) that has an emperor cutting his sleeve to avoid disturbing his sleeping lover (a younger man). So famous that “cut sleeve passion” became euphemism for homosexuality in China.
You’ve heard that people that sound uncomfortably loud, garbled and distorted, barely comprehensible, with intermittent popping and hisses over the phone? That’s you.
The clever part is that most phones do have a microphone at the top nearby the earpiece. The stupid part is that that mic is for noise canceling the ambient noise. So the phone is hearing them, but the person at the other end of the line is getting a distorted and full of artifacts voice that is barely comprehensible.
Well, most of the time, faulty leadership and bad hierarchies fail to construct coherent strategies. But, strategy is supposed to be the guiding lead to a whole organization’s activities. A good quality strategy implementation has clear goals in mind and can be used to elaborate clear and concise mission statements for all the functional parts of the organization. A “focus on resilience” can be translated into many things at an operational level, but it’s way too vague at an strategic level. Why do they want to be more resilient? is the appropriate counter questioning here. Better serve customers, how? Why key player?
It’s different from “focus on production resilience to respond to customers regardless of adverse market circumstances”. That is more actionable. It’s part of the strategic responsibilities of middle management to translate that into tactical operational actions and communicating them to individual staff. For example, product design can create redundant packaging alternatives that use different levels of different materials, so shipping can respond to material shortages without incurring too much delay. Logistics can call for cache storage of production critical materials. Then factory can come up with the production plans for each packaging alternative and a contingency plan in case of shortages. Then acquisitions can scout ahead of time the different vendors for materials that would be required. Finance has to come up with a plan to finance the new storage caches. Marketing and sales can come up with reward plans to compensate customers on delays, and advertisement messages that spin negative circumstances into positives, etc. This is just one possible line of actions, out of infinite possibilities depending on industry, product and structure.
That’s a well formed strategy. Now, just giving a hollow presentation to an all hands meetings is not the most efficient way of communicating but yet again, a lot of incompetents make it into management without having a damn clue of what is their job.