Slashdot Mirror
GNOME 3.10 Is Now Properly Supported On Wayland
An anonymous reader writes "One week ahead of the GNOME 3.10 release, all of the basic Wayland support for GNOME has been merged. With today's GNOME Shell 3.9.92 release the Wayland branch was merged and there was also an updated Mutter Wayland release, besides earlier GNOME 3.9.x packages fostering the Wayland support. Fedora 20 is expected to ship with GNOME on Wayland as a technology preview. Additional details about the current GNOME Wayland support are available from the GNOME Wiki."
More importantly, when will we see GNOME 2 support?
Mandatory xorg.conf went away a few years ago. You can still tweak parameters with one if you want to. Are you suggesting removing the ability to tweak it?
Must be a Gnome developer. Configurability confuses users, so we make make them write 'extensions' in Javascript instead, etc.
Have they fixed the lack of options for decent previews? Selecting a picture or video by a 20px preview just doesn't cut it anymore.
Yes, it's called using KDE.
--
BMO
X was so "ahead of its time" that its entire architecture was dumped in version 10 to give way to X11, and then it remained so far ahead of its time that to this day NextOS, MacOS, Android and Windows have yet to adopt a single thing from it, contrary to the rest of Unix most of which has made its way into those operating systems.
And no, it was not designed to access resources from the desktop. It was mainly designed so that you could use a dumb terminal to access your server. When it became clear that was pie on the sky, instead of redesigning the turd, they just added layer upon layer of cruft, so you ended up with a dumb as doornails protocol running on a heavy weight, expensive "dumb" terminal.
Wayland is an effort to remove those layers of cruft that nobody uses (Xtoolkit?)
Lastly the web browser has nothing to do with Unix. It is platform independent. The fact that you think the web==unix shows how little you know about deep OS architecture.
The dumb terminal at that time was a VT100.
By dumb terminal I mean a thin client, something that didn't happen.
X mostly ran on engineering workstations.
Not by design dude. It was meant to run on thin clients but it ended up being such a pig that you needed a workstation to run it. At the time a "thin" X-client was more expensive that a PC.
I'm not sure why you think that is "pie in the sky" since it worked and continues to work rather well.
So a protocol designed to run on a cheap thin client ends up needing a powerful workstation to run and you call it "working rather well"? With those definitions it's no wonder you consider X a success.
Part of the reason for that was because the protocol was rich enough to transmit graphics primitives at a higher level than a bitmap. Nothing dumb about it.
No one uses such primitives because they are incredibly sucky. Hence VNC and such.
I did find NextStep and NeWS superior to X11 and it's a damn shame they didn't succeed
Of course, anything was better than X11. Steve Jobs famously declared "X11 is brain dead".