It's interesting to read that this happened, but that was 6 years ago.
141 karma · joined July 7, 2026
The main change for me has been... if I want to send someone a patch, it's more important now to talk to them about it first. But I was doing that anyway. Join the chatroom, let people know I found an issue and am working on fixing it, maybe get their advice on how they think it should be solved (to make sure it fits with their project and goals), and then send code. And stick around to help with testing and stuff. It's not much different than how things were before everything moved to GitHub.
Talk to people. Be a part of the community. That's what made free software work in the past, and it's what makes free software work now. As the article said, it was never just the code.
It's a bit like saying you never hear complaints from piano players, only dentists. But dentists also play piano, just like everyone else. Dentists just know more about teeth than the average pianist.
I see the same argument all the time about Windows vs Linux. Linux lacks this, Linux lacks that, etc... but somehow, people fail to notice that Windows lacks a whole lot of important things that Linux has. Because a Windows user won't be aware of what they're missing. But for me, coming from a Linux background, Windows is missing so much I would view it as unusable.
Changing from one to the other is painful, because of the differences. It's not a drop-in replacement you can keep using exactly the same way. But that doesn't make either one better or worse. They're different, and that's a good thing. But different requires learning, and learning is hard.
Anyway, you're correct that $FreeProgram isn't a drop-in replacement for $ProprietaryProgram. But that's not a valid argument on the relative value of the two programs.
Personally, I switched to open-source alternatives way back in the late 1900s, and they've only continued to improve ever since. Adobe has been lagging behind for over a quarter of a century, in the ways which matter to me, and they keep getting farther behind as they turn to worse and worse methods of extorting money from people.
YMMV, of course.
I can get behind almost anything which reduces lock-in for Adobe's remaining customers, but from what I see in other comments, this probably ain't it. It seems very vibey and buggy. But maybe after more work is put in, it could be good. It looks like it wasn't supposed to go public yet, and they're aware that it's not ready yet.
That last bit was supposed to say:
- Supported: Firefox, Chrome, Edge, Floorp, Chromium, Brave, Vivaldi, Librewolf, Waterfox, Ungoogled Chromium, Thorium, Mullvad, Tor, DuckDuckGo, Yandex, ...
- Impractical to support: Orion
- Impossible to support: Zen Browser
This probably won't be the last time I trip over that. I use lists a lot, and almost every other platform allows them to be one per line without anything between.
More generally, Zen Browser is the buggiest browser I've ever encountered... by a wide margin. Some of the issues are jaw-dropping. It's notorious for losing user data. And looking at its history, it has mostly just kept getting worse over time. Extensions which used to work don't any more, because he keeps breaking more and more stuff.
I tried to support it. But instead, I got a quick education on why nothing supports Zen Browser. They can't... because of the guy behind it. Sometimes due to his incompetence, sometimes because he actively intervenes when people try to support it.
So... my experience with Zen Browser rapidly went from "hey this seems neat" to "wouldn't touch this with a ten meter pole".
I'd love to support Orion, but I can't because I don't have a practical way to run it.
Dropping the ports doesn't necessarily make the Mac version better. It makes the entire browser unsupportable by developers who want to make their sites/programs/extensions work in Orion but can't run it.
So my support list now is...
- Supported: Firefox, Chrome, Edge, Floorp, Chromium, Brave, Vivaldi, Librewolf, Waterfox, Ungoogled Chromium, Thorium, Mullvad, Tor, DuckDuckGo, Yandex, ... - Impractical to support: Orion - Impossible to support: Zen Browser
Some of the main parts are:
- Basically never logging out. Everything just stays running.
- Lots of desktops, usually one per project or task or ... whatever grouping makes sense.
- No minimizing windows. No taskbar, tray, dock, etc. Things just stay open, and I change desktops when I want to change to a different project or task or whatever.
- Logging at multiple levels. Like, there's a script which checks the complete session state every 15 seconds, and logs it if it has changed. It's exported as a tree or outline of each desktop, each tab group, and each window... with the title and size+position. Archived daily. That way, if the computer crashes or something, I have a recent snapshot I can restore.
- Also, detailed logging of what I'm doing. Like, every 100ms or so, a daemon checks the title of the focused window. If it has changed, it logs the new title and the timestamp, and how many input events happened since the last log entry. If the time of day changes to a new minute, it logs the number of input events since the last log entry. These logs can then be used for all sorts of useful things. Like analyzing my erratic sleep schedule and predicting when I'll be awake so I can schedule appointments. Or automatic time tracking for billing clients.
- I make sure to put useful info into my window titles, in each program. This makes the logs way more useful.
- Also, whatever other logging is relevant... like zsh history, autojump for getting to oft-used directories easily, a todo list / calendar text file with one heading per day and a list of stuff relevant to that day, a new directory each day for miscellaneous files which are worth saving but don't fit elsewhere, a lot of screenshots, an entire web archiving system to save copies of pages I view, etc.
On a side note... a lot of this stuff is explicitly forbidden in Wayland. It doesn't allow these features to exist, because most of this stuff is viewed as a security risk. So if you're using Wayland, entire categories of useful features are off limits. Their reason is basically "what if a hacker collected data about you? what if a hacker wanted to remotely control your computer?" ... but they ignored the case of "what if the user wants to collect data about themself? what if the user wants to remotely control their own computer?".
So yeah. A lot of my setup only works in X11.
The worst was one day at a big sprint... the VP of Business gave an all-hands powerpoint presentation right after the workday ended, with a catered dinner afterward. He looked and spoke like a caricature of an Italian mobster, and spent 45 minutes gleefully explaining exactly how we were going to screw the user to make more profit, by taking control away from the user and giving that control to phone corporations. Like, selling corps the ability to place ads directly onto the user's home screen. He was so excited he was practically vibrating.
Afterward, I just went straight to my hotel room and cried.
Eventually, the phone project was cancelled because it had failed pretty spectacularly, for exactly the reasons everyone said it would... and upper management laid off nearly the entire Ubuntu Engineering business unit, about a third or a quarter of the company. The people in charge had decided the problem wasn't a bad design... it was just all those uppity devs who wouldn't follow orders. They kept the managers who were responsible for making it fail, and got rid of all the devs who tried to warn management that the "vision" was broken.
At least sabdfl seemed somewhat aware of the situation... aware of how bad it was. A day or two beforehand, he started the day by giving everyone a pep talk. The talk was pretty somber, talking about how we were supposed to have a mature product to launch by now, but instead we were cancelling the launch and hoping for an optimistic scenario where some tech magazines would at least say it "showed potential". The best case scenario he could muster for the team's motivation was ... we might get a couple reviews stating that it could eventually be good someday, with enough work.
But that's okay. I don't have to use one. Different people have different needs and preferences, and their choice to use a taskbar-free workflow doesn't interfere with their ability to get serious work done.
Each desktop has a project or something, a related group of windows which I leave open until I'm done with it. Some desktops have remained more or less the same since the 1900s since they've been relevant and useful for that long.
Over time, my desktop hasn't gotten fancier... it has gotten simpler. Bells and whistles are inversely proportional to useful life span. Similarly, over time I've relied less and less on big, full-featured, specialized applications and databases... and more on plain text files, a text editor, short scripts, clean filesystem organization, and a whole lotta terminals.
I have my dotfiles and other stuff checked into Subversion, with different programs in different modules so I can build each host's config out of a set of modules, and not have to have everything checked out on every host. There's an article about the setup on my site. Git didn't exist at the time, but you could probably do something similar with git submodules. I run a revision control server of sorts in a lxc guest on one of my computers, to make it easy to sync things. Or depending on the nature of what I'm syncing, sometimes "unison" works better, or sometimes "syncthing", or sometimes git + github, or sometimes just rsync.
I have a little python program constantly monitor the title of the focused window, and look for anything which looks like a filesystem path. This gets saved to a ramdisk, like ~/ram/last-dir and ~/ram/focused-window-title, so other programs can use this info for context-sensitive things. Hotkeys which react in different ways in different programs, or always know what directory to work in, or whatever.
I also basically keylog myself, with another little python program I wrote. It monitors the title of the focused window, logs the timestamp when each window was focused, and logs the quantity of input events... but not the actual individual content of keystrokes. So I can tell which window was used when and how active I was, but not exactly what I was typing.
To make these title-based things work better, I make sure to put useful info into my window titles. Zsh is configured to put the command line (so far) into the title, along with the current host and path, or put the finished command line into the title while a program is running. I added a browser extension to put the current URL into the window title. I configured Vim to put useful info into the title. Etc. So the logs are very detailed. This info comes in handy quite often, and is also used for other things like generating a heat map graph of my erratic sleep schedule, and predicting when I'll be awake so I can schedule appointments more easily. Can also easily tell exactly how much time I spent working on pretty much anything, for invoicing clients or working toward productivity goals or whatever.
I've put together several things which work in a daily log directory... like ~/daily/YYYY/MM/DD/ . There's a key to open a shell in today's directory, or open a minimalist filemanager there. I made a screenshot program which saves things there... like, press a key, click or drag to select what I want to save onscreen, then it shows a preview I can edit if I want, and asks for a title, with recent titles available for easy recall or searching or tab completion so I can save a series of images without having to retype the title... and then it saves to a timestamped file in today's dir. Shift+Screenshot to do the whole screen, Ctrl+Screenshot to turn off all controls and just save automatically using the most recent title, Meta+Screenshot if I want to add metadata (like open "hacker-news.2026-09-24_11:59:23.png.md" in Vim to save extra notes). Or any combination of modifiers to combine effects.
And, of course, a nice terminal and shell. I've found rxvt-unicode is lightweight and can run hundreds of terminals with near zero resource use. And zsh is very powerful and customizable. But YMMV, use whatever you like. Build up your own vocabulary of tools over time, and the shell becomes incredibly powerful.
I've had the same $HOME, basically, since I first installed Linux in the 1900s. It occasionally gets moved from one hard drive to another, and now is scattered across an entire network of many hosts, with pretty much everything replicated and synced and backed up... but it's still the same data, collected and curated and organized and optimized over decades. When one's computing environment is stable and built for user empowerment instead of corporate growth... one can really settle in and get everything "just right".
I've also had mostly the same browser session for like 15 years. Even when switching between browsers. The session is much like my $HOME filesystem, just an organized hierarchy of arbitrary stuff, whatever I found useful or notable or worth keeping. At first, I did this using Tabs Outliner in Chrome, but it has degraded over the years and has a lot of the best features paywalled, and it doesn't work on Firefox, and it didn't adapt well to Manifest V3, and it's buggy and unreliable and awkward now... so I made my own replacement. I suck at naming things though, so I just called it "TK's Tree Style Tab Outliner". Still working on the feature to auto-sync between browsers, but at least it can export and import manually and do automatic backups, to make sure data won't be lost.
... which reminds me. It's also very helpful to run Chrome (or Firefox, or whatever) in a memory jail cgroup so it won't grow until it squeezes every other program into swap space. A cgroup like this also makes it easy to pause and unpause the entire browser session so it won't do anything while you're not actively using it. Slow down the memory leaking, reduce CPU use to zero to make the rest of the system run faster and cooler and make the battery last longer, and completely stop data leaking out to corporations while the browser is idle. Yet another thing I made a little script for.
And a ton of other things which didn't even come to mind, because I'm so accustomed to it that I don't even think about it any more.
Most of this is niche and weird and probably has very few users, and took a lot of time to discover and integrate... but a lot of the stuff people want in a desktop is already possible and has been for a long time, if you're willing to look around and try things until you find what works for you. Just try to use systems which are designed to be powerful and flexible, and you'll never hit the ceiling. It may be harder initially, compared to something mainstream, but you'll be able to go a lot farther with it.
The overall setup is X11 with a Sawfish window manager. X11 provides a lot of cool features like network transparency and automation and generally being wildly flexible. Sawfish is like the Emacs of window managers, written in a flavor of Lisp, and you can literally rewrite its code while it's running. So whenever I want something to work differently... I just find that part of the code, change it, and activate it.
If I manage to crash it, that's fine... Sawfish isn't the outer process for my session. For that, I have my .Xsession just do a simple loop. It keeps running until I touch a file called ~/.xlogout, and can restart the window manager or other tools if necessary.
I pretty much never log out or reboot unless it's time to do a dist-upgrade... which means once every couple years on average. Everything just stays running.
The main limit is that Xorg is usually compiled to use an 8-bit ID for each client, so it can only have 255 clients connected at once, which usually means a limit of 255 windows open at a time. But you can push this a bit using programs which do multiple windows in a single client connection, like "urxvtcd" in rxvt-unicode can have hundreds of terminals sharing just one client slot. I've occasionally had 500+ windows open on a single computer (though this is kind of a bad habit, and I try to keep it under 200).
I configured Sawfish to do soft tiling, and also to do tabbed windowing, and made all of it work via keyboard, including things like moving and resizing windows. Sawfish is also where I implemented the "every flavor of F1-F12" hotkeys thing, and implemented mouse warp, and it already had a lot of things built in like sloppy focus and the ability to add and remove desktops with a keypress.
I added another thing to it to save the contents of every desktop, every window, size and position and title and tab grouping, etc... every 15 seconds or so if it has changed since last time. This gets archived daily. So if the whole system crashes, or if I need to actually log out, or if something bugs out, I can restore things mostly how they were.
A lot of the stuff I don't have, like a task bar, or a desktop notifications system, is simple enough to do by just not installing one or not running any of the relevant programs or services.
As for traditional-ish desktop stuff, there's not much. I set the wallpaper using a small program I made decades ago, which basically just picks a file at random from a big nested directory structure of images I've accumulated over the years. I use a 2D grid style desktop pager in the corner of the screen to see which desktop I'm on, with Hyper+Arrows keys to navigate the grid, but I barely ever look at the widget and it sticks to the bottom stacking layer so other programs are free to draw over it. Similar story for a Conky instance configured in a thin vertical strip with all sorts of realtime system stats and any other info I care to put there. It's a quick, easy way to see what's going on, but I often cover it up and use that space for other things. It's basically just system stats rendered onto the wallpaper.
I mostly use keyboards with open-source firmware like QMK, with a pretty extensive personal keymap tailored to my needs and tastes. I also added some stuff to QMK, like a better MouseKeys motion mode called "inertia" mode, to make mouseless use easier. But on notebooks and legacy keyboards, I can at least use Kanata to get most of the same features.
Macros recording/playback is built into the keyboard, or X11 in general is pretty easy to automate with small programs or shell scripts or even one-liners. Like, with xdotool.
For remote controlling other systems, x2x is great. Ancient program which "just works". Or running remote programs on the local screen, ssh + normal X11 stuff. Or for a full remote desktop, there's VNC (there's a tigervnc xorg extension, and the tigervnc viewer is good too... I patched it to make it handle larger desktops better, and the patches are upstreamed).
(continued in next comment, my post was too long to fit in one comment)
What you're describing sounds like it has been possible for a long time.
I've been doing it on my Linux desktop for decades. I throw things into workspaces which just ... stay open until I'm done with it. The same windows with the same layout and the same history and state, everything right where I left it. They stick around as long as they need to, which can be weeks, months, even years. I even have some desktops which have stuck around since the 1900s, though they do gradually change and evolve over time.
... and any windows from any program can be grouped together. Grouped into a desktop, or even grouped into a single window frame with tabs.
And nearly everything is automatically logged, so I have detailed history going back well into the past.
This stuff isn't in the big mainstream UIs, but it is at least possible with a bit of work to set it all up.
Like, "let's put the buttons at the bottom so the user can reach it with their thumb while holding the phone" got turned into "let's put every important button at the top left where it's literally the hardest place on the whole screen for an average user to reach during typical use".
Or, more importantly, it started out as something like... "Debian/Ubuntu has a rich repository of high-quality full-featured battle-tested popular programs curated by community experts, designed by and for users to empower themselves, so lets give users a way to run all those beloved programs on mobile devices". And then it became "let's get rid of the package repository and forbid users from running anything from it, and build a brand new system which is incompatible with everything, and instead has a commercial app store where corps can sell proprietary software and Canonical gets a big cut of each sale, and the OS has only a small set of proof-of-concept placeholder programs, and is designed to restrict the user so corporate partners can have more profit and control".
And then when it didn't work out, the company kinda doubled down on some of the worst parts of it and went all-in on Snappy.
Instead of bringing phones up to the level of a desktop, as promised... the company tried to bring desktops down to the level of a phone. And that trend has been increasingly popular in the corporate Linux world lately... "Androidifying" desktop Linux.
sigh
I'm tired, boss.
For one, the ability to change how the desktop itself works while it's running, without restarting it... modifying the code on the fly. And if I manage to crash the window manager or some other desktop component, easily just restart it without having to log out or restart all the other programs.
And being able to pretty easily run and manage hundreds of windows. Log in, open one desktop for each project, and just leave it running until the project is done. Maybe reboot for upgrades once every year or two, but otherwise no disruptions.
NO DISRUPTIONS. I don't even have the underlying plumbing installed for notifications and stuff like that. They can try to interrupt me, but they'll find those API calls aren't plugged in to anything.
Freely mixing and matching tiled and floating windows, each of which can be its own tab group with multiple arbitrary windows sharing the same frame. Super handy having free-form placement and grouping of absolutely anything.
No minimized windows. No task bar. No icon tray. No desktop full of icons underneath the windows. The entire screen is one big canvas, to be used however you like. If you need more space, just hit a key to open another desktop.
Manage nearly everything with a keyboard. Mouse usable but not required.
Sloppy focus, of course. (i.e. focus follows mouse, but stays focused if mouse "falls out" of a window into empty space) Not click-to-focus. And definitely no raise-on-click or raise-on-focus.
Mouse keys built into the keyboard, for clicking, scrolling, and moving. Mouse warp too, to teleport the cursor, like having two mouse cursors and a key to swap between them.
A full set of launcher hotkeys which are easily configured and managed by making short shell scripts. Like, F1 to F12 run scripts from ~/bin named like "f1" to "f12", and "shift-f1" and "ctrl-f1" and "shift-alt-f1" and "hyper-shift-ctrl-f1", etc... if a script exists, the key is mapped. Ideally just symlink the named key to a program or script with a more descriptive name, like "shift-f3 -> open-todays-journal-in-vim.sh" or something like that. Easy to see exactly what each key does, with a "ls -l" or similar. (can send a normal f1-f12 event by holding Fn and hitting a number key or the two keys next to the numbers, but I barely ever have a reason to)
Network transparency for everything, of course. It's wild that newer desktops have chosen to remove such a useful feature.
Work at my desk with a notebook to either side, all using a single keyboard+mouse... just slide the cursor off one screen and onto the next. Pick up a notebook and move to the living room. Use its keyboard+mouse to control the notebook plus the television, in much the same way... slide the cursor off one screen and onto the next. Pack up and go to a coffee shop. Control the remote home computers from the local notebook, using their running desktop session. Or run programs natively on several remote computers, with the windows all opened together on one desktop on the notebook.
Automate inputs easily, whenever desired. Record and play macros which work in any program.
Configurations revision-controlled and synced across all my devices, privately, without any data leaking to a corporate cloud.
Organize data into a rich set of nested topic directories or project directories, instead of organizing things by file type into places like "~/Pictures", "~/Documents", etc.
But also, a directory for each day, to hold all the other misc stuff which doesn't fit elsewhere. And a key to easily access it.
Shell scripts can easily know what program I'm using in the GUI, and what directory the focused program is working in, so scripts can take context-sensitive actions.
Automatic private logging of what I do, with easy time tracking and arbitrary queries, using simple plain text log files which are small, easy to grep, and easy to build custom tooling around.
Human-readable plain text everywhere. Plain text files are versatile, powerful, portable, compact, timeless, accessible, and future-proofed.
No churn. No need to retool every few years. Long-lived tools which are mature and robust. Maybe not the flashiest or most fashionable tools, but "bells and whistles" and "useful life" are typically at odds with each other.
A rich vocabulary of small, simple tools which each do one thing well... makes for a powerful, expressive world of deep functionality thanks to the power of language. It empowers the user to do anything they can express. But a small set of huge tools, while initially a bit easier, tends to quickly become limiting and stifling.
I think a lot of the "right answers" for interface design have been figured out for a long time. That is not to say new interfaces are bad... but anything which throws out the old battle-tested solutions in favor of something radically different is going to take a long time to reach anywhere near the same level of usefulness.
That's a bold claim. It doesn't tell me there is zero evidence... hardly anything has zero evidence. It just tells me you either reject the evidence or haven't looked. It's not hard to check. For the lazy, Wikipedia provides a nice summary and 82 references to get more details. But that's just a starting point.
> there are suddenly two types of people
This comment is pretty revealing. For almost any trait, there are way more than two types of people. Usually there's a whole spectrum with lots of diversity. It's a beautiful thing. What would be very unusual is if there was only one type of person, or only two types.
Even distinct "types" is a bit of a misleading concept. Instead of distinct types or buckets, most things have more of a cluster or nebula structure. Each individual member of a cluster is different, but has overall similarities, on average, to other members. There will usually be a fairly dense core, and then it gets more sparse with distance. And there will often be several clusters near each other, overlapping, so there is no clear boundary between one cluster and another. That is how descriptive categories work... nebulous clusters in thingspace, where that space is a many-dimensional abstract space with each trait having its own axis, and many degrees of each trait.
For convenience and efficiency, we use labels to refer to these clusters, but when deeper understanding is needed, or more nuanced communication, the labels stop being a useful simplification. It's like trying to dig out a splinter with a shovel; shovels are very useful, but they're way too coarse and blunt for something as precise as a splinter. A deep enough understanding requires us to more explicitly recognize the cluster structure and the multidimensional spectrum of diversity.
Don't mistake the map (the labels, or the "types" of people) for the territory (the rich variety of life).
But what's even more wild to me is the people leaving comments refusing to believe that different people are actually different. Refusing to believe aphantasia or hyperphantasia exists. Refusing to believe that other people are telling the truth when they describe their experiences. Insisting that everyone is the same, actually, and anyone who thinks differences are real must be confused or misunderstanding something.
I guess these are both types of cognitive disability... but I know what aphantasia is called. Not sure what the other thing is called, but I'd imagine it's something which sounds pretty unflattering.
Becoming active on Twitter in 2016: popcorn
Becoming active on Xitter in 2026: red ballcap
It makes a statement. Is it a statement you want to make?
So I keep hearing. But hardly anyone ever talks about what's underneath the tip... and when they do, it turns out to be a big mess under there, not a mountain of advantages.
> just like there is no spoon, there are also no windows, only surfaces
Yes, I understand. That's why programs can't position their own windows, or get or set the mouse position. It doesn't even assume the coordinates are 2-dimensional. It's all very futuristic and makes a lot of interesting things possible, like using Minecraft as a compositor, or a Facebook style Metaverse compositor. But you're not hearing what I'm saying:
Wayland is solving the wrong problems. What it can do is pretty neat, but what it does is not what people need. It's good at party tricks, but bad at solving the real needs of daily life. It largely solves problems that nobody had, and to do this, it breaks major features people need. Much like how Facebook's Metaverse failed, nobody really wants to do their spreadsheets in Minecraft.
> It doesn't do your laundry
Yeah, and that's part of the problem. To use your analogy, it's like removing someone's washer and dryer, and replacing them with a box of tools which don't do laundry. It may be a really fancy foundation for building efficient laundry appliances, but that's not what people need. People may have used it to build an entire ecosystem of laundry appliances, but they couldn't agree on basic things so the ecosystem became fragmented, such that P-brand soap doesn't work in Q-brand washers, and clothes washed in Q-brand washers can't be dried in R-brand dryers, and if you use a P-brand washer you need to take fifteen extra steps to prepare it for a drying cycle, and T-brand dryers can only be used for pants, and ... etc etc. It's a big complex mess which, after 18 years of development, still doesn't let me get my socks clean. And most of it doesn't work at all for people who use a wheelchair.
> when your input and graphics go directly through your compositor ... input directly to the game
When they cut out the middleware, the middleware stops working. And when they make it impossible to add middleware, it stops being possible to do all sorts of useful things. Sure, it may be a millisecond faster, but in exchange, all my keys get mapped wrong, or I can't use my notebook without physically touching it (and causing repetitive strain injury), or my autoclicker stops working, or my accessibility tools become impossible to fix, or my automatic time tracker is treated as a security violation, or the solution which works for me suddenly won't work for my friend who uses a different compositor, or ... etc etc etc.
It architecturally eliminates entire categories of useful things... in order to make the simplest case slightly faster. This provides a more pleasant experience for average able-bodied normal people with no uncommon needs or preferences, while making things worse for everyone else. In particular, the complete lack of accessibility in Wayland is very able-ist and makes it unusuable for anyone with disabilities. That sort of thing needs to be built deep into the core, but it was instead rejected outright and left as an afterthought exercise for Someone Else to solve.
> [this] feature is the job of the compositor. Most compositors already have this feature ... GNOME and KDE have their own solutions, as do most of the others
This really gets at the nature of Wayland's biggest problem. A ton of important things are rejected and declared to be Someone Else's Problem. The compositors have attempted to deal with the aftermath of this mistake, but they all do their own thing and refuse to agree on a lot, so instead of one robust solution, we end up with an entire fragmented ecosystem of partial solutions which aren't compatible with each other.
It's even more of a nightmare for application developers. Instead of needing to support Windows, MacOS, and X11, suddenly they need to support Windows, MacOS, X11, GNOME, KDE, Sway, Weston, Hyprland, Enlightenment, Niri, etc. Every time two compositors disagree on something, it means every application must add support for both of the ways of doing it, like how they are now required to optionally draw their own title bar and window frame, depending on which compositor the user has... and good luck getting two programs from two different developers to draw their frames in the same visual style.
> Wayland really isn't trying to prevent you from doing things
It may not be trying, but it sure is succeeding.
Curiously, people always seem to list the same advantages, and it's a very short list. Fewer (but still non-zero) torn frames are the top of the list pretty much every time, since that was the very first thing its creator listed in his original goals... but that's a pretty small benefit in exchange for breaking entire categories of functionality. Like, it looks smoother when I scroll, but features I rely on heavily every day are forbidden.
As for input latency... that doesn't seem like it was ever a problem. Using X11, I'm able to get 500 to 1000 inputs per second even on a potato PC. That's faster than the frame rate of pretty much any screen, and fast enough even for audio / midi purposes. Reducing input latency from ~1.5ms to ~1.0ms doesn't really matter when the timeslice scheduling has ~6ms of jitter on an average system, a common screen only draws a frame every ~16ms, and many input devices have 50+ ms of their own additional latency.
> if you want to take a screenshot in a generic way, you have to go through the XDG portal API
This is a symptom of what's wrong with Wayland. Wayland doesn't do screenshots. Like many things users need, they decided it was someone else's problem, and threw it over the fence for the fragmented ecosystem of downstream projects to solve. So each downstream project came up with their own workarounds for essential features not existing. The solutions had to be built entirely outside of Wayland, and even after years of development, the solutions are still incomplete, unreliable, complex, and full of caveats. It required (and still requires) everyone except Wayland's core devs to write a lot more code for less functionality than they used to get with a couple of simple API calls. They had to architect entire complex infrastructure layers in order to work around a missing feature in the core protocol, since the core devs stubbornly refused to allow it.
Similar situation for input automation and remote control. It's a common thing people need. I use it every day and can't use the notebook at my desk without it... but the Wayland folks refused to solve it, so it had to be done outside of Wayland. For example, one workaround is to give the user direct access to the kernel so they can create fake input devices at a kernel level, and generate the inputs they need, which Wayland then sees as a local physical keyboard or mouse. So... problem solved, from Wayland's point of view. The user gets what they need, sort of, and it's implemented outside of Wayland, so Wayland doesn't have any security issues. But... and this is a big "but"... the solution involves giving users device-level kernel access. Which seems significantly worse than the issue it was originally trying to solve.
> I understand where you're coming from, but there is no turning back at this point.
A position of "sure it has major problems, but it's too late now" is not a position of progress. Much like the situation with pulseaudio being deployed everywhere then replaced with pipewire, it's almost never too late to fix bad software architecture. As you said, this whole ecosystem is still very much a moving target.
The ideal solution would be the creation of a new system which supports the features, protocols, and APIs of the older system(s), in a way which "just works". But that requires a very different mindset from the people behind it. Instead of "not my problem, someone else can deal with it" like the Wayland policy, a proper solution needs people to adopt a "the buck stops here" approach, and take responsibility for making the entire system work. Things like accessibility, network transparency, automation, and legacy support... need to be built in from the ground up, not rejected or treated as an afterthought for someone else to handle.
BTW, what's the policy on that sort of thing here?
I often still use just ALSA, but pipewire is at least pretty decent and mostly "just works". Unlike pulseaudio, which was kind of a plague on Linux audio for ages.
On that note, for about 15 years, a funny thing kept happening. Any time anything on my Linux boxes broke, I'd trace the issue to its origin (bug hunting was literally my job, after all), and about half, maybe even two thirds of the time... it traced back to Lennart Poettering. That man was singlehandedly responsible for more than half the bugs I encountered for a decade and a half. It became so routine that I started practicing my impression of Severus Snape, so I could shake my fist at the sky and exclaim, "Poettering!!!"
Anyway, Wayland feels like another one of those... where someone has to do it wrong and create a lot of trouble before someone else comes along to do it right. But that second part hasn't happened yet. So it's still in a broken state where half the stuff I do on a daily basis isn't even possible in Wayland.
So he started his own fork.
The ban didn't seem to have any relation to politics or personal behavior. However, he was widely known for being ... how to put it in a way which is acceptable here ... uh, difficult to deal with. Like, after Linus Torvalds made a vow to be nicer, he made an exception just one time... for metux. He was the only person obnoxious enough to get Linus to break his vow. Which, if I recall correctly, was how he ended up focusing on the Xorg project. After getting booted from Linux, he picked a different project.
That's who is in charge of XLibre.
Things didn't get political until he announced the fork. Because, although politics had nothing to do with him getting banned (either time), he framed it as if he was being targeted for political reasons, and used inflammatory political language in the project's documentation. This gained a lot of attention and caused a lot of controversy, and also had the effect of ensuring the contributors all had mostly the same political views.
Anyway, the number of commits doesn't tell much of the story. The content of the commits (especially the reverted ones at Xorg) are far more enlightening.
My theory about the motivation behind the extra security is that it's largely driven by corporations wanting to make desktop Linux less free and less open, and normalize proprietary software instead of open-source. Because profit. Proprietary software is inherently not trustworthy, so the execution environment needs extra security and restrictions, and must be generally less powerful to reduce the damage it can do. Essentially, proprietary software needs the same precautions as malware. So the corps needed to "androidify" desktop Linux. Hence the change from curated distro package repositories to corporate app stores, and the reason why there's so much money pushing to replace X11 with Wayland.
In an open-source ecosystem, users and developers are one and the same, or at least on the same "side", cooperating with each other to make tools which work as well as possible for everyone. Each big program tends to be a collaborative effort where a lot of people contribute to make things better for everyone. Things mostly "just work" and people can typically trust their computers not to do anything weird or hostile.
Very different than a proprietary commercial ecosystem, where users and developers have more of an adversarial relationship. Each program tends to be created in a closed silo by one person or a relatively small team, and is designed primarily to extract money from users, with all other concerns being secondary. It is very common for profit-driven developers to engage in deceptive practices, or do things the user doesn't want, like showing advertisements, collecting and selling data, sabotaging products from competitors, using the device as a node in a botnet or secret compute farm, forcing unwanted updates, microtransactions or subscription fees, etc. So nothing can be trusted, and the entire system needs extensive protections against every type of misbehavior imaginable... even if that means reducing the power and features available to the user.
I've really enjoyed the past few decades of living entirely in the open-source world, where those problems pretty much just don't exist. But with corps pushing the androidification of desktop Linux, I fear those days may be coming to an end.
Wayland is now about 18 years old. So, by Wayland standards, only 3 more years until it, too, will be obsolete and need to be replaced.
That day can't come soon enough. :D
Maybe the next one will actually be able to do the things I need a display system to do. Until then, at least we've still got X11. And Wayland has taught everyone all sorts of things about what not to do.