Wayland has just been a disaster for the open source desktop. It's absorbed all of the effort into something horrifically subpar while breaking compatibility with the past.
Accessibly is far worse to the point of embarrassment. Latency is worse. Compatibility is gone. Everyone in the ecosystem needs to do more work to end up with fewer features for end users.
This is the opposite of systemd in every way. Systemd upset a lot of people because it was entirely user focused and didn't care about the beauty of the architecture. Wayland is only obsessed with how nice their apis are, not what the end user experience is.
Let's end this disaster. It's been 16 years. It's almost old enough to vote. When will we accept it has failed?
I mean X11 was a pile of hacks, it became an unmaintainable pile of hacks.
I think reduced scope was a good call, writing a display server is a hard problem. A lot projects started and failed to replace X11.
If you feel this way I recommend watching this talk by Daniel Stone
from linux.conf.au 2013,
The Real Story Behind Wayland and X
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RIctzAQOe44
Just because you don't agree with it (which is weird given the guy is a big X/Wayland maintainer), doesn't make it propaganda.
X sucks for how graphics work in the 21st century, there's a big reason Google didn't use it for Android and instead made something that's actually more akin to the Wayland model .
Accessibly is far worse to the point of embarrassment. Latency is worse. Compatibility is gone. Everyone in the ecosystem needs to do more work to end up with fewer features for end users.
This is the opposite of systemd in every way. Systemd upset a lot of people because it was entirely user focused and didn't care about the beauty of the architecture. Wayland is only obsessed with how nice their apis are, not what the end user experience is.
Let's end this disaster. It's been 16 years. It's almost old enough to vote. When will we accept it has failed?