Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 12th Nov 2010 22:35 UTC, submitted by Debjit
Permalink for comment 449842
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
News
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/18/13 17:45 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/18/13 17:32 UTC, submitted by poundsmack
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/17/13 17:58 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/17/13 17:52 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/14/13 21:03 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/14/13 20:46 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/14/13 17:32 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/14/13 11:39 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/14/13 11:32 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/13/13 19:39 UTC
More News »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2005-08-07
Wayland aims to be an alternative, however, you appear to be saying don't bother with Wayland cuz its hard? Thing you appear to be stuck on is that most Linux installations today are on form factors where they simply do not care about remote displays etc, and the only other use is servers which do not - and imo should not - need a GUI. If you need idiot-proof interfaces to manage your server, things like WebYast are around already.
I simply think you vastly over-estimate the usefulness of enabling network transparency in the display server. Also, Ubuntu has already committed to getting Utouch working with Wayland, so that concern needn't be maintained either.