To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Just like in any version of Windows you mean?
I think we can live with applications lagging when they hang. It's applications lagging when they're behaving normally that is of concern IMO.
As for Wayland, I still find the idea of mainstreaming a display system that only works on Linux... irksome. There are other UNIXes out there, some with advanced features that Linux doesn't have, and a much better record in terms of security and stability. Dropping support for them entirely is not what I consider a wise move.
I think you mean that XP & earlier use a stacking window manager so not redrawing when the application hangs. Wayland of course is for compositing WMs. But anyway, like you say, who cares if a window is a bit jittery while you drag it around the screen. If it's the kind of thing you do a lot (like me) then you probably have other problems...
I totally agree about the Wayland framework leaving the BSDs out in the cold being a bug, not a feature.
However, I don't really understand why all the Wayland comment threads here because the original article is not wayland advocacy, it's just one of the relevant things covered within an overview of the graphics stack.




Member since:
2005-07-06
Wayland has some downsides too:
do you know what happens when you try to move a Window of a busy application in Wayland?
Since Wayland is designed with compositing window managers in mind, I would hazard a guess that a static, screenshot-like bitmap of the busy window is moved around, without needing to constantly refresh that bitmap as with older WM technology. "
Wrong, remember that the decoration is handled by the application in the "normal" Wayland configuration.
So the application is handling the mouse events (then tell to Weston move my Window), so if the application is busy, moving a window may be laggy/"not smooth".