I don't have any screen tearing on X11.
Although I can't tell you if that's how it was out-of-box, or if I set it up to be tear free, because... I don't remember.
Remember the part about things just working and me not having to do anything with this for many years? Yep, that's why. (:
> Unless your workflow (and hardware) comes from 20+ years ago, you have almost no reason to stick with Xorg, especially as it continues to get worse and worse when the user experience relies on newer and newer features.
My workflow is probably 20+ years old because not much has changed with software in the last 20 years. My computer is getting close to 10 years old. It works fine. X doesn't get worse and worse; it continues to just work. Sort of like apple fanatics claim, except it's actually true.
In not worried about running a keylogger or something that's going to surreptitiously capture my screen. It's not a major issue. It's not an issue at all. Never comes up.
Maybe I'd care more if I were running multiple monitors each with different scaling factors and refresh rates, but that sounds pretty niche. I still don't see a reason to want Wayland as a user.
So basically you're calling almost every modern laptop + external screen setup "pretty niche". I wonder whose post is more silly.
I just got a new laptop for work last month. HDR 4k display. It's still 60 Hz. More only matters for people who are really into gaming, and then you wouldn't be using a laptop.
> Most people probably don't even know scaling options exist, so using different ones on different monitors is going to be niche, yeah.
If you don't know the thing exists, that doesn't mean you don't use it. Modern OSes adjust scaling automatically for the screen DPI. Otherwise using configs like Retina MacBook + 1440p displays, or 4k laptop + 4k external display would be very painful.
I have everything set to 100% scaling because that's a low as you can put it. The defaults had my laptop at 250% (!!!) and external monitor at 150%, which makes the laptop in particular look like some cramped 800x600 monitor out of 1995. In theory I'd like to have my external display be at something like 75% because it's so much larger than the laptop, but I've never seen any OS support this. Does wayland let you do fractional scales like this?
Edit: I also just tried plugging my 4k monitor into my Linux laptop (with a 1920x1080 screen), and it at least defaults both to 100%, which is more sane than "modern" windows. Again I'd probably prefer 75% scaling on the 1080 monitor because things are otherwise too big.
When I had my previous laptop, it had 100% for 4k@16" in Linux by default, and it was causing me a pain in the eyes. Switched to 200% back then, because fractional scaling in Ubuntu wasn't working well.
I'm not sure if it's possible to have scaling less than 100%, I just never thought to make things smaller, not bigger.
I don't understand the point of a high resolution monitor that you scale up. Just to have extremely crisp lines? To me the whole point of a high resolution is that you can have more information on the screen because it remains legible when small.
Also, is that 60 or 59.94 Hz? Both exist
Most of the time on a normal boot, the xfce display app will apply my saved config and the monitor works, but several apps like kicad somehow glitch out something at random times and I lose both external monitors as though the dock were unplugged and then replugged.
What that happens, it's an extra level of ridiculous. I have to use TWO different apps to recover.
First I have to use ArandR to reset the layout with left, right, and center screens. The normal xfce display app does not work for this even though it does at other times. Trying to click on the little scteens doesn't do anything. But ArandR works.
But ArandR has no way to set the 170hz one back to 60. For that, I have to go back to the xfce app, which is now working after ArandR fixed whatever it fixed.
Then I can resume work. Sometimes for only a minute before it happens again.
It's completely ridiculous and has spanned a few different monitors and docking stations and tb3 and tb4 cables. The one constant is the Framework laptop after upgrading to the i7 1280p motherboard.
Anyway, monitors with all kinds of framerates are now the norm. I'm not even a gamer. I didn't seek out a high framerate monitor specially. I just wanted a good monitor in general with a type of stand that would not waste all my desk space. I think the other monitor can do 120 too for that matter, but somehow is better behaved and doesn't try to when it won't work. It's the norm.
(And no, if Nouveau is an option for you then you probably wouldn't have a dGPU in the first place.)
Not only nothing was miserable, but the NVIDIA dGPUs have allowed applications that are still impossible with GPUs from other vendors, e.g. professional applications using OpenGL that expose bugs in the drivers from other vendors or that have a too low performance on other hardware, or computational CUDA applications that benefit from the many useful libraries provided freely by NVIDIA.
For simpler applications AMD and Intel are fine, but unfortunately there are still many cases when there is no alternative for NVIDIA.
NVIDIA may be criticized for the greediness of their pricing policy or for the slow progress towards providing an open-source kernel driver, but claiming that they offer a miserable Linux experience is completely false.
Very few companies provide a similar level of Linux support, despite the fact that there are some kernel developers who continue to try to sabotage the work needed for maintaining the NVIDIA Linux kernel driver.
NVIDIA provides much more free Linux tools for their GPUs than any other GPU vendor.
Yeah, I don't get this argument. If a process can already run on my account then I'm screwed anyway. It's trivial to e.g. do some bash magic to transparently replace `sudo` to get access to root without me knowing, and then hook into e.g. evdev to keylog every keystroke regardless of whether it's on Wayland or X11.
Unless you sandbox everything (and no one does that on a normal desktop) Wayland's extra "security" guarantees are completely useless in practice, because they're trivial to bypass.
How so? If you run a program that you trust, like "ls", "vim", "firefox", "cat" or "rm", then you absolutely want it to be able to access all your data. That's the whole point of running a program: to read/write your data.
If, for some reason, you want to run a program that you don't trust, you can run it easily inside a container or a virtual machine.
I fail to see how this is a "security disaster". It seems very sane to me. How could it be even better?
I think some systems might be forcing breakage into it: I recently upgraded from Ubuntu 18.04 to 20.04 (had to wait for approval for work laptops, and I keep my personal one at the same release as a reference point) and with that upgrade did I start seeing a weird visual glitch, where new windows would be covered in static for a second before drawing.
Or at least until things start breaking, or maybe until Wayland has e.g. stellar HDR support and I'll get a nice OLED monitor. Otherwise, no dice.
I know that X is a crusty old spawn of Cthulhu; but honestly, I don't really care? It just works! I set up my system 10 years ago with how the UI works (including my window manager), and it stably works since then without me having to ever fiddle with it. The fact that X's development is dead is also a feature, because there's no churn!
And when I see other people complaining what still doesn't work on Wayland (where everything works perfectly for me on X) I'm like, eh, I don't have the time for fiddling around; maybe I'll try it out some other day.