▲ 115 ▼ Does Wayland really break everything? (Nate Graham's OG post ref'd in the Phoronix article) (pointieststick.com) submitted 2 years ago by OsrsNeedsF2P@lemmy.ml to c/linux@lemmy.ml 45 comments fedilink hide all child comments
[–] gnumdk@lemmy.ml -2 points 2 years ago (2 children) On the other hand X11 is missing an important feature: security permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] drwankingstein@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 2 years ago while I do agree that x11 could be better in that regard, having the baseline critical features met matter a lot more then security for me. I personally really like wayland, I just wish it actually was properly usable in all my use cases permalink fedilink source parent [–] WarmApplePieShrek@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 2 years ago* Security at the expense of usability comes at the expense of security. X11 doesn't have security. Wayland doesn't have usability or security. Security is about putting walls in front of the bad guys while letting the good guys go through. Wayland just puts walls around everyone. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] drwankingstein@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 2 years ago while I do agree that x11 could be better in that regard, having the baseline critical features met matter a lot more then security for me. I personally really like wayland, I just wish it actually was properly usable in all my use cases permalink fedilink source parent
[–] WarmApplePieShrek@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 2 years ago* Security at the expense of usability comes at the expense of security. X11 doesn't have security. Wayland doesn't have usability or security. Security is about putting walls in front of the bad guys while letting the good guys go through. Wayland just puts walls around everyone. permalink fedilink source parent