And yet even though Wayland is backed by 'giants' like Intel and Red Hat, it still doesn't have more than $400,000 available to the project.
Canonical has been dumping a lot more money into Mir.
I'm interested where you got those numbers from. I gave an extensive list of references, you gave none.
Considering that Canonical is still losing money (see above), it may be very plausible that Shuttleworth will at some point stop "dumping a lot more money into Mir".
Soon these Desktops will need wayland. so they need to run wayland on Xmir to run Xfce. Have a lot of fun...
I don't see a real problem with just ending Xubuntu, Kubuntu, etc.
Despite PR talk, Canonical is not interested in them. If Canonical was, Mir would not exist and Wayland would be used as originally planned.
There are many fine Linux distributions that ship Xfce etc.
That makes no sense at all.
If I understood the mail discussion between Mir devs and others correctly, the display manager would "just" need to both Wayland and Mir to switch between a Wayland and a Mir session without reboot. The problem is that nobody wants to add Wayland support to LightDM (Canonical is not interested and anybody else would be required to sign the CLA and hand over all rights to Canonical which nobody wants) and nobody (incl. Canonical) wants to add and maintain Mir support in the other display managers.
What's outdated about X11? And no, the presence of old API calls for backwards compatibility does not make it outdated.
Answer: http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=x_wayland_situation&num=1
Making significant headway with Mir, it probably won't be long till Red Hat hires this Canonical developer out from under them to put a kibosh on the project.
Significant headway? This is just X11 and Mir side by side using XMir. Something like this is possible with Wayland since at least a year, maybe even since 2011. For proof of running X11 applications under Wayland via XWayland see the YouTube channel: https://www.youtube.com/user/waylandweston/videos
Is there going to be an X12? Some of the main X11 devs are working on Wayland. Have any thought about doing an X12?
X12 just was a tentative name for some imaginary future replacement. Even though there were some X12 ideas docs in the past, the reality is that Wayland the the de facto X12.
I appreciate the fact that Ubuntu has made dealing with video drivers easy, and I imagine working with Valve has given them some insight to what they think is needed.
Mandriva added easy driver installation to Linux way before Ubuntu's Jockey even existed.
Canonical also does not develop drivers, therefore I don't get how you think it matters what Canonoical may know what's needed. So far the FOSS drivers were developed by AMD (radeon), Intel, Google (Gallium-based Intel drivers), SUSE (radeonhd), and Red Hat (nouveau, radeon, and more). Canonical never ever even touched GPU driver code.
Canonical still owns Lubuntu & Xubuntu, but Kubuntu has been handed over to Blue Systems.
Blue Systems pay for Kubuntu but the Kubuntu trademark is owned by Canonical.
Blue Systems have their own Linux distribution called Netrunner which, for the time being, is based on Kubuntu.
You've got quite a selective memory there, bud. The only parties that are hurling Molotov's are in the Wayland and KDE camps (mostly from the deranged kwin dev).
The mere existence of Mir is "hurling Molotovs" at Wayland: http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=MTMxODA
To claim that anybody other than Canonical started that "war", is simply lying.
Brace yourselves, KDE 5 is coming!
He's talking BS.
Martin Graesslin, the KWin maintainer, began to prepare KWin for Wayland before Mir was even announced. So he designed the transition path to support two and only two back ends. See https://plus.google.com/115606635748721265446/posts/136nV4uojKH for details (public post, no need for a G+ account).
Graesslin also made it repeatedly clear that he won't support single-distro solutions. That means no support for MS Windows in KWin, OSX' Quartz, or Android's SurfaceFlinger. Somehow nobody ever had a problem with that decision. Only after Canonocal announced Mir Ubuntu fanboys began to whine.
There are no technological benefits for Mir over Wayland. Canonical made false claims as outlined on http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=MTMxODA but they've since redacted the statements. Wayland even works with Android drivers: http://mer-project.blogspot.fi/2013/04/wayland-utilizing-android-gpu-drivers.html
The reasons for Mir are not technological, they are purely economical. Canonical wants to establish asymmetric licensing to have an economic advantage over the competition: http://mjg59.dreamwidth.org/25376.html
Wayland OTOH is under MIT/X11 license for everybody. This means that not only can any Linux vendor grab it and to anything with it, incl. to make an Android version that uses Wayland: http://ppaalanen.blogspot.com/2012/09/wayland-on-android-upgrade-to-404-and.html
Mir's licensing makes it forever impossible to become part of any major BSD variant. Wayland, however, is being ported to FreeBSD: http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=MTMwMzE
Wayland is being pushed by industry giants such as Intel and Red Hat, as well as smaller companies like Collabora (creators of many technologies commonly used on GNU-based Linux such as Telepathy, WebKit-GTK, etc.: https://www.collabora.com/projects/ ).
Mir is just backed by Canonical who, while claiming to be the most popular Linux distributor, still makes no money: http://www.internetnews.com/blog/skerner/canonical-ubuntu-linux-is-still-not-profitable.html
Sure, sure, the recent 100% CPU load on screenlocking bug on KDE 4.10.x for some people was really fun, I suppose.
No idea what you're talking about. I tried googling it but found nothing.
I have no idea what kind of "crucial for productivity" you need to update that often from the damn desktop
I was referring to PIM applications. If you could read, you'd knew that.
As for the PIM if you value your crucial thing - just don't use KDE PIM period. It's just that bad.
Kontact 4.10 is great: http://www.muktware.com/5567/future-and-kde-pim – 4.8 however was only the second release with the new foundation. It contained bugs related to mail filtering. These bugs are all fixed in 4.9.x or 4.10.x, as far as I'm aware.
Evolution 3.6 also bought nice improvements.
As for non-PIM productivity applications: GNOME Boxes 3.4 is a mere tech preview. 3.8 is the current and much better release. GNOME Web is now based on WebKit2 which is a great improvement security-wise.
As I previously wrote: QtWebKit 2.3 has also been released with many important bug fixes but Debian 7.0 sticks blindly to QtWebKit 2.2. EVERY Qt-based application that uses WebKit to render some content has grave security risks with 2.2.
You've got a choice here.
1. Always new, only new. Welcome your new bugs every so often by impaling yourself on them (no idea how that works, really).
2. Might be not latest but you don't need to fix random bugs out of nowhere. If there were bugs you deal with them once and forget about it until next release.
Second one is Debian stable. It might not have appeal to you, but it does for many of us who don't feel like fixing random upstream bugs _all the time_. And those DEs, they sure as hell do have those.
As if you would fix any bugs...
GNOME 3.4, KDE SC 4.8, and Xfce 4.8 are End Of Life and don't receive any bugfixes at all any longer and all those releases fixed more bugs than they introduced regressions. Dot-0 releases are the ones with regressions and these are gone by dot-1.
Claiming that the fixed bugs are not important is simply denying reality. Especially in KDE land where 4.7 introduced the new generation KMail and 4.8 is only the second release with it. 4.9 and 4.10 fixed loads and loads of bugs in that area and PIM is not some unimportant game or so -- it's crucial for productivity.
And webkit is explicitly cited in the wheezy release notes as something that is not covered by their security guarantees. The only webkit browser that receives security attention is chromium; if you want to use some other webkit browser, you do so at your own risk. This is a reasonable stance to take for an organization with limited resources, particularly considering how niche the affected browsers are.
QtWebKit is not a single browser, it's the HTML rendering used by almost all KDE applications (excl. the few that still use KHTML).
And I don't see any reason in refusing to ship an important bugfix release that does not need any cherrypicked backporting. It simply proves that Debian is not as secure as masternerdguy claimed.
Considering that QtWebKit 2.2 is the version Debian users are stuck now for the next two years without any update in sight, Debian can be considered extremely dangerous.
Well, debian does backport all relevant security bugfixes.
No. Wheezy’s QtWebKit is stuck at version 2.2. QtWebKit 2.3.1 is out since a while featuring many important bugfixes of which none were backported: http://patch-tracker.debian.org/package/qtwebkit/2.2.1-5
Debian stable focuses in being a bugfree distribution, not a distribution comprised only of bugfree software.
That's not what masternerdguy wrote.
if you campare it to, say, Fedora 17's or even Kubuntu 12.04's KDE 4.8, you'll realize how marvelously quirkless Debian's KDE is and why it pays to have stabler distributions.
And when you look at openSUSE, your whole argument falls apart: openSUSE is also relatively conservative but still manages to bring recent GNOME, KDE SC, and Xfce releases to its users. That's because the openSUSE maintainers decide on a case by case basis (eg. they waited a while to adopt systemd or Plymouth) instead of blindly picking only old software.
And it should be the law: If you use the word `paradigm' without knowing what the dictionary says it means, you go to jail. No exceptions. -- David Jones
