In January I was complaining that Nvidia were jerks for halting Wayland.
They have since shipped it, and the problems stayed.
I am against Wayland itself.
It was made for everything, a TV, a car, and not specifically a PC desktop.
The Wayland project says it does not restrict where and how it is used.
I agree with that goal, to a degree.
But the official reference implementation, Weston, came too late for the desktop.
So everyone made their own.
GNOME ships Mutter, KDE ships KWin, and the rest pile onto wlroots.
The Wayland project itself says there is no single common Wayland server like Xorg, every graphical environment brings with it one of many compositor implementations.
Which means every application now has to support every desktop.
Someone asked me why window positioning is a limitation on Wayland.
An app can request a size, but not a position.
It can only set a position today because of X11 backwards compatibility, xwayland and all of it.
GTK4 does not even have a way to position a window anymore.
GNOME and KDE could let applications position themselves,
but it would be a Mutter protocol and a KWin protocol, and the app would have to support all of them.
"Moany nerds just be hating on Wayland over nonsense."
I told them to remember this conversation when Wayland has taken over and the backwards compatibility is gone.
Positioning will be up to the window manager, which will try to be smart and position things for you.
Wayland has too many issues right now.
Applications like Discord, and many others, have issues with global shortcut keys and other things.
"The year of the Linux desktop"
is not going to get a good rep if people start with Wayland.
It will make Linux look bad, when it is Wayland that is not up to the task of supporting a modern desktop.
Linux does not need to be split any further.
It needs to be unified further.
And every small desktop will have to face the fact that it will not be supported.