https://distrowatch.com/dwres.php?resource=showheadline&story=20007
The Ubuntu team is following Fedora's example and dropping GNOME's X11 session in the distribution's next version. The announcement for the change reads, in part:
"The login screen (powered by GDM) will no longer offer the Ubuntu on Xorg option. All sessions based on GNOME Shell and Mutter are now Wayland-only and users who rely on X11-specific behaviors will not be able to use the GNOME desktop environment on Xorg. We understand that some users still depend on Xorg's implementation of X11; for example, in remote desktop setups, or highly specialized workflows. If you require Xorg specifically, you can install and use a non-GNOME desktop environment. Xorg itself is not going away, only GNOME's support for Xorg."
(Score: 5, Insightful) by pTamok on Wednesday June 11, @06:38AM (2 children)
There is an article and subsequent comments on this over at Phoronix.
https://www.phoronix.com/news/Ubuntu-25.10-No-GNOME-X.Org [phoronix.com]
Several people are pointing out that wayland on NVIDIA can be a poor experience, which means that uneducated end-users who try to put 'Linux' on hardware that uses NVIDIA graphics cards could well form the view that Linux doesn't work properly, rather than finding out that NVIDIA don't support Linux well.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Unixnut on Wednesday June 11, @05:45PM (1 child)
It's ok, with every update both Gnome and Ubuntu become increasingly crappy, to the point I've moved away from Gnome and Ubuntu completely for Linux desktop needs.
Nowadays the only exposure I have to modern Gnome is on my work desktop, and it is such a crap interface it makes Windows 11 look good in comparison. Gnome now feels like it was designed to only ever be used on a tablet/smartphone type computing device, ironic as tablets and smartphones are the one place Gnome is not actually used.
Linux as a whole just keeps circling the drain, so what if more silly, politically based decisions are piled on top by people with an agenda to push? Things with just fragment more, get more incompatible and dysfunctional, and users (who are not zealots for their particular side) will either tolerate it or move to other operating systems.
(Score: 1) by pTamok on Thursday June 12, @03:36PM
I wouldn't say Linux the kernel is circling the drain.
But Desktop Environments to be used on top of a Linux kernel - you could well be right, if talking about ones targetted at non-technical users.
Linux with a minimal user-interface is currently a very popular server O/S - which doesn't usually run a DE. From that point of view, other O/Ss are circling the drain.
But for non-technical user interaction, FLOSS software is not even on the playing field.
(Score: 3, Informative) by shrewdsheep on Wednesday June 11, @09:33AM (1 child)
I somewhat applaud the move. I intend to stay on X11 as long as possible (KDE). If other distros/tookits will help to iron out Wayland issues in the meantime, I don't mind.
(Score: 2) by SDRefugee on Friday June 13, @05:20PM
I'm on KUbuntu 24.04 and just for shits/grins I switched to wayland to see where its flaws were.. Seemed ok for about 90% of my workflow.. But when I tried to do a remote desktop via Anydesk OR Rustdesk, both programs shit the bed.. Since I do a LOT of these remote connections for my extended family, since I'm their defacto tech-support, It was back to X11. Maybe some day Wayland may be worth it..
America should be proud of Edward Snowden, the hero, whether they know it or not..
(Score: 4, Interesting) by VLM on Wednesday June 11, @03:13PM (13 children)
You can tell something is dead when the entryist types come in to ruin everything as a humiliation ritual. If it works, change it, if people need it, delete it.
Just like the deletionist people on wikipedia, "the rust community" in general, systemd corporate fanboys, etc.
If the host were not already dead or nearly dead, the parasites couldn't parasitize it.
(Score: -1, Offtopic) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday June 11, @03:42PM
ugh.. again, why do you post here?
(Score: 3, Interesting) by shrewdsheep on Wednesday June 11, @04:12PM (1 child)
That's a false dichotomy. Stuff gets broken due to the anarchist model of FOSS. New, opinionated people move in and start to break stuff. FOSS needs a constant re-supply of developers and because of this PITA happens (also with proprietary stuff BTW).
That being said, Linux on the desktop has already happened. In Europe, market share is around 5% and it is no longer necessary to beg for Linux support, say, for official applications. There are bigger installations in the public sector and grants are given out by the EU for FOSS development.
(Score: 4, Informative) by gnuman on Wednesday June 11, @09:36PM
Because we've basically went with Chrome being the OS.... (or Firefox for the holdouts). The OS is mostly in the browser these days for most people. That's why Desktop OS don't really matter.
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Wednesday June 11, @05:27PM (9 children)
For this issue in specific, X11 was not architected for modern views of security, the security it has is patches and band-aids with incomplete coverage.
Wayland will never be "as highly developed" as X11 until people stop developing X11 and put their efforts into Wayland / other more modern platforms. This is a move in that direction.
But, yeah, whine about the politics - they're there too.
🌻🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 2) by VLM on Wednesday June 11, @05:46PM (3 children)
They'll do that
No guarantee of that... the future is HTTP not X protocol.
(Score: 3, Informative) by JoeMerchant on Wednesday June 11, @06:05PM (2 children)
>No guarantee of that... the future is HTTP not X protocol.
I happen to love the portability of an HTTP interface, but... it's no replacement for a local desktop - not yet.
HTTP has a lot of similarities to X11 in the remote capabilities, but it's being so many different things to so many diverse clients that it doesn't do any of them very well in many of the aspects that an X11 or Wayland or Windows desktop does.
I develop HTTP interfaces for embedded devices and system services - the power of being able to pull up that interface at any time on your phone or whatever browser you happen to be at is tremendous, but the coding of the interface, the handling of multiple simultaneous clients, the indirectness of control inputs and control of the output are all so different from a desktop that desktop interfaces have many decades left in them. They aren't ready to be relegated to a window on a http connected browser the way that bash terminals have gone into windows on the desktop.
🌻🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 2) by VLM on Friday June 13, @03:04PM (1 child)
I think we're talking about different layers of the "stack".
For decades now the "reasonable" way to use a desktop remotely from the linux-ish side is a mix of IPMI, IP-KVM solutions, Apache Guacamole, KASM, etc. Instead of rendering to display hardware, stream bytes over a http(s) connection. The user doesn't run a vnc/rdesktop/X11/Wayland whatever client to connect to a corresponding server, they just point a web browser at something vaguely http-ish and the desktop appears on their browser screen.
Your POV seems to be from the opposite direction where you'd write user code to implement a UI that renders to a pixelated screen (that I send over HTTP, or could be rendered to a HDMI/DisplayPort/analog VGA port). I think in the long run writing UIs to natively render to HTTP would be more efficient than using a virtual screen buffer then sending the buffer over HTTP; this "seems" inevitable.
Eventually, someone will write a library that "looks like" user interface code to you but renders an output of streamed HTTP. The C-sharp folks are doing something like that right now, kind of, pretty interesting. The main disadvantage of their system is, of course, its written in c-sharp, but aside from that it seems a good idea.
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Friday June 13, @03:55PM
> in the long run writing UIs to natively render to HTTP would be more efficient
When the UI is simple, this approach is tremendously efficient. I have had a Raspberry Pi Pico running a webserver on solar power out in the yard for several years now. A few lines of Python give me an interface that not only shows me status, but allows me to control its peripheral (an ultrasonic dog annoyer).
When you get closer to playing DOOM, the HTTP interface solutions get more kludgy and inefficient. I think it's "WebSockets" that keeps the connection open for continuous updates - and anytime I have dug into that it has been a hot mess as compared to established local UI APIs, whether windowed or fullscreen or whatever. I find it easier to render a full screen "bare metal" UI than to work with the shifting sands of the likes of WebSockets.
🌻🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 5, Interesting) by Dr Spin on Wednesday June 11, @08:12PM (4 children)
Wayland is NOT a better X11. It is a completely different object - a different solution to a different problem
Wayland is a light-weight way to talk desktops to your local hardware.
X11 is a way to talk to random hardware elsewhere. - which could be completely different hardware architecture
on another continent (or planet?), with no advance planning. You can just login to a server - or virtual server
that might be a ten years old Sun or a RaspPi in a Drone.
And other people with other kit can do it.
You connect over ssh. If that is not secure enough, then you
need to work on SSH.
Of course a muscle car will been a 40 ton truck at speed, but your breakfast is coming to you in old 40 tonners, not
new Ferraris.
X11 is part of the success story of Unix - which I have been using for about 40 years. X is ancient, and somewhat
weak at the knees - like me, but it is lurking everywhere. Some people actually do keep entire countries running by
using 40 year old software - hell, FAA is still using floppy disks to keep planes in the air!
Wayland is knocking at the door of the kindergarten. Its far from ready for prime time, and any time spent on
it would probably be better spent on X12 - but unless the EU decides its going to be part of EUOS,
I doubt that we will see X12 in my lifetime, so keep patching, folks!
Warning: Opening your mouth may invalidate your brain!
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Wednesday June 11, @08:54PM (3 children)
>Wayland is NOT a better X11. It is a completely different object - a different solution to a different problem
Correct. Wayland is a solution to the problem that the vast majority of X11 users have been wanting solved for decades: a local desktop.
>X11 is a way to talk to random hardware elsewhere.
Yes, but how many Ubuntu Gnome users use that capability? Less than 0.1% I'd wager, and them only some of the time. Furthermore, anytime I have tried to use the remote capacities of X11 it has been a poor performing result. For this use case HTTP(S) has been the de-facto standard for 25+ years.
>X11 is part of the success story of Unix
Agreed, and 30+ years ago X was the prevailing solution. It may still beat out other protocols like remote desktop / VNC / et al, in many ways, but mostly not.
>any time spent on it would probably be better spent on X12
Maybe from your perspective. From mine (used Unix on some clunky old iron in the late 80s, tried Slackware Linux in the 90s and declared it "not ready for prime time" vs Win95) it is time to move on from Xnn to HTTP(S). Yes, they're still very different animals, but Wayland + an HTTP(S) browser covers the vast majority of X11 use cases, throw VNC in the mix and you're getting close to full coverage with less of the X11 remote pain that exists in the real world, despite the theoretical "just hook it up and run" design.
I agree, 40 years from now there will still be significant systems using X11 - just like there are significant systems using COBOL today, their market share shrinks more due to the growth of the market in other areas than it does due to their replacement with newer tech.
🌻🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 2) by Whoever on Wednesday June 11, @09:53PM (2 children)
In what way are all the myriad desktops that run on X11 not local?
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Wednesday June 11, @10:13PM (1 child)
The problem is that X - including X11 - was developed as a remote protocol, so it's made to be easy to remote into - in other words: exploit and abuse via network connection.
So, even if they never do anything but local desktop with X11, it still has all that remotely accessible and remote access capability there lurking under the hood, just a flimsy bypassable security patch away from sharing your desktop with anybody on your network.
🌻🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 2) by Whoever on Thursday June 12, @03:39PM
I think you need to come up to date. Just about all use of remote X display capability is done via tunneling in SSH. My Linux desktop doesn't even have a port listening for X connections.
(Score: 2) by MonkeypoxBugChaser on Wednesday June 11, @06:37PM
Mate, KDE, something else. I haven't used gnome in over a decade. Why would you run that anti user DE. If one want to have a GUI that picks my workflow for me, why not run windows?
Have people really been suffering under this environment that needs tons of ever breaking extensions to even be a complete desktop? Doesn't have xorg? I was under the impression it doesn't let you open 2 windows with different folders. Not sure why it's default, maybe its great for headless systems.
(Score: 2) by DadaDoofy on Thursday June 12, @07:15PM (1 child)
Here is a "unique" take on this from someone called Google Whistleblower.
https://x.com/Perpetualmaniac/status/1932951899105603929 [x.com]
(Score: 2) by turgid on Wednesday June 18, @03:52PM
Is it safe to click on that link?
I refuse to engage in a battle of wits with an unarmed opponent [wikipedia.org].