It’s a standard to display programs and let them interact with each other. The old way is X11 which is a big program handling all of that. With Wayland every desktop and window manager (like KDE, Gnome, i3wm, Sway, etc) take up the role of Xorg themselves, giving them better control.
Every program has to be changed to work with Wayland. Those that don’t run through Xwayland, a program mimicking the old X11 standards on Wayland.
The important part that they are a bunch of new commands. We had old commands for this things, but they were written a long-long time ago, and computers evolved a lot since that, we can’t fix the old commands anymore.
So you wanna go from home to school. The whole distance/trip can be done on a bus or your moms car. That’s a means of transportation. But, now people are creating a train and soon you will have another means of transportation that you can go to school with, by train.
That’s it, Wayland is another means of transportation (newer) than the older means of transportation that existed for a long time, x11 or xorg.
The route is how can applications show stuff on a screen, what transport should they use.
I’m guessing it’s kinda like: you’ve got a couple people sitting there wanting to play with Legos and only so much room to play. They don’t have direct access to the play area because of security reasons so they have to ask someone to place the Legos for them. Wayland, X11, and Xorg are all different people they can talk to to place the Legos in a way where no one is fighting for space.
So basically it’s a new way for programs to negotiate who has what part of the screen?
I’m guessing Wayland is either more feature rich or lighter on resources and that’s why it’s a big deal?
It’s an entirely different design than X11. It gains features not possible to implement on X11, while losing many features exists in X11. People that like those new features love Wayland, while people that use those missing features hate it.
The most obvious, user-visible loss of features are applications no longer able to grab/mess with contents of another application’s window. Screen sharing and remote desktop was broken for a long time in wayland until it’s fixed via pipewire recently. Under X11, rendering is free-for-all, where any app is free to do whatever it wants to other app’s window. Heck, you can even tell mpv to play video on a cell in librecalc if you feel like it. Such shenanigans is now impossible in wayland because it’s a big security risk (though I’m not sure if it’s actually exploited in the wild).
The most hyped feature of wayland is better support for high resolution “retina” display. Also, you can use multiple monitors with different dpi/scaling in wayland. IIRC it’s not possible on X11, though you can use xrandr to force the scaling on each monitor, though it’ll result in blurry texts because the scaling is not done natively.
Yeah, it’s a new way that programs use to draw their stuff on the screens.
In the middle usually are other stuff that abstract away that part from normal application development, so in general, most applications don’t need to care with the low level thing that is being used to draw their stuff, but there is always somethings that some apps will do to bypass or expect to work in a certain way, so sometimes changes and time are need to adjust those applications to play well with the new way of drawing.
The core idea of why Wayland matters is that it is designed to take advantage of the hardware features and how hardware is designed in this century. On xorg, since it was designed around the architecture and expectations of what people thought things should work in the 70s, it was becoming really hard to add features related to how newer hardware worked. Things like multiple gpus, prime architectures, multiple surfaces/screens with multiple aspect ratios and dpis, varying refresh rates, taking advantage of hardware acceleration for graphics drawing, etc, were all really hard things to do because the code had multiple concepts not applicable to the modern age. So, essentially developers were already bypassing 99% of the internals of xorg architecture and hacking things in a very hard way. They basically decided/experimented with stripping apart all the things they didn’t need and didn’t matter and reduced it to the most basic and core thing that mattered: “how to push these pixels to that surface”.
It ended up being a successful experiment, in that it showed it was possible to do.
Now, in the current world, there are solutions that need to be implemented to bring some features up to speed since the wayland thing is so core and barebones. And this is a good thing. It allows developers and applications to think really hard about what they need to do and how they should do and how things should work across all toolkits and desktop environments. Obviously this takes time to make decisions and ensure everyone is onboard, experiment and reiterate on it until good solutions are found.
This last point is what makes end users frustrated when trying wayland because some things are lacking or not ready yet. For the general use, users without really specific needs, they can already use wayland now, but for others they can’t because of their particular needs or specific hardware situation.
If xorg is working for you, then there’s no need to worry. If it’s invisible to you then most likely you shouldn’t care, because the desktop environments are changing their sessions to use wayland by default and most users will not perceive any difference. If users see problems and then notice that it’s related to using wayland they can choose explicitly to use the xorg version since it will still work for a while.
On one end, in the kernel, there’s a big array of pixels that is a picture that gets drawn on your monitor (or monitors). On the other end are a bunch of programs that want to draw stuff, like pictures of your friends and web pages. In between is software that decides how the stuff the softwares want to draw get put into the pixel array. This is Wayland; it was written to replace Xorg, which is what did that job for decades prior to Wayland.
If you understand the concepts of Xorg and window managers, Wayland + a compositor = Xorg + a window manager. Wayland abdicated a lot of work to the compositors, making it simpler and easier to maintain (and compositors more complex and harder). But together, they all do basically the same job. If one of the compositors implemented a network protocol, then you could declare equivalency.
Programs running graphically (Firefox, your file browser, etc.) need a way to tell the system “draw these pixels here”. That’s what the display server does; it takes all these applications, works out where their windows are and manages that pixel data.
XOrg has historically been the display server in common use, but it’s very old and very cobbled together. It generally struggles with “modern” things that must people expect today. Multimonitor setups, vsync, hdr and all that. They work, but support is hacked together and brittle.
Wayland is a replacement for XOrg that was designed from scratch to fix a lot of these issues. But it’s been an uphill battle because XOrg is the final boss of legacy codebases.
tl;dr They’re both software that manages drawing pixels from applications to the display.
Wayland isn’t software as it is just a set of protocols. The desktops and window managers take the place of X on Wayland. That’s why it has better performance.
That hill has a name. GNOME. Wayland’s governance on the whole is a fucking disaster (alternatively, the best sitcom you’ll ever see), but GNOME is a particularly malignant growth on the project’s taint, with completely baseless NACKs that have delayed some protocols by months, and missing/incomplete features in Mutter.
Q1: No, it does not require X. But some software even if not graphical, requires X libs for whatever reason (e.g. Using Qt)
Edit: to answer Q2: I don’t think there is technically a way to interact with the system without a TTY but thats technicalities. Your more practical answer is to use SSH to log in and interact. This is how most IoT things work which run Linux and have no display capability at all.
wiki.archlinux.org/title/Fbterm can take care of some of the limitations (use TTF fonts, for example) but support in general for nongraphical environments on Linux at the moment is not amazing
But it’s been an uphill battle because XOrg is the final boss of legacy codebases.
Also because Wayland forces every compositor to be an unmodifiable monolith instead of following the UNIX philosophy. For example I’m currently running i3 inside of Xfce because the de, wm, compositor, and every other part are doing their own thing and can be replaced. With Wayland I’d need to fork the compositor and spend a ridiculous amount of time on something that’s trivial in xorg.
And let’s not forget the garbage pile of tools that got abandoned a week after release because Wayland introduces breaking changes on a regular basis. You want unified shortcuts across multiple compositors like with sxhkd? Tough luck, the only tool was abandoned after the first version and doesn’t work anymore. On the other side you’ve got 15 rofi alternatives you need to dig through to find out which ones are still maintained and might work on your device.
On top of that Nvidia GPUs have so many issues, and while that’s not solvable by Wayland, it’s still a major issue that still hasn’t been fixed after 15 years, but might maybe soon™.
Finally, the security improvements have gave me nothing but headaches whenever I tried using Wayland. No matter the distro or compositor, screen sharing and recording never worked for me. Give permissions, share whole screen or just window, it’s either black or the program is not showing I’m trying to share ate all.
You can’t blame it all on xorg when Wayland is still simply far worse for a large part of the community.
The Wayland protocol board can never agree on anything. It takes them years to decide to consider adding something.
Also Wayland is just a protocol at the end of the day so implementation is up to the software developers. I also think that the Unix philosophy holds back software that could be good. You shouldn’t prioritize it over good battery life and low overhead.
I also think that the Unix philosophy holds back software that could be good.
IMO the UNIX philosophy is the reason why Linux survived. Imagine if every distro had a single DE, or you had issues with pulseaudio and couldn’t replace it with pipewire.
You shouldn’t prioritize it over good battery life and low overhead.
And why would separating functionality into different tools cause you to have a worse battery life? You don’t get to have tlp on other OS because it’s all integrated
So it’s software that handles software wanting to display things on the screen. Because having each piece of software do it itself would be not only chaos but a massive security concern. And it’s a big deal because it fixes (by replacing) the old software with something that’s easier to work with than the old ways of doing things (due to all new code that’s not spaghetti that’s hacked together over decades).
Because having each piece of software do it itself would be not only chaos but a massive security concern.
Not really, the main point is that (most) apps don’t know where they are on the screen, whether they’re minimized, on the active workspace, … and they don’t care either. That’s the responsibility of the window manager.
The app tells the display server “I need a window to display these pixels” and that’s it. And the window manager, well, manages these windows.
On the topic of security, X11 doesn’t handle security at all, that’s one of the main issues. So any graphical app can read the other windows’ pixels, grab everything you type, everything you copy, … OTOH Wayland isolates apps so they can’t do that by default. Apps that really need to (screenshot apps, …) can use “portals” to ask for these permissions.
I use wayland, but be warned that there are downsides.
X11 is 40 years old. Which means that even though it has 40 years of bad decisions baked into it, it also has 40 years of features and tooling built around it.
And in some cases, things are purposefully broken in the name of security as mentioned above. Writing a keylogger on X11? Easy. Every app can watch the keyboard even when they aren’t in focus. So if I type my password into firefox, Discord can listen. Hope you don’t have any malicious apps just patiently listening to all your keystrokes.
Getting rid of input listening sounds great! … Except for the concept of global keybinds. Have a Push to talk button in discord that you need it to be able to listen to while youre playing a game? Sorry, the game is in focus, so discord can’t see ANY of your input. Including the push to talk button. Different wayland servers have different ways of handling this with their portals. Some don’t have it at all. And the ones that do don’t always have great solutions.
One major issue that has been in wayland debate hell… how do multi-window apps communicate with each other. For example GIMP. The editor window is a separate window from the toolkit which is a separate from the layer view. GIMP on X11 knows where all of its windows are because it can see everything. if you wanted GIMP to save all the window positions, it could. GIMP on Wayland has no idea where each window is relative to each other. Each window knows its own size and shape. And thats it. It doesnt know where on the screen it is. Which means it doesnt know where it’s other sub windows are relative to itself. Which means GIMP on Wayland can’t really save the window positions for next run. Wayland is working on a protocol for handling this, but its been caught up in debate hell last I saw. This is a prime example of a thing X11 had. And Wayland will someday have, but the 40 year headstart and disregard for security gives X11 a huge headstart.
Most of these problems have workarounds and solutions, but you might find yourself in a situation where you do in fact need to implement a workaround instead of having everything Just Work.
“Better” means different things to different people. Architecture and security and technologically? Wayland is better. Just Works and its what your apps were probably built to run on so less weird edge case issues? X11 is still better just due to inertia. (And again, I use Wayland, I’m willing to deal with the workarounds, but you do you).
Wayland is a display protocall. What does that mean? Well, it describes how a program on linux tha displays graphics to a user should work. Examples of programs which do this include kwin, mutter, and sway. It’s why you see stuff on your monitor and why when you open an app, it’s in a window, which can be moved.
All that along with a good amount of supplementary tools, makes up wayland.
Currently we are transitioning from a 40 year old protocal called X11 which has many issues and few people willing to work on. Wayland offers a codebase without the spaghetti, more security, easier feature development, and to a point backwards compatibility.
The system that Linux uses to draw anything on the screen (showing the desktop, your windows, their contents, etc) is called a display server.
Linux has been using a display server called the X Window System (or x11) since its inception, but it’s ancient and has limitations that can’t be fixed without breaking everything that depends on it.
The Wayland compositor is the new display server that will be replacing x11, improving security and adding support for newer features like HDR. It’s nearly ready for a full release now, and is already the default for some Linux distributions.
Wayland is not a server or a program. It is a set of protocols implemented by the desktop. Basically your desktop draws to the display and then your apps connect to the desktop
Waland is the British half of the mega corp Waland-Yutani. Sometimes called Wa-Yu, or simply “the company”
Founded by Charles Bishop Wayland, the totally not evil billionaire industrialist, Wayland LLC was known for energy production, computer technology, and planetary terraforming before it was acquired in a hostile takeover by the Japanese Yutani corp in 2099.
Wayland is the replacement for X11, it’s getting pretty close to what I consider pretty good, I only have 2 more desires for Wayland, I’d like it to be able to remember where my windows were placed, and I’d like scaling to not suck.
I’m using KWin, and you could for example start every Firefox window at the same specific position, but it would be better if it could just be where I put it last time, because even if I pop every window in the same place or not, the instant you have more than one window, it’s useless. Remembering would be preferential.
Eli5: Wayland is a new way for Linux to make things appear on your screen, things like windows, graphics, and even your whole desktop.
The old way was called Xorg. It has been around for a very long time, and works pretty well, but the code is veryyyy messy and many developers wanted a new and easier way to make things appear on your screen, so they made Wayland.
(It’s debatable how much easier Wayland actually is vs Xorg, but at this point most major distros are switching over to Wayland, so it’s a moot point)
I have been sort of following Wayland’s development for over 10 years now. I have been using Wayland for over 2 years now. I have been reading and watching various lengthy arguments online for and against it. I still don’t feel like I actually know it even is, not beyond some handwavey superficialities. Definitely not to the extent and depth I could understand what X11 was and how to actually work with it, troubleshoot it when necessary and achieve something slightly unusual with it. I feel like, these days, you are either getting superficial marketing materials, ELI5 approaches that seem to be suited at best to pacify a nosy child without giving them anything to actually work with, or reference manuals full of unexplained jargon for people who already know how it works and just need to look up some details now and then…
Maybe I’m getting old. I used to like Linux because I could actually understand what was going on…
Wayland is a modular communication protocol that specifies how a compositor interacts with its clients, as well as a replacement for X11.
Wayland does not aim to provide a commonly used compositor implementation that could be used by everyone.
This modular approach allows for different desktop environments to have their own Wayland compositor implementations that reliability produce the same or virtually the same output based on the communication specifications without the increased challenges of integrating it into existing Desktop Environments or Window Managers as it allows for more flexibility in implementation. As an analogy, it’s like if several people were making the same type of sandwich in different ways, as long as the “client” (the application) gets the sandwich they asked for, the specific process doesn’t matter.
In contrast, Xorg is a single, monolithic X11 implementation. Due to Xorg’s dated, non-modular design, maintaining and extending it’s functionality is extremely difficult. Infact, it’s lack HDR support to this day is due to its inflexible architecture.
Wayland compositors combine the functionality of a display server, window manager, and compositor into a single component. This simplified architecture is one of the main design goals of Wayland compared to Xorg/X11 where the display server, compositor & window manager are separate components. This approach ultimately streamlines the rendering pipeline where applications render locally and communicate directly with the compositor, cutting out the X server entirely. Wayland’s client-side rendering is more modern and cleaner than Xorg’s approach.
Okay, I’m not OP but a follow up question that occurs to me reading the explanations of what Wayland is, is are there any distros or spins of distros that use Wayland by default?
Fedora uses it by default on KDE Plasma and Gnome. It even removed Xorg support for Gnome (and maybe Plasma. Can't remember). Ubuntu uses it by default with Gnome. Any distro which leaves the DEs on their default settings gets Plasma and Gnome running Wayland by default.
Add comment