Path: csiph.com!eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!nntp.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: John Ames Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.os.linux.misc Subject: Re: KDE Goes Wayland Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2025 09:39:57 -0800 Organization: A noiseless patient Spider Lines: 40 Message-ID: <20251215093957.00004b4c@gmail.com> References: <10h13uq$2b64m$10@dont-email.me> <10hj8ms$3qr8r$6@dont-email.me> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Injection-Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2025 17:40:08 +0000 (UTC) Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="2edf9ef637dca759f6fe7d05026fa1eb"; logging-data="2186046"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1833zwKI93GDfSrwbcFQzulFWeejYAZmdA=" Cancel-Lock: sha1:TSQdFNSWwh4JC1aV2vsS7X7v1wQ= X-Newsreader: Claws Mail 4.3.0 (GTK 3.24.42; x86_64-w64-mingw32) Xref: csiph.com comp.os.linux.advocacy:702788 comp.os.linux.misc:79158 On Sat, 13 Dec 2025 10:56:37 +0000 Richard Kettlewell wrote: > >> MAC OS-X worked fine without [X11]. > > > > It actually did have it included, right to this day. > > macOS has not included X11 for over a decade. The comparison isn't very indicative, anyway. OSX included X11 support because NeXTSTEP had, but NeXTSTEP had it because it was in the "Unix business workstation" market and it would've been stupid *not* to be compatible with the dominant display-server standard just because they had their own that they liked better. Even on NeXSTEP, though, I'm not sure that it ever saw a lot of use, since the native tools for building GUI applications were much better (if you could cope with Objective-C;) and when it got around to OSX it was little more than a novelty, as Mac users unsurprisingly preferred to run Mac software. Which, for the most part, it did perfectly well. A better comparison would be a hypothetical scenario in which Apple decided that the underlying frameworks in classic MacOS had significant security holes (which they did) and were unsuitable for a cooperative multi-tasking, multi-user OS (which they were,) and that it was there- fore in need of a ground-up redesign... ...but instead of a concerted effort to make the transition reasonably seamless, they got about 70% of the core functionality, fudged some of the remainder, made breaking changes to some more in accordance with a whole different set of ideas about how the GUI should work, and replied to user and developer complaints with patronizing lectures about how You Don't Need That and The New Way Is Much Better Actually, You Sheep. Which, in a post-iPad world, would actually be a very typically Apple thing to do - but which is *not* the kind of thing freenix users are used to putting up with. And unlike proprietary OSes controlled by a single corporation, freenix users have the option to tell them where to stick it.