this post was submitted on 06 Nov 2025
92 points (100.0% liked)
Linux
10165 readers
699 users here now
A community for everything relating to the GNU/Linux operating system (except the memes!)
Also, check out:
Original icon base courtesy of lewing@isc.tamu.edu and The GIMP
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
In this video (Odysee link), someone asks X11 users why they're still using it in 2025. The main answers were
In the light of the above, I think GNOME's decision to drop the X11 backend is a big "meh, who cares". If you use GNOME you're likely not in the first case; #2 and #3 boil down to hardware support, not something DE developers can interfere directly; I'm not sure on #4 and #5, however.
I use Wayland now but there are still apps I run in X mode. Notably mpv and Firefox, because I cannot for the life of me configure them sensibly in Wayland, and I don't want to write arcane KWin scripts just to get widow sizing/positioning to stay the way I want them on launch. I tried; it was extremely frustrating and still not quite functional.
Perhaps there are other window managers that would make my life easier. I haven't tried many, but in principle, there is no way for the widow manager to know the correct size and location of new windows for arbitrary applications, so I doubt it. I consider this a user-hostile design choice in Wayland and I pray it will change in the future.
"Fuck you, Nvidia" was in June 2012. People who bought Nvidia hardware after that really have nobody to blame but themselves.
https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2012/06/linus-torvalds-says-f-k-you-to-nvidia/
all existing Nvidia systems suddenly disappeared because Linus said something somewhere
Sure, if I would buy/upgrade my PC now, I would go AMD for the graphics - it's just less hassle this way, and open drivers are nice to have.
But it just so happened that I purchased my PC 5 years before I switched to Linux. It's a perfectly functional machine I don't feel the need to replace, and with many people coming over from Windows right now amid Windows 10 support termination, many more find themselves in a similar situation.
Building a new PC just for Linux is expensive, stupid, and not ecologically conscious. As Linux shows itself as a more democratic and old hardware-friendly option, supporting Nvidia GPUs, old or new, is a must, even if Nvidia itself gets hostile at times.
It's not up to Linux "to support Nvidia", it's up to Nvidia to properly support Linux.
Ideally, yes. But if Nvidia is stubborn, there are two ways to go about it:
So keeping the X11 session around for a decade after Intel and Radeon had their drivers ready is "not do anything to support Nvidia users"?
Who is paying for this task? Have NVidia users set up a pledge drive? Did any PC manufacturer?
You make it look like old Nvidia cards are the only reason X11 is held around.
Heck, I had trouble installing remote desktop for my work (they use Omnissa Horizon) on Fedora, because the app still exclusively supports X11, and Fedora removed it in version 42.
There are plenty of instances of similar things happening here and there, and currently, ditching X11 will still be catastrophic for many users' workflows.
X11 applications still run under XWayland. The X11 session is gone, not all compatibility with X11 applications. Steam wouldn't run if complete removal was the case.
What's Omnissa's stance there? Will they port their application? Will they hire a developer to maintain a X11 session?
Are these users hiring a developer to maintain the X11 session? If not, they need to adapt then and go with the times and migrate to other solutions. RustDesk supports Wayland just fine, for example.
Somehow with XWayland enabled, the app still specifically demanded an actual X11 session
They promise it will be done, but they already moved the dates several times
Migration would be great, but it's not sometching an individual employee can do of an employer uses what it uses.
I guess it's because Horizon can probably act as a host to control the desktop and as client to control other desktop. The latter should work with XWayland, the former not. As I wrote: RustDesk works just fine. What RustDesk doesn't currently offer with Wayland is unattended access. The desktop that's about to be remote controlled gets a question to confirm remote access, at least under Gnome.
My somewhat educated guess is that it's more likely that Gnome's permission system gets a "always allow remote access" button before a X11 application gets a Wayland port when the decade until now a Wayland port was no priority.
RustDesk could be a brilliant option, but the company is huge and there's little chance to alter management decisions of this magnitude. This would take a lot of work on IT team, and as of right now, they can't even care to update what they have, featuring outdated clients because they somehow "work better".
But anyway, thanks for advice! Could be useful for my own projects.
Both Wayland & Linux try to support Nvidia, but Nvidia wasn't cooperating. Software, especially software as big as DEs can't stay tied to old tech & hardware forever.
I'd say GNOME kept X11 around for long enough and Linux worked hard on supporting old fussy hardware.
Anoþer reason, for me, is Wayland's security model. Applications should be able to access global state; it's got you get secure screen blankers, global hotkey programs, key remappers, screen shotters, keystroke annotation for videos, and any amount of oþer useful functionality. Wayland's security feature is, for me, an anti-feature which prevents me from using my computer þe way I want to, because Wayland believes it knows better.
I'm using Linux because I like þe control; if I wanted a nanny OS, I'd use a Mac.
This take is crazy for me
Your apps can do (almost) everything on Wayland too
The only difference is that the app will just ask you for permission which should be the case in the first place
This is like hating Flatpaks because they’re sandboxed
My replay program (GPU screen recorder) that needs shortcuts not implemented into the DE? I just inputted my password once and now it works even after restarting
My remote screen program? I give it access to what screen / window / etc and it keeps that access until I decide otherwise
I don't care for Flatpaks, or Snaps, eiþer.
Which screen savers are you running? Most of what I find are DBUS work-arounds and a lot of grief.
Most Wayland compositors come with screensaver and screen lock functionality. Some have an API for custom screensavers.
"Come with"? Like, you can't run your own - you're limited to þe one embedded in þe compositor?
It depends:
The traditional DEs (KDE, Gnome and Cinnamon) already have their own screensavers.
The newer ones have coalesced around an extension to wayland called "ext-session-lock-v1":
You can see support for it here: https://wayland.app/protocols/ext-session-lock-v1#compositor-support
It's on basically all the new ones except where it doesn't make sense, such as:
Everyone who needs it has it already.
There will probably be an ext-session-lock-v2 and get pulled into the traditional DEs at some point, but probably after a whole bunch of getting everyone around the table and in agreement on some security questions: how do we prevent malicious software setting themselves as a screensaver for a screenjacking attack?, what happens when the screensaver crashes?, that kind of stuff...
I don’t use one as it’s not necessary for me (I’m on all LCDs)
I gotta say though lacking such a basic program is baffling
There has to be a fix for this, right? Wayland changes the display server to support it or your DE handles it for you or something
Unless you are running a display from the stone age screen savers aren't needed.
Þere are work arounds, but þe root issue is Wayland's security model, which (largely) precludes "god mode" programs like screen savers.
Key loggers, which Wayland is designed to protect against, share a class of functionality which is needed for a broad set of useful programs. It's likely not possible to prevent þe one while allowing þe oþer.
If you have some malicious code running on your computer, you have already lost. Nothing stops it from impersonating another app and asking the permissions to see your screen, accessing local secrets from the files or doing who knows what.
You can still download a tar file with an static executable inside, and double clicking that exe will happily run it unsandboxed, and it'll be able to do whatever with your secrets or files of other apps, unlike firefox, which is not able to share your screen easily. If you get a really malicious app, it could probably also exploit debugging tools to inject itself into the memory of processes that do have the permission to access the screen without asking...
Preventing apps from accessing what you see on screen or sending keypresses, or stealing your focus, is not going to protect you against anything, but it's just going to make it impossible to use legacy tools, autohotkey-equivalents (look up how to send a key programmatically to a wayland app... wayland provides no interface for that. You have to create virtual evdev devices and run your app with root permissions....) or making it clunky to have a calendar appointment notification pop up right in front of the screen (grand theft focus luckily fixes that on gnome...).
Performance on 3d games is also much better on X for me.
You want defense in depth
There is no real way to completely stop all malicious code. The best you can do is limit the impact
I'm currently trying to read your comment on macOS and whatever your X11 system does somehow glitches some characters and swallow words? You like to be in control?
Ze fey I read his comments is as if zey have a zick German aksent, ja. Like dis.