|
|
|
|
|
|
by Crysstalis
1416 days ago
|
|
|
I am sure you can understand how that is a contrived situation if you are trying to test and deploy a general-purpose network application. In every other case with lower speeds it is a horrible option, the bandwidth usage is unacceptable. |
|
|
I've also seen it work fine with 100mbit speeds. But again, I'm not going to make the claim that X-forwarding is the be-all and end-all of remote display solutions; I use mostly RDP and VNC when I'm on the Internet. I never said that X-forwarding is the best remoting solution in all scenarios. You're the one making the argument that everyone who doesn't do things your way is doing it wrong, because you don't seem to understand that other people have radically different use cases than what you're used to. And the flexibility of X11 means that it supports those use cases and others out of the box...and Wayland does not.
In fact, the only thing I've seen going for it is that a) people don't want to maintain X11 and b) it addresses vague security issues like applications resetting your display settings that almost no-one ever had a problem with. It's not a mystery to me why people complain. You're telling people that they're wrong for using their computers the way they've been using them for decades, and if they only change their workflow and environment (which they may have no control over) then they will be compliant with what's new and happening. I'm not here to defend X11, I have no great love for it, but it's bizarre to be told not wanting major feature regressions is wrong.