What’s the difference for a real user between using X11 or Wayland nowdays? I haven’t found anything useful on the internet, so I’m asking you. Internet articles on the topic (and about WMs too) seem to be advertising slop since they explain anything but the real things. Also, if anyone used the XLibre fork, I would love to hear about your experience with it.
As someone who has used X11 and Wayland, it doesn’t matter for the typical user. If you, like me, have a penchant for some smaller desktop environments like XFCE or window managers, you will be stuck with X11, but many are already working on porting to Wayland.
Couple edge cases for gaming, namely screen tearing on some X11 configurations and certain Nvidia hardware running into issues on Wayland. For multi-monitor or high DPI users, Wayland handles per-monitor DPI and fractional scaling far better than X11. Maybe a couple more edge use cases for remoting into the desktop, but Wayland support is also improving quickly on that end. In any case, Wayland is by design more secure than X11.
I thought I’d never have to care about X11 or Wayland if I was a typical user. I thought it was just a debate for really passionate Linux user.
I turned out to be false since the reason I had bad playback on my HTPC, was the fact that Wayland was preventing the refresh rate of my TV to be adjusted to the content.
Switching to a distro using X11 solved the issue and apparently Wayland doesn’t plan on changing anything about this issue.
This seems to be a common pattern with the Wayland team. They seem very focused on some technical ideology for how “things should work” to the point of ignoring or dismissing real-world issues.
Perhaps in another 20 years they’ll get around to addressing it.