In the login screen there is this option to choose zorin with wayland. what is the suggested one to be used in zorin, wayland or without wayland? what are the differences for the user (not the architectural differences, but user experience)?
Well, you have gone and lit the fire, now⊠
I believe that the debate of Wayland vs. Wayland will rage on for a long time. But for now, My Own Opinion is that Wayland is Unready for Use.
Wayland offers some very pointed advantages. It is a proposed replacement for the Xwindow system, that reduces the âmiddle-manâ back and forth communication, offering a more direct means of the display communicating with the kernel. But in experiencing Wayland, it comes clear that many things Do Not Work in Wayland that do work under the Xwindow compositor.
Wayland was first introduced about 12 years ago⊠So why exactly, it operates as it does (or does not operate as it should) is a mystery to me.
Wayland lacks the API to allow calibration and profiling. It cannot support different displays needing different calibration and profiles, or for applications to discover and use profiles for each display.
This person makes the following opinion:
2 Likes
I donât know. I logged in with wayland and a lot of those things mentioned in the article work. I donât know if they are the same but firefox works, gpaste works, gnome gesture extension works, etc.
1 Like
That link leads to an article from Feb of '19⊠Who knows if some things have been fixed or not.
It becomes an interesting point - breaking trust by releasing something Too Soon⊠As we all await the release of Zorin 16.
Either way- if something stops working soon, I am sure you know the first thing to check.
2 Likes
yes, logout and log in again, like always 
but either the team behind wayland did a lot of works the recent months/weeks or I didnât do much to put it on test
1 Like
have been digging just a little bit more into wayland. it seems that in some distros and in some DE it works better, and in some other worse and causes problems. but the pros when it works are much better compared to xorg. also, xorg is something from 1984/1987, thatâs older than linux!! and yeah, not wayland is xorg, learned that too 
1 Like
Unix predates both. And keep in mind that much of what makes Windows and Mac run relies on coding that is around that same time frame.
Another viewpoint would be: If code has been working well, while actively developing, since 1987, then it must be doing something right.
By all means, keep digging. Knowledge is not gained by accepting without question, nor by merely agreeing with others around you.
Yes, I think there are definite pros to Wayland- when it works. But the âwhen it worksâ caveat is pretty important. I am not a fan of xorg, but when it comes down to it; It works.
2 Likes
Marked solution. 15
Gave up on Wayland because Alt+F2+R doesn't work but then found that the Shell Refresher extension does, so I'm back
Only bug I have is the Numlock light doesn't come on at boot (but Numlock does).
Gave it up the first time because Clipboard apps didn't work but then found the Clipboard Indicator extension does.
Now that the current fad distro, Fedora, uses Wayland by default, I expect the last few bugs to be cleaned up.
Wayland is future and with fix drivers nvidia all jump from windows to linux.
OK! Until now I had not understood the reason for the wayland option. But from what I understand for myself (I'm just a user who likes zorin!), I don't notice any difference in productivity or appearance. It worries me only when Zorin starts to be very slow (little fluid) in the use of applications that I have installed on my machine that has 1 GB HD 8G ram and I5 processor.
The new finger gestures for Gnome 4X are really awesome in my opinion. They only work with Wayland. You can get the to work for xorg though, with tinkering and extensions.
In my opinion Wayland is 
.
When it comes to the Wayland vs Xorg debate, it's important to recognize that it's not a black-and-white issue. Each has its own set of advantages and disadvantages. What truly matters is finding a solution that aligns with your specific needs rather than adhering rigidly to others' opinions. Take the time to test Wayland for yourself, and if it meets your requirements without any issues, sticking with it makes sense. On the other hand, if you encounter challenges, Xorg might be the better choice for you.
In the world of Linux, there are numerous options, and many paths lead to success. Personally, for my use case, which primarily involves coding and machine learning, I've transitioned to Wayland and haven't encountered any issues. It's a testament to the diversity and flexibility that Linux provides, allowing users to tailor their experiences to suit their unique workflows.
2 Likes
Yes, yes. But I don't like Wayland as it doesn't have any use for me.
Yes. I reading a rumour everywhere about Wayland but it is really good?
So now everyone want kill Xorg for Wayland?
It isn't the problem Wayland could be for never graphic cards but not for older?
I don't know but I am sceptisc. Waylan is from 2008 and Xorg is 35 years on earth.
Most of system software we rely on is that old. It is not important when development started; it is only important whether that code is being maintained and up to date.
Another point: Old Software that is up to date and currently maintained means it is well tested, solid, stable and well understood.
Would you hire a tradesman with 8 years of experience or 35 years?
Would you trust a doctor with 8 years of experience or 35 years?
Mainframe computing is older than dirt. The GUI stuff you see on screen is young and fresh... And who posts on the forum looking for help with base mainframe system issues?
Pretty much never happens.
Who posts on the forum looking for help with new software issues?
The vast majority.
I personally do like Wayland, there's only one scenario that I've run into where it gets in the way and that's with password managers. However, is not a deal breaker for me and I haven't been bothered with anything else (yet), while providing a few nice improvements in terms of security.
What I don't like about it is how everyone is jumping on the hype train and shoving it on people's faces Ă la Flatpak, as if it were the ultimate solution to all problems. Even with supposedly stable distributions we have to be afraid of the next release because it may be the last one where things continue working. And that just gives me flashbacks of Windows and why I dropped it in the first place...
I totally get the point you're making here. And you may be right in many cases. But on your question which doctor I would choose, I'd pick the 8 years. It's a tough decision, it's like 55/45, but I'd go for the 8 years of experience. The older doctor will be solid, and very good at what they're doing. Thing is that they learnt what they're doing 35 years ago, where understanding of the issues, problems, and methods was not where they are today. The doctor will more or less try to keep up with the development of cures and methods, but eventually stick to and get stuck with what they learnt in their first years of practice. In the worst case they will refuse to accept flaws of their older education that are uncovered by newer findings. Again, it's a close call, but kinda sadly, I will pick the younger doctor.
Coming back to Linux: I've more and more come to realize that the phrase "never change a running system" is (again sadly) not only just one side of the truth, it's actually less than half of the truth and even potentially harmful in this fast developing world.
I am not a fan of Wayland. But Xorg needs some serious changes.
1 Like
This is an interesting point. It is a good argument, as we have all met people that get stuck in what they originally learned, but a bit too general for my tastes. While I have met some people like this, I would set them as a minority. I would go with the more experienced doctor since, in general, doctors constantly stay up to date with new leanings and methods. I would be hard pressed to believe that other than a small minority of doctors get hard-headed and stick to old data.
What changes does it need?
Xorg just works. Wayland - sometimes works.
I really like what Wayland offers in principle. Cutting out the middle man, simplifying the process and direct communication with the terminal. It can be faster.
The problem is that in application, it does not work with many apps out there. It has trouble on many kernels (usually unsigned ones). One of the first troubleshooting questions we ask users is "Are you logged into Wayland?"
1 Like