Wayland. It comes up a lot: “Bug X fixed in the Plasma Wayland session.” “The Plasma Wayland session has now gained support for feature Y.” And it’s in the news quite a bit lately with the announcement that Fedora KDE is proposing to drop the Plasma X11 session for version 40 and only ship the Plasma Wayland session. I’ve read a lot of nervousness and fear about it lately. So today, let’s talk about it!
Why are you so worried about people wanting to see this situation change for the better?
I’m not worried. I’m being realistic.
I’ve used Linux long enough to know that refusing to be complacent can lead to positive change. I’ve seen it firsthand.
We didn’t always have such good hardware support on Linux. People refused to accept crappy binary blobs and ndiswrapper for other things, and won. Having the attitude that you don’t want to listen to Linus because you love nvidia so much doesn’t help.
Okay. I’d like to know how a boycott will lead to positive change.
According to Steam’s latest hardware survey in August, Linux systems make up 1.82% of all hardware. I’d prefer to use this over the StatCounter statistic, since Steam’s survey data more accurately represents Nvidia’s target demographic for their graphics cards.
Let’s say all Linux users start boycotting Nvidia. I will assume that 60% of them are already on AMD cards since as you’ve described, they have better Linux support.
So the remaining 40% of those 1.82% (approx. 0.73%) can now start boycotting Nvidia and lose them additional sales.
So of the 98.9% of the gamer demographic (100% - AMD Linux users) that Nvidia could market to, they would lose 0.73 / 98.9 = approx. 0.7% of their sales.
How can a boycott that lowers their sales by up to 0.7% at best improve hardware support? I get that each individual person will be improving their own situation by switching to a card with better support, but I don’t understand how it will incentivize Nvidia to improve their Linux support.
Edit: Rectified some calc errors.
I’ve been using Linux since 2004. Back then, it didn’t even have nearly the marketshare it does today, and Android didn’t exist, but boycotts and protests have worked anyway. Many times. Even nvidia themselves changed their tune with their motherboard chipset drivers.
By your logic, all these hardware manufacturers should just give up and refuse to support Linux at all. It sounds like that’s what you are advocating for.
You said that Linux users should boycott Nvidia. I’m asking you how that will incentivize Nvidia to improve their Linux support. Can you answer that question or can you not?
I’ve said numerous times that this has worked multiple times in the last 20 years I’ve dabbled with Linux. You refuse to listen and throw numbers and “I don’t care what Linus thinks” at me. I’m done here.
It would help if you pointed towards specific incidents where a boycott was the direct cause of an improvement in Linux support.