Talk:X Window System

Why intro does not clarify that X11 is a protocol?

   The X Window System (X11, or simply X) is a windowing system for bitmap displays, common on Unix-like operating systems.

X Window System is a specification which seems to have second name of X11 (whereas there exists X11 protocol which is a part of X11 specification). However the reference "windowing system" can confuse since it does state in its intro the following fact

   ...a windowing system (or window system) is software

As I have stated, X Window System is not software but specification or design description though it has a reference implementation. That did mislead me in first place and could mislead others. Shall we clarify that is it a specification? If not, I apologize and please tell me what I am missing. -- Yoratade (talk) 22:06, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

:Actually, X11 is a standard.  X-Window-System is a standard an X11 one of its versions.
Inside XWindowS you have the Xprotocol, that is like Machine Language for X, and XLibs to make programmers live easier.  Guilloip (talk) 19:20, 16 February 2022 (UTC)

How could one possibly confuse this with Microsoft Windows?

There's a weird archived section from 2004 about how Microsoft lawyers would sue the maintainers of X11 for the name "X Windows" (and...no...I think few lawyers would be stupid enough to do that even when that was the name, not to mention this predates Windows 1.0 so they couldn't do anything). But I don't understand why else the article would start with "not to be confused with Microsoft Windows" because everything on the article points to this not being Microsoft's Windows. Is this a byproduct of that weird section in 2004? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.201.25.34 (talk) 04:24, 13 April 2022 (UTC)

@72.201.25.34 It's not uncommon to see it called X Windows, X-Windows, etc. For people less technically- (or at least less Unixily-) inclined, it's not improbable they might think anything computer-related called "Windows" is something to do with Microsoft. I'm not sure of the origin of the hatnote, but it doesn't do any harm. Getting that potential confusion cleared up immediately, without the reader getting through more of the article, is not a bad thing. Inops (talk) 17:51, 17 April 2022 (UTC)

VcXsrv not listed as free implementation on Windows

A reference to VcXsrv [1] in Implementation section was removed as not non-notable entry. This is strange as VcXsrv is one of the only 3 available as free implementation on Windows.

The other two are Cygwin/X and Xming. While Cygwin/X is free, opensource and kept updated, the minimum installation is 800 MB, so not suggested but in case you need also posix layer and other tools with windows. Xming on the other way come in two versions, only one (v6.9) is free/public domain/MIT licensed but it is very old, from 2007, unstable and not ready for production env. The other Xming is updated (v7.7) but proprietary licensed and payd so not free.

So most of Windows users today are using VcXsrv. This is expecially true in recent years where WSL is really common and widespread, and more and more these days that WSL got DirectX acceleration with WSLg in Win10 21H1 too.

OK VcXsrv does not have a Wiki page, but this do not do it non-notable Efa (talk) 11:24, 27 November 2022 (UTC)

In the above, the only cited source is the project's SourceForge page. In Wikipedia, talk pages aren't a reliable source, so to continue the discussion, you should demonstrate notability by presenting independent sources which could be used to develop a suitable topic TEDickey (talk) 11:45, 27 November 2022 (UTC)

Here some:

https://itservices.cas.unt.edu/software/windows-x-server-vcxsrv

https://www.stat.ipb.ac.id/agusms/index.php/2019/01/15/how-to-run-graphical-linux-applications-on-bash-on-ubuntu-on-windows-10/

https://uni-tuebingen.de/fakultaeten/wirtschafts-und-sozialwissenschaftliche-fakultaet/faecher/fachbereich-wirtschaftswissenschaft/wirtschaftswissenschaft/fb-wiwi/einrichtungen-wirtschaftswissenschaft/wiwi-it/services/services/computing-asp/tools/x-server/vcxsrv/

https://www.shogan.co.uk/how-tos/wsl2-gui-x-server-using-vcxsrv/

https://www.uxora.com/unix/45-xdisplay-over-ssh-with-putty-xming-vcxsrv

https://askubuntu.com/questions/1435037/how-to-check-and-confirm-a-right-opengl-version-with-vcxsrv-for-using-ros2-rviz

https://seanthegeek.net/234/graphical-linux-applications-bash-ubuntu-windows/

https://help.cs.uwindsor.ca/mediawiki/index.php/VcXsrv

https://www.scrc.umanitoba.ca/doc/tutorial/T19_3a_xsrvputty.htm

https://www.oit.va.gov/Services/TRM/ToolPage.aspx?tid=9676

https://www.onworks.net/software/windows/app-vcxsrv-windows-x-server

https://codeyarns.com/tech/2019-05-12-vcxsrv-x-server-for-windows.html#gsc.tab=0

--Efa (talk) 14:50, 27 November 2022 (UTC)

sure - then go ahead and create a topic, so that others can validate which are reliable sources TEDickey (talk) 22:24, 27 November 2022 (UTC)

be careful not to get caught up in bureaucracy, damaging the quality of the Wiki product--Efa (talk) 10:50, 28 November 2022 (UTC)

Wayland as its successor?

Should this article body and infobox state Wayland as the successor to X11? They're under the same umbrella.

https://www.x.org/wiki/XorgFoundation/ :

X.Org Foundation's (or X.Org for short) purpose is to research, develop, support, organize, administrate, standardize, promote, and defend a free and open accelerated graphics stack and the developers and users thereof. This stack includes, but is not limited to, the following projects: DRM, Mesa, Wayland and the X Window System.

Merko (talk) 11:47, 18 April 2024 (UTC)

Is it explicitly stated that Wayland is the "successor" anywhere? 2601:646:9981:7000:428B:EDAB:F0C5:A0F4 (talk) 03:43, 30 October 2025 (UTC)

"Wayland is a replacement for the X11 window system protocol and architecture with the aim to be easier to develop, extend, and maintain." [2] Merko (talk) 13:10, 30 October 2025 (UTC)

One would expect Wayland to say that.

Xlibre says

""Xlibre is a freshly created fork of the Xorg X11 server, initiated by Enrico Weigelt, aiming to provide a more actively maintained and modernized alternative to the aging X11 system." [3]

Please explain why we should favor one self-serving claim over the other.

For those unfamiliar with what appears to be going on here, I refer you to The Curious Case of XLibre Xserver]. --Guy Macon (talk) 20:46, 3 November 2025 (UTC)

Your own link admits that Wayland has been adopted as the successor to X11 in basically every major distro. "What appears to be going on here" is dumb culture war shit. One maintainer loudly forked X11 in June citing "DEI" and it stopped getting any attention by end of July. REAL_MOUSE_IRL talk 00:47, 4 November 2025 (UTC)

The maintainers of the following distributions created packages for XLibre or intend to create them: Artix CuerdOS DeLinuxCo Devuan GhostBSD HomeServerHQ Nemesis OpenMandriva Stormux Vendefoul-Wolf Vipnix. There hasn't been a lot of time for adoption; the inaugural stable release of XLibre was released in June 2025. I expect that if the quality is there after a bunch more testing, those few distros that have purposely rejected Wayland will switch to XLibre. As for distros that are currently sticking with X11 I wouldn't try to guess which way they will go.

As I said, it would be inappropriate for Wikipedia to take sides, especially with zero reliable sources supporting the claim that either is X11's successor. --Guy Macon (talk) 01:21, 4 November 2025 (UTC)

Wayland is an Xorg project [4], and Xlibre is an independent fork. I don't see how adoption by distros is relevant. Should we list Blender as the successor of Maya if the entire industry switches to it? Merko (talk) 12:26, 4 November 2025 (UTC)

Assuming that we decide to not list Blender as the successor of Maya, should we change that decision of IBM/Redhat buys[note 1] both, shuts down Maya. and puts up a similar notice on the Maya webpage? One could instead argue that XLibre is the "real" sucessor because at this point it consists of the X11 codebase plus many of the contributions that were rejected because X11 decided to close down and not accept any changes. (I am not making that argument, BTW. My position is that Wikipedia should not anoint a successor when no independent reliable source has done so).

Note 1: Yes, I realize that technically you can't "buy" an open source project, but nonetheless IBM owns redhat[5] and, while Google doesn't technically own Firefox, Google pays Mozilla half a billion dollars a year[6] -- Approximately 85% of Mozilla's revenue.[7][8] --Guy Macon (talk) 17:48, 4 November 2025 (UTC)

Wayland being the successor of X11 is sourced (even if only from a primary source), as they are both in Xorg umbrella. Xlibre being the successor due to sharing a codebase is WP:OR. Merko (talk) 23:02, 4 November 2025 (UTC)

Of course it is OR. That's why I didn't try to make the article say that XLibre is the successor to X11. I would need to find independent secondary sources to make that claim. I would revert anyone who tried to add that claim without sourcing it. In like manner, you need to find find independent secondary sources to make the claim that Wayland is the successor. I am not going to debate this with you any further. Wikipedia's rules are clear on the topic of basing contentious claims on primary sources. Feel free to post a RfC if you think the community will agree with you. --Guy Macon (talk) 23:24, 4 November 2025 (UTC)

I have to agree, Wayland's developers describing Wayland as "a replacement" for X11 (emphasis added) is not the same as saying it is the successor. Even if it did explicitly call itself the successor, that would be an WP:ABOUTSELF claim that would need third-party sources. - Aoidh (talk) 00:18, 5 November 2025 (UTC)