2016-03-06 21:33 GMT+01:00, Rainer Weikusat <rainerweikusat@???>:
> Not at all, actually. VNC based on keeping two bitmapped displays in
> sync by sending by sending 'bitmap updates' from the remote machine to
> 'the local display'. Even in a LAN environment (disclaimer: Haven't used
> it since 2004) this is a clunky mechanism which sucks badly. OTOH, X
> uses a higher-level protocol where clients send "drawing commands" to an
> X server which executes them on their behalf. It's just that this is one
> of these "obsolete technologies" (2D graphics? Nobody uses that!)
> so-called 'modern desktop applications' don't use: These do all their
> rendering on the client (at least reportedly) and then send bitmaps to
> the X server. As this still sucks badly, "network transparency" is
> essentially useless for wayland as "like VNC" is the best it will ever
> become.

Indeed: being Wayland a 'whatever' which puts bitmaps somewhere
over your displays, syncing your displays to the ideas your applications
wish to render, it's very akin to VNC which is a protocol for sending
bitmaps updates over the network, syncing a local machine's
display(s) with a remote one's.
It sucks but you can't prevent it: the corporation which thinks is
in charge for mantaining X, Red Hat, sees a bunch of clumsy but
active devs in the toolkit world, while seeing two aging developers
(and some vultures orbiting...) working on X.
So the idea is to come up with another standards clash between
window managers for network transparency and IPC (and audio,
and printers, and scanners, and input devices, you name it)
on the toolkit side, while the main API for drawing is under control.