Updated the title

But you don't need a status icon to run in the background.

If Firefox wanted to, they could make Firefox continue running in the background. They could even app a system tray entry for Firefox to access recently visited sites or favorite sites, like what Steam does.

This paradigm is actually the norm on MacOS. When you X out of an app, it doesn't actually close. It will just have no open windows but stay open on your dock.

All those same options are available by right clicking on the app. Though thinking some more, the status icon being dynamic does give it some extra flexibility, I think it can show recently launched games. Still, does that mean Firefox should get a status icon so that you can access recently opened sites? Should your file manager?

The complaint against the app indicators is that apps tend to throw their icon in there for no reason. Why does Steam need to show itself there? Why doesn’t Firefox?

There’s also some technical reasons why they’re bad. There’s quite a few different protocols to show the icons up there, all each with their own pros and cons. But none can handle sandboxing properly, so work is being done towards a new protocol.

Setting the environmental variable

GSK_RENDERER=gl

in Flatseal or on your entire system should fix the issue. It tells GTK to use the old OpenGL renderer backend for GTK. Once the issue is fixed upstream, it would be a good idea to remove the change.

The benefit for Amazon is good PR and supporting open source projects their engineers use.

You can check if you are using Xorg or Wayland in the Settings -> System -> About -> System Details page. If you're using Wayland, you're all good, nothing changes. If you're using Xorg, you may notice some changes. If you're using NVIDIA on Ubuntu 24.04, you'll be on Xorg by default. If you're using a later version or AMD/Intel, you'll be on Wayland be default.

To keep it short, X11 was the old protocol for creating and managing windows. Xorg implemented this protocol. But both the protocol and implementation have many shortcomings that are difficult to address for a multitude of reasons (breaking compatibility, poor code base, a ton of work, etc).

Rather than putting lipstick on a pig, a new protocol, called Wayland, was created. It was designed for modern needs and tries to avoid the pitfalls that X11, Windows, and MacOS have. It doesn't just copy what those three did, it's more opinionated, so some people love it a lot (like me) or hate it a lot because it changes the way things have to be done and simply does not implement some functionality, either purposefully or because the work hasn't been done yet.

Gnome isn't locked-in. For being an important open source project, AWS has given Gnome credits so that they can use AWS free of charge for years. Once those credits expire, they are free to leave. So long as they do their proper preparation to migrate away, they get multiple years of hosting for free.

Gnome has already been in this circumstance. Their free hosting from another provider expired so they moved. Though as I'm researching this, I can't find the sources I've read this from.

Could you please explain further?

How does free infrastructure hosting from AWS hurt anyone? There’s no privacy concerns and this helps Gnome’s development.

The only way this will hurt is if Gnome is not prepared to switch away once their credits are up.

Amazon is giving this service to Gnome for free. If anything, this is hurting them.

For some reason, this has been getting a lot of push back on Gnome's Mastodon.

Keep in mind that this changes nothing for you as a Gnome user. It changes little even if you develop for Gnome. However, this frees of a lot of resources for Gnome. Gnome is getting the infrastructure for all their needs for free (for now) and don't need to worry about maintenance of the hardware.

Getting ready for Zoom to have instructions to install i3 rather than fixing their Wayland support.