I’m going to have to press X to doubt.
I’ve not heard or read a single good argument why Wayland is better than Xorg. I’ve heard plenty of times stupids arguments like: “it’s the future.” But really nothing to say what makes it better right now. People just repeat that like parrots. Sure, one day, maybe, we’ll all use Wayland on our GNU Hurd computers and it will be fine. Can’t wait! But in the meantime, in the current year, what makes Wayland better right now for me? I hear only cricket noises.
I swear, 99% of all Wayland users haven’t got the foggiest idea why they are using it. It’s just a fashionable thing to do. I guess some Tuber told them to do so.
Some people say: “Wayland is more secure.” But what is not secure about Xorg? All I hear is buzzwords like: “lack of basic security protocols that we take for granted in modern computing environments”, parroted around without any actual argument. And it sounds like a bunch of bloat to me, to be honest.
Seriously, what are the actual practical implications of all that “lack of security?” Sure if you run a bunch of proprietary spyware on your machine, Wayland makes it more difficult to for them get info from other windows. But that’s not a good argument, Wayland makes everything more difficult, so it’s not unexpected that it makes making spyware more difficult, too. Stuff not working is not a security argument! If it were, you should be turning off your computer, because that’s the most secure way, by far!
I do have plenty of reasons not to run Wayland. I’ll just mention two: