>In general, Wayland is moving away from the modularity, portability, and standardization of the X server.

This is the core criticism that's been advanced since a decade ago. X is the standard, it's an actual standard. Wayland is apparently both a protocol which is defined by an XML file, a reference implementation, but yet not a standard. It's going to be tough to get it into deployment until it is standardized and finished, so to speak.

It also doesn't give me any benefits, the programs I use all use X so Wayland becomes a parent process to X and that's apparently its job. Why not just skip it? X is very time worn and honed to a sharp edge, it can run on incredibly minimal hardware. Wayland depends on a lot more.