There are missing or less well-supported features in the wayland protocol as well as the various compositors. I would argue that most of your complaints, if not all of them, are niche concerns for the average Linux desktop user. I can't really say that I've had much trouble with clipboard buffers in various applications (after it worked at all in wayland compositors). I'm either doing something different or there's not much overlap between the applications we regularly use.

I'm not going to argue that Wayland is flawless or even feature-complete, because it isn't. But for the average Linux desktop user, a decent wayland compositor is completely fine and works well without any need to mess with configs. Unlike X, it's being actively developed so it might actually gain those missing features unlike all the shit X has been missing for ages. I wouldn't even mind another option in the display manager/window compositor world, but your first comment seems way too harsh, especially when most of your criticism boils down to praising the supposed network transparency of X, which has mostly been a hindrance for at least a decade. No wonder they decided to do away with it for Wayland.