No, it's really not. In many ways X11 is behind what the other operating systems offer, and the emphasis on backwards compatibility above all else is the reason. For example, Windows has the notion of window privilege, in which lower-privilege windows are isolated from higher-privilege windows. X11 technically has the XSECURITY extension, but nobody uses it as it breaks everything, so in practice every X11 app can keylog your browser. It's really unfortunate that the Linux community is so divided over Wayland, as from a technical perspective Wayland is sorely needed.
MS Windows manages to be binary backward compatible with win95 and in some cases even win32s. The graphics model is mostly the same as windows 3.0 . So MS has backward compatibility in spite of security.
Otoh, wayland has gaping functionality holes that MS windows has not: Screen recording is basic, normal usage. UI automation isn't that weird of a use case either.
I can't believe that this is unsolvable with some security model in wayland if the political will would be there. If a lot of people have the same complaint, and they are ignored, that's really unfortunate. Basically, Wayland should deal with reality or it will stay in limbo.
UPDATE: This post has a more harsh tone than intended. Sorry for that. I did my share of X11 programming,so I agree that something better is needed. And wayland is after years and years of no advancement a great initiative. But it pains me to see it stumble a few meters before the finish line, because of a stupid self inflicted wound.
Wayland is problematic as it goes entirely the opposite direction of X11, which means, for example, that screenshot programs and custom key binding daemons will not work.
We now understand that a program that can secretly take screenshots at will can spy on all your conversations and steal your credit card number. That isn't quite as bad as root, but, honestly, for most users it's pretty close.
Wayland is absolutely doing the sensible, conservative thing when it comes to screenshots.
No, I'm pretty sure that was always understood. What Wayland is doing -- breaking expected desktop functionality -- is not sensible at all. Window's permission model is more sensible as it actually accomplishes something.
Wayland's "fix" isn't one because on the vast, vast majority of systems any compromised program running under your uid can begin debugging another under your uid, completely circumventing any permission system Wayland tries to create. Have a root terminal logged in, or maybe open one later? Any program under your account now has root if it tries hard enough.
People started freaking out about the completely normal and expected things you could do under X11 and kneejerked themselves into the current Wayland. Maybe it will eventually be relaxed. If it isn't, I can't expected it to replace X11.
> ... and the emphasis on backwards compatibility above all else is the reason ...
Not entirely; from memory the entire X11 development team are also heavily invested in Wayland.
There was a long period of time where graphics drivers lived in userspace, in X11, and nobody could use an alternative window system. That was the way things were up until 2010-2012 era. Even then the graphics drivers in the kernel weren't in a great way.
Now the drivers in the kernel work well and the graphics stack is slowly migrating away from X11. They are moving as fast as they can without breaking things.
I want better windowing security, but I also need to be able to present my desktop in a video conference call. Expecting people to switch before they can do normal desktopy things isn't reasonable.
No, it's really not. In many ways X11 is behind what the other operating systems offer, and the emphasis on backwards compatibility above all else is the reason. For example, Windows has the notion of window privilege, in which lower-privilege windows are isolated from higher-privilege windows. X11 technically has the XSECURITY extension, but nobody uses it as it breaks everything, so in practice every X11 app can keylog your browser. It's really unfortunate that the Linux community is so divided over Wayland, as from a technical perspective Wayland is sorely needed.