The technical merits of Wayland are mostly irrelevant
In response to Wayland Breaks Your Bad Software
I say that the technical merits are irrelevant because I don't believe that they're a major factor any more in most people moving or not moving to Wayland.
With only a slight amount of generalization, none of these people will be moved by Wayland's technical merits. The energetic people who could be persuaded by technical merits to go through switching desktop environments or in some cases replacing hardware (or accepting limited features) have mostly moved to Wayland already. The people who remain on X are there either because they don't want to rebuild their desktop environment, they don't want to do without features and performance they currently have, or their Linux distribution doesn't think their desktop should switch to Wayland yet.
I still don't know why people are willing to give up remoting so willingly. With X it was always easy to send your accelerated video securely over the network. Didn't Wayland drop this? How are people remoting securely into Wayland desktops now?
I mean, I think most people use xwayland to keep this functionality.
Agreed completely though, we need a better replacement for remoting, it's too useful.
You mean something like waypipe? https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/mstoeckl/waypipe/
This seems good. Is there a preferred solution for headless Wayland desktops?
Do a significant amount of people using wayland even want or need to remote exactly like in X?
There is a variety of remote desktop applications that support Wayland, Brodie talked about them in his video regarding Wayland's lack of network transparency. Wayland does not need network transparency to be able to support remote desktop.