> X11 not being a monolithical piece of software sounds like a cognitive dissonance issue. But it isn't. Have you ever tried to use X11 without any window mana

> X11 not being a monolithical piece of software sounds like a cognitive dissonance issue. But it isn't. Have you ever tried to use X11 without any window manager? You can't! In the best case you can type inside a terminal that is not moveable or resizable. X11 can not function on its own, hence it can't be monolithic. Just because it is bloated doesn't mean it is monolithic. And most of the bloat is old graphics drivers which are not installed on your system anyways. I'm not really liking X11 either. Just like I switched from sysvinit to runit I would be happy to switch from X11 to the next best thing. But Wayland is not it. The protocol is flawed on so many levels but most importantly because it does not provide the necessary interfaces required for normal, functional desktop and degrades them to "implementation details" (or in your words "1000s of things"). Just blitting bitmaps is not sufficient for a working desktop system. The biggest pain point is access control policy, which Wayland completely ignores.