I use uMatrix as a substitute for NoScript + uBlock, and while it's a pain to get some sites working manually without bulk-enabling everything on them, I'm mostly happy about it, and the web looks better for me.
I use Noscript and uBlock Matrix together. It's a little annoying to have to double-whitelist pages, but they offer some non-overlapping functionality. uBM has finer whitelisting control, while NS has finer control (and better visibility) over specific kinds of objects on the page.
However, neither offers a UI for whitelisting specific scripts, which I see as an important feature in the Year of the CDN. I think NS has that feature but it's hidden away in the preferences.
I tried using uBlock (EDIT: uMatrix) for a while, but I felt like it was a lot of hassle, and most of the time it still wasn't granular enough to actually block the things I wanted to without breaking sites. It seemed like usually all of the bullshit javascript making sites sluggish came from the same domain as the few bits I might actually want. (Or at least needed to make the site useful.)
> wasn't granular enough to actually block the things I wanted to without breaking sites
I don't understand the criticism: it's no less granular than NoScript. If considering only the dynamic filtering panel[1], it can be argued it's more granular given that one can block inline-script tags only, and also one can block/allow on a per-site basis.
Static and dynamic URL filtering of course allows you to filter on a per-URL basis.
However, neither offers a UI for whitelisting specific scripts, which I see as an important feature in the Year of the CDN. I think NS has that feature but it's hidden away in the preferences.