I think it's fair, since every one of those distros ships an X11 fallback. I desperately want Wayland to succeed but exaggerating its current wins won't get us there.
I don't want this post to focus on the negative, though, so I'll suggest a more positive argument: the people who would have been responsible for a hypothetical X12 instead decided to make Wayland. I can't think of a body of experts more likely to make a correct decision, so I have confidence in Wayland as the path forward.
Fair. I'll admit there are a few rough edges, mainly caused by some apps (Slack) having older versions of certain libraries that makes some functionality (like screen sharing) break.
Dudemanguy wrote about its deficiencies 2022-06-11 [0], ex lack of feature parity with X11 and self imposed limitations like only allowing integer scaling (ie to get 1.5 scaling, it uses x3/x2 scaling). For some perspective, consider checking other hn reader reactions to this post [1].
To be fair, I'm on an five-year old laptop with NVIDIA and since last year it almost works well enough to be a daily driver. For some weird reason Chromium doesn't render at all, even though Chrome does. That's the only remaining bug of significance.
Whereas when I tried a year before I had to bail after an hour because many applications would just have a black screen.
It kind of feels like it will take only one more year for this to work well enough (except then the laptop might be so old hardware support ends up lacking)
I have to disable hardware compositing on X11 to get a reliable desktop (and HW rendering in individual apps like firefox). I'm not sure if something similar is possible on Wayland.