If you’re fine with Wayland, go with Wayland. There are lots of reasons still that people might prefer X11 but the list has been getting shorter.
The security model of Wayland is more restrictive than necessary for many users and means things like screen sharing and desktop toys are harder and not universally implemented or doable.
Wayland effectively requires many things to be handled by the same process, preventing traditional modular environments (e.g. separating window manager from compositor no longer possible)
Explicit compositor support required for more features, meaning having a feature complete environment in small projects is much harder, and the design of Wayland tends to promote a few large desktop environments rather than many small window managers.
honestly my biggest complaint with Wayland is the lack of programs being able to move their windows causing browsers to not be able to properly display certain web experiences.
I’m new to Linux too and testing both X11 and Wayland at home. so far I like Wayland in theory (it’s the future!) but prefer X11 in practice (no weird graphical issues).
If you’re fine with Wayland, go with Wayland. There are lots of reasons still that people might prefer X11 but the list has been getting shorter.
honestly my biggest complaint with Wayland is the lack of programs being able to move their windows causing browsers to not be able to properly display certain web experiences.
I’m new to Linux too and testing both X11 and Wayland at home. so far I like Wayland in theory (it’s the future!) but prefer X11 in practice (no weird graphical issues).
For what it’s worth, I regularly switch depending on what I’m doing (AwesomeWM for X11 and Hyprland for Wayland)