> Try 150% and it is really a pain in the ass.
Yes and no.
Wayland clients work file with 150%, or 125%, or whatever scaling. X11 client don't, they are blurry, as they are upscaled from @1X scale.
In the past, I considered that a problem, but I no longer do. You see, 20 years ago, one of the great things Apple did with their migration to Unix-like system was to make X11 clients second class citizens, beyond any doubt. You had to run X11 server manually and later, they even stopped shipping XQuartz with the system. It was a message, that while X11 apps work, if you are the author, you should really make your apps native.
Blurriness of X clients is a similar message here. You want it sharp? Ask its author for a native client. By dragging the feet the problem won't be solved. Chrome, and by extension Electron, are "working" on Wayland support since, what, 2016? For 5 years? They obviously do not see any need for it. The blurriness is a kick so they feel that they should see the need.
Similarly, JetBrains. Recently, there was an article how they partnered with Azul to rework their JIT for M1. M1 is a product, that wasn't on the market yet, but they were working on supporting it. On the other hand, they haven't managed to introduce Wayland support during last years yet. Again, the difference is, that they know M1 is inevitable, but they can afford to delay with Wayland, the users will excuse that, will look for hacks on their own and they won't be blamed anyway.
So if anything, the problem is too nice Xwayland integration and Ubuntu, that delayed switch to default Wayland session, giving time to ISVs to ignore the Wayland support for another couple of years. The distributions have to signal inevitable changes; the problems that will appear by not doing so will be their own, and solving them later will be harder.