> And I can connect to my work system and use the same windows in Visual Studio with "all aspects of the window work as if it were local".
Only if you take the entire desktop--I've already explained why whole-desktop sharing doesn't work for me. X can do this, too, without needing any special support or coding in the applications. It's only if you want to have one application open windows in two different displays simultaneously that you need special support in the application.
However I'm no Windows expert, by any stretch. If there's a way to share a single application's windows between multiple systems seamlessly, without the entire desktop, that's very cool. If I was a Windows developer I'd probably be very happy with that.
I don't know what you mean by the X approach fails in 99% of the cases, or that "few programs" show all the properties of X network transparency. Either this is hyperbole or else the set of applications you use and the set I use have zero overlap, since 100% of the applications I use work perfectly (and transparently) when using a remote display, with no special extra code. However I'm not interested in this argument either.
This article is about Wayland, and my only point in posting is to make clear that "remote desktop" is not sufficient functionality to achieve feature parity with X.