1) Mac users are persnickety about UI and cannot suffer to use the standard tatty UI that prevails in the Linux desktop world.
2) X in general is moribund, as everyone knows Wayland is the future. What's really needed now is a Wayland compositor that can render to Quartz.
Anyway, XQuartz doesn't give you the capability to run Linux binaries -- only to run software commonly available under Linux that's been source-compiled to macOS. Noah allows you to run a full Linux binary distribution under macOS without virtualization.
The only use case of XQuartz for me is the ability to ssh into a Linux server with X11 forward so I can remotely control the GUI app running in the server. That’s why I ask whether Noah would be good replacement for such purpose.
I agree with you that Mac users are persnickety about UI. In fact, one of my complaints on XQuartz is the lack of retina support. As for wayland, as far as I understand, it does not support network forwarding (yet?)
1) Mac users are persnickety about UI and cannot suffer to use the standard tatty UI that prevails in the Linux desktop world.
2) X in general is moribund, as everyone knows Wayland is the future. What's really needed now is a Wayland compositor that can render to Quartz.
Anyway, XQuartz doesn't give you the capability to run Linux binaries -- only to run software commonly available under Linux that's been source-compiled to macOS. Noah allows you to run a full Linux binary distribution under macOS without virtualization.