To be optimistic for Linux adoption, I'd estimate that for every person who does nothing in terms of remote apps or desktops there are 2 users who do (have to count business, campus, etc. users who are on a large network where such things are every day events). Linux still has a lot of it's users in technical areas or who are technical even at home (home network, etc.) as opposed to just home users. So I's say we've got 2/3 of the Linux users doing remote work of some kind. And for every 3 users who do use some kind of remote app and is telling me X11 remote apps is just as good as VNC or RDP, I'd bet there is at least 2 of those 3 that doesn't understand how X11 remote apps works (hasn't used it or doesn't understand the difference) based on what I've heard from people who have tried or who have at least thought about it.
Just rough estimates on my part, sure, but it still gives my side the majority. Any place I can look up real figures to try and find out who is using Linux nowadays? See how far off I am?

Don't have mirage, but gave Konqueror a try. Prolly not an accurate test as I don't use it much, but worked OK from my PC to my phone...lots of messages in the xterm about contacting other desktop pieces but scrolled fine on the GUI side while showing my home folder...

Every time I'd tried it it's worked. Mozilla, Firefox, Doom3 even, The ones that have trouble are desktop environment apps (like gnome session manager, or other gnome utils) that assume the whole desktop is local...not a problem to do with X, they are looking for or trying to take over another desktop pieces. That's a multi-user fail, not an X fail.
Examples from your side?

Slashdot's not the only place I count. Other web sites and forums seem to be the same. Rough back-of-envelope counting anyway...no need to do more than that considering the counter replies don't even do that.
Just once I'd like someone to answer this criticism with something reasonable instead of "No it's Not!!!"

All X11 apps "support" it...that's the beauty of X11 network functionality: apps don't HAVE to support it, it comes free.

if I count most comments about it, you're out numbered, hence "minority"

You mean the "rest of us" being that minority that doesn't use and/or doesn't understand X11 network functionality?

I'd sure hope so, or better yet someone close to the "action" has already mentioned it to him and he was glad of the input. Even better still he had thought along these lines himself already while making the decisions he did...I'd assume I'm not the first to see this since the developers on these projects are much brighter and quicker than I am. The worry is it's been dismissed already without taking it in, not that it's a radical idea.
The question is more: Am I wrong in what I see? I would love someone to argue points instead of just refusing to take the point seriously, which is what seems to happen on forums like Slashdot and the other websites describing Wayland ideas.
It's been a while since I watched the video, but as I remember it: the justification for going the way Wayland went was doing some modern graphical tasks the X way was horribly convoluted and/or buggy, so clients did all the heavy lifting and handed X a finished product to throw on the screen. While true, doesn't really sound like the solution is take that workaround people were using to get around a problems and base a window system on it while dropping the network functionality that ONLY EXISTS IN X (emphasis all mine) and is so much better designed and implemented than any other network graphics model...
X has issues, but throw out a working design with a working (working well I might add) implementation (not just in Linux, but X is on many platforms) to fix a few shortcomings?

Watched it a long time ago. Doesn't change the fact that Wayland is a step backwards.

I've said it before and I'll say it again: Wayland is a coder's fix to a design problem: take a hack/workaround and build a new base on it instead of fixing the design.
I watched the video and Wayland is a step backward.
What kind of solution ignores the use cases on a working (and well performing) system when replacing it? X has issues no doubt, but criticize it's weaknesses not it's strengths please. I'd love a replacement for X, but Wayland IS NOT A REPLACEMENT.

Funny, I feel the same way about Wayland: If they'd quit wasting time on Wayland, the graphics dev's would be able to put time into the better, feature rich and more mature X system and we wouldn't loose as much ground as Wayland development threatens to do.

Another post mentioning Wayland...I still have hope it will die a quiet death so the Linux GUI can get back on track...

So, now can they just load the driving software into Atlas? instant marketable product...buy a driver for all the benefits of the AI driving without having to buy a new car!
Or load the same software into Cheetah and it can run deliveries down streets and right up to your door! That will show Amazon!

simple answer : "No". Complex answer: Wayland can share a screen provided someone writes a separate piece of software to do it and you can deal with the model used by Mac and Windows, which is lower functionality than X11.

X11 treats the screen as a resource shared by the X server. means the screen is available to any app on the network same as network storage, etc. Wayland left that out of "core" with the promise someone would be able to come along later and add something similar back in. Similar but not same...not that I'm bitter or anything.

If they dropped X11, then I can't share my device screen out. What exactly is the advantage of Sailfish over Android if it's just another isolated device like android?