Don't you mean active scans? It's not necessary to broadcast your MAC address in order to find Wifi access points. A passive scan just waits until it receives all the beacons. Since beacons are transmitted every 100ms, I never understood the need for active scans.
Anyway, I have better uses of my time than to waste another minute with you.
We knew what was going on when you ran your anti-IBM campaign, sometimes even positioning yourself as arguing on behalf of our community. It was a way to lend credence to IBM and MS arguments during the SCO issue. To state otherwise is deceptive, perhaps even self-deceptive.
Florian, you would not be devoting all of this text to explaining yourself if you didn't feel the need to paint your actions in a positive light. That comes from guilt, whether you admit it to yourself or not.
Go write your app, and if you actually get to make any money with it you can give thanks, because it will happen despite what you worked for previously. Keep a low profile otherwise because your credibility is well and truly blown and you can only make things worse. And maybe someday you can really move past this part of your life. But I am not holding out much hope.
So, I see this as rationalization.
The fact is, you took a leadership position, and later turned your coat for reasons that perhaps made sense to you. But they don't really make sense to anyone else. So, yes, everyone who supported you then is going to feel burned.
You also made yourself a paid voice that was often hostile to Free Software, all the way back to the SCO issue. Anyone could have told you that was bound to be a losing side and you would be forever tarred with their brush.
So nobody is going to believe you had any reason but cash, whatever rationalization you cook up after the fact. So, the bottom line is that you joined a list of people who we're never going to be able to trust or put the slightest amount of credibility in.
And ultimately it was for nothing. I've consistently tried to take the high road and it's led to a pretty good income, I would hazard a guess better than yours, not just being able to feel good about myself.
Meh, it's easy to find people with skill. With values, OTOH...
You have a point.
Great. Name calling, with zero actual substance. I am reminded now why I don't frequent Slashdot much anymore. I suppose you can't be bothered to bring actual arguments against what I wrote in my earlier, post, right? No, spitting out curses is much easier of course. It should be completely obvious that I am *not* speaking for Raster, but instead am stating that he *would* agree with what I said since his design decisions for Evas are pretty much what I described. But hey, I don't expect an actual discussion anymore. Continue with your infantile name calling.
If you mean enlightenment evas, note that the lead developer would agree with me. Evas has been one of the earlierst adopters of client-side drawing. It is so efficient that it can even outperform GL-accelerated 2D drawing in certain cases. Evas has (or had) support for the Xrender extension as well, but quickly dropped that, because letting the application handle all of the drawing and small-bitmap blitting (by that I mean stuff like icons) is so much more efficient. If anything, Evas is a perfect example of why the "blitting bitmaps" paradigm is the better one.
And none of them use the X way of remote desktop either. Yet, they are efficient, and in heavy use. You make it sound as if remote desktop is unfeasible without the X remote functionality, which simply isn't true. Stick VNC/RDP to Wayland, and you are done.
Again, I wrote:
Yes, that fits the term "most", unless you are running some old distro
Also, you completely disregard the MUCH bigger number of administrators and helpdesk personnel working with VNC, RDP, Citrix etc.
You said it yourself: the X remote functionality is okay for *old* stuff (RHEL5 is from when, 2007?), which still draws content by asking X draw this line, that text etc. It is much more efficient to let the application draw these things by itself these days, which is why every newer toolkit and application uses this client-side drawing model. And this is *exactly* where X is broken: it is fundamentally ill-suited for this new paradigm, which only needs a much simpler system. One like Wayland, which only provides surfaces applications can draw into. That's it. Anything else is an anachronism.
Qt4 just pushes bitmaps (even Qt3 did, partially). So does Gtk 3. So do Chromium and Firefox, and IIRC also Thunderbird. Yes, that fits the term "most", unless you are running some old distro.