It *is* quite different from all other hardware: the number of sources
involved and the bandwidth of the data streams make it a unique case.
However, when I say people are being too absolutist I mean both ways.
I'm quite happy going with whomever puts out the better solution
(XFree86 or GGI.) I'm just commenting on what I see.
> We walk the walk while others merely talk the talk. We are not
> afraid to defend the validity of our ideas (on this list or anywhere
> else), and back them up with running code. Given the scope of the GGI
> project (an almost total rewrite of the Linux console subsystem), we are
> doing pretty damn well, thank you very much, especially when you consider
> the almost total lack of cooperation and assistance we have recieved from
> the rest of the core kernel development team (exceptions noted - we know
> who you are and we thank you).
Given the vitriolic nature of the communications some of the GGI
project members have had from the very beginning most kernel
developers have written GGI off as a bunch of flukes. The flame from
about a year and a half ago ("we're going commercial" or something
like that) was the straw that broke the camel's back for a number of
people.
To be frank, I would be very hesitant to "defend the validity of
your ideas" in any *other* form than working code -- may it be fair or
not, you have exceeded your hot air quota by quite a bit. You are
fighting an uphill battle *because* of it, and adding more really
doesn't help, if you want your work to be judged fairly on its merits.
-hpa