Alea, an excellent answer, but hardly one on the point in question.
24601 said: I don't think of an examination of data-at-rest as "surveillance."
_________
that was the focus of the discussion--his definition.
Anyway, IMO, Wave is not being held back because of lack of meeting standards real or imaginary; lack of fiscal stability; lack of suitable financing to service a big contract; or any of the other explanations.
Wave fails because it never had a clear strategy that it stuck to, the technology is old and one assumes assembled in the same haphazard way Wave put out press releases with misspellings and terrible grammar.
Whatever the reason, Wave has tried a number of ways to enter the market with its product and despite a few nibbles, its product has not sold.
Is there a market for Wave-type security, if it were modernized and innovative with no bugs? You betcha and expanding by the second.
It is this desperation in the security, enterprise, and government markets that vividly brings out the contrast between Wave's claims and the lack of sales--not to mention the far-fetchedness of the excuses for not selling.
IMO, either rescue will come quickly or the NAZ, or creditors, or lawyers will put a bullet into the head of this fatally wounded critter writhing in pain. I think we are talking fairly soon, as before summer's end.
Blue
