> Nowadays X-server simply uses kernel support for modesetting, display and input device discovery, etc.
It also "simply" provides all that information to X-clients and "simply" allows them to configure and use it. Xorg also has methods and standards for communications among all the X clients.
> So actually recreating all the X functionality is easy.
Sure, if Xorg was just about drawing, but it's not. That's why after 5 years of Wayland development it's still not much better than Windows 2.0, except being true-color.
> At this point it simply makes sense to write something from scratch
Makes sense? For what? Who's going to win from that? It adds more work for toolkit developers. It breaks compatibility with lots of existing software (window managers, dock bars, etc). But who's going to win from Wayland? Where are those people?
> After all, X server has a freaking x86 real mode emulator to run BIOS VESA modesetting on x64 hosts.
And Wayland has what? Or are you trying to say that X works when Wayland does not? Well, that's true.