tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19798349.post7093005835945737936..comments2024-03-04T06:09:18.295+00:00Comments on open...: Are Microsoft's Promises For Ever?Glyn Moodyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04436885795882611585noreply@blogger.comBlogger12125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19798349.post-26304856319882686042009-07-09T21:55:12.936+00:002009-07-09T21:55:12.936+00:00answers on the back of a postcard...answers on the back of a postcard...Glyn Moodyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04436885795882611585noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19798349.post-15249062615714707122009-07-09T21:35:10.562+00:002009-07-09T21:35:10.562+00:00Java, Python, Lua, etc. Why do some people insist ...Java, Python, Lua, etc. Why do some people insist on a risky MS patented technology when there are so many good safe free options out there?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19798349.post-60215058606312516582009-07-09T09:41:32.353+00:002009-07-09T09:41:32.353+00:00@CHub - we have just the thing ... it's alread...@CHub - we have just the thing ... it's already hugely popular in industry use, its creator has made a patent promise that's actually good for something, and it's got a version that's entirely GPL free software.<br /><br />It's called Java. The thing that .NET is a shoddy copy of!David Gerardhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13057086390864018760noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19798349.post-55671528413870841782009-07-09T08:19:20.646+00:002009-07-09T08:19:20.646+00:00Indeed: dependence on Microsoft is not a safe stat...Indeed: dependence on Microsoft is not a safe state to be in.Glyn Moodyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04436885795882611585noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19798349.post-81108889791630484822009-07-09T08:09:58.573+00:002009-07-09T08:09:58.573+00:00It will mean Linux will always be playing catchup ...It will mean Linux will always be playing catchup to Microsoft setting the ship's direction.<br /><br />We need to create a whole new totally open intermediate language to makes assembly language interoperable.CHubhttp://conspiracyhub.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19798349.post-49670186092153418042009-07-09T08:08:28.965+00:002009-07-09T08:08:28.965+00:00thanks for the comments.thanks for the comments.Glyn Moodyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04436885795882611585noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19798349.post-79804535940270240182009-07-09T00:01:13.609+00:002009-07-09T00:01:13.609+00:00I'm getting a little lost in all the minutia, ...I'm getting a little lost in all the minutia, but it doesn't appear to me the this change in Microsoft's position is big enough of difference, to actually make a difference. <br /><br />Who actually, unequivocally benefits from this change? How is a programmer or developer actually, in any significant and practical respect, any "safer" from patent-infringement claims -- or legal actions -- than they were before?<br /><br />And in any case, would any of these alleged benefits even apply to GPL-licensed code? It appears to me that it wouldn't. <br /><br />Does this "promise" (assuming that it's even legally binding) actually make a difference? After the promises Microsoft made regarding vFAT and their subsequent actions, I'm not sure it would matter in any case.<br /><br />Bernard SwissAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19798349.post-84534604694546681602009-07-08T22:47:34.370+00:002009-07-08T22:47:34.370+00:00As I see it, the requirement that the implementati...As I see it, the requirement that the implementation of the ECMA standard be complete, leads to two undesirable consequences:<br /><br />1. The "all or nothing" requirement means that Internet-based collaborative development is cut off at the knees. The first version checked in to a public RCS essentially has to be v1.0. Development versions implementing incrementally more of the ECMA standard cannot be published.<br /><br />2. Fewer people having access to development versions means less robust testing, which means possible undetected variances from the ECMA standard, which means it wouldn't be covered by the so-called "promise" from MS not to sue.<br /><br />Bad, bad, bad...Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19798349.post-67433611053593816862009-07-08T15:10:09.393+00:002009-07-08T15:10:09.393+00:00@zaine: welcome back...@zaine: welcome back...Glyn Moodyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04436885795882611585noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19798349.post-7234861084992873902009-07-08T14:58:34.653+00:002009-07-08T14:58:34.653+00:00Glyn you're right: it doesn't pass the ste...Glyn you're right: it doesn't pass the stench test. This is what frustrates us about Microsoft --everything is conditional. Reminds me of the idea of Indian giving here in the US; you can have it until I want it back. And Microsoft won't want it back until it's too late for you, the consumer (or is it victim?) of their specs.<br /><br />This is why Mono is bound to turn out badly.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19798349.post-55731073030186447432009-07-07T20:31:13.156+00:002009-07-07T20:31:13.156+00:00@David: yes, lots of glorious wiggle room there, m...@David: yes, lots of glorious wiggle room there, methinks...Glyn Moodyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04436885795882611585noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19798349.post-88038170452014578122009-07-07T19:40:23.963+00:002009-07-07T19:40:23.963+00:00And here's a key point: it applies to software...And here's a key point: it applies to software meeting the spec. Not software that diverges from the spec to be bug-for-bug compatible with the .NET implementation. Ask the Wine project how much of MSDN is pure fantasy and how much they need to hack in bug-for-bug compatibility to make applications work.David Gerardhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13057086390864018760noreply@blogger.com