I agree with you, who really cares what Adobe say about Railo or vice versa, as you say this is normal competitive practice and any company need to prove their product is the best and normal practice is to say "our product does this, theirs doesn't, so no-one is doing anything wrong there. The blurred line however seems to be whether it is the OSS or the people who use it getting the abuse. From what I have seen and experienced it is the users dishing out most of the abuse, and many of them really should know better.
On Mon, Jan 31, 2011 at 11:12 PM, Brian Kotek <[email protected]> wrote: > > What are we actually debating, again? The original issue at the root of all > this was that Adobe is being "abusive" to the OSS engines. Highlighting the > competitive advantages that Adobe feels they have over Railo or OpenBD, or > the negative impact they feel it those engines have on the Adobe or CF > community, is not abuse. It is exactly what competitors do. Everyone is > free > to agree or disagree with what Adobe is saying. But to call it "abuse" > reveals, at best, a lack of understanding of what the word means, and at > worst, an intentional misrepresentation. > > I keep asking for some examples of the horrible abuse that Adobe (or > anyone, > really) are directing at the OSS engines, but no one seems to be bothering > to provide any. > > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Order the Adobe Coldfusion Anthology now! http://www.amazon.com/Adobe-Coldfusion-Anthology/dp/1430272155/?tag=houseoffusion Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/message.cfm/messageid:341747 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/unsubscribe.cfm
