That's not what I meant, sorry. MS since ever used their market-share/power to dictate the market, invent useless, platform specific stuff and thereby force users/developers to be highly incompatible with anything (and they build a whole business model on top of this). Not that I mean everything they did was bad or wrong, but they USED their power to control the market:
Do you remember i.e. - building Internet Explorer right into the OS (and thus forcing people to use it over the competition), - the strange HTML-implementation (still) only supported by IE, - a completely stupid and incompatible JAVA VM, - JScript, - non-compliant DOM-functions, - non-compliant HTTP-functions, - a private "OpenDocument"-Format .. just to name a few (somewhat related to the forum here). So lots of (professional) developers were never free, but forced to develop incompatible crap to stay in business. That said, 'The Steve's' way seems not too bad ;-) BTW: On the Macintoshes there was never any restriction or licensing model to install an app. So your comparison is somewhat comparing Apples to Peaches (pun intended). ;-) a. at 22.10.2007 4:19 Uhr, Michael Geary wrote: > > What has Microsoft done for decades? > > There has never been any sort of licensing or "Microsoft seal of approval" > required for DOS, Windows, or Windows Mobile apps. Software developers have > always been free to distribute apps for any of these platforms under any > terms and through any channels they choose, and users of these platforms > have always been free to install any apps they want from any vendor. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "iPhoneWebDev" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/iphonewebdev?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
