I know that Apple is very unpopular right now for having a closed garden, and I think we all wish things were more open. But that's not the same as the things we've seen from Microsoft in the past -- their tactics with the Office document formats (both the XML standard tactics as well as their forced upgrades and incompatibilities in the past), their FUD tactics around Linux, not to mention their attempts to hamper Java, etc. Apple isn't in the same league, nor is IBM, Oracle or any other dominant software vendors that I can think of.
Regarding the Mono discussion: The "snickering" was just that this is what everybody had predicted in the past and that it's amusing that it has taken this long for the Mono guys to open their eyes to it. Regarding the iphone dev license issue: No, I don't think we'd have a long discussion about a possible restrictive license if the tables were turned and it came from Microsoft. I don't think we've gotten into licenses much in the past either. Licenses just aren't exciting. I seem to recall that there was a huge hoopla over license provisions in the Android download as well, but that we didn't discuss it much on the podcast. -- Tor On Apr 8, 6:10 am, Maarten <[email protected]> wrote: > Guys, > There's something that's been bothering me for a while about certain > discussion on the podcast. But first, let me clear up a few things. > 1. I love the podcast. I started listening around the 30-something > mark, haven't missed an episode since, and don't plan to stop > listening any time soon. I even bought you guys beers once! But > unfortunately Dick couldn't take the bottles on the plane, and had to > leave them in Holland (don't worry, they were put to good use ;). > 2. I don't work for Microsoft. I don't get paid by them, and never > have. In fact, since I switched my desktop box at work from Windows to > OpenSolaris, I don't really use any of their products any more (at > least in a professional capacity). > I'm just a Java developer who's interested in fair reporting, and > equal treatment of all players in the IT industry. So, with that in > mind, here goes.... > > There seems to be a fairly solid anti-Microsoft bias among the Posse > members. For each individual member it seems to be some form of the > stereotypical "everything Microsoft does is evil/crap" sentiment that > is so prevalent in the FOSS community. To a degree, that's fairly > understandable (at the risk of sounding a little too sage-like, I too > once felt that way), given Microsoft's track record. And if it were > just limited to that, it wouldn't bother me that much. What does > bother me is that there seems to be a fairly hefty double standard > employed by the Posse when it comes to the actions of other companies. > > Take the discussion about Apple and patents in the last episode, for > instance. If that particular lawsuit had been Microsoft vs. HTC, > instead of Apple vs. HTC, I think we can all agree that the discussion > on the Posse would have been of a very different tone. > > Or take your discussion about the iPhone Developer Program License > Agreement. Dick called it "draconian", but, other than that, the > general attitude seemed to be "hey, it's their right to require you to > sign it, that's life". Really? Is that really all you guys had to say > about this incredibly restrictive and overreaching license agreement, > which the EFF has called "troubling" (http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/ > 2010/03/iphone-developer-program-license-agreement-all)? > Let's do a little thought experiment. Let's say it wasn't the iPhone > Developer Program License Agreement but the Windows 7 Phone Developer > Program License Agreement that was discussed on the Posse, and it was > just as draconian as the iPhone version. I can't be sure, of course, > but I think that there would have been fairly solid condemnation of > Microsoft for being secretive, locking in developers, etc. etc. I > realize this is hypothetical, but I don't think it's unrealistic. > > Or lets take a concrete example: in the last episode, you discussed > the whole Miguel de Icaza/Mono thing, and there was lots of snickering > about MS not opening up .NET and not cooperating with the FOSS > community. Given how you'd just glossed over the license agreement > that enables one of the most proprietary, locked-in and secretive > platforms in the consumer computing industry today, it was a little > disconcerting. > > This double standard bothers me. On the last podcast Tor actually said > something along the lines of Apple being "much better" than companies > like SCO or Microsoft on the issue of business practices. But is it? > There is a whole litany of Apple business practices (and this goes for > other companies as well, such as Google) that cannot be reconciled > with the principles and ideals of FOSS, of which I consider the Posse > (at the very least Dick) to be solid supporters. And those same > business practices are condemned when used by Microsoft. It seems that > MS is held to a much higher standard than almost any other company on > a lot of issues, and other companies are often given a free pass, even > though their practices are no better than Microsoft's. > > Like I said, I love the podcast. But I'd love it even more if you guys > would call out other companies for doing the same things which you > condemn when done by Microsoft. > > Regards, and keep up the good work, > Maarten -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The Java Posse" 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/javaposse?hl=en.
