On Sun, 09 May 2004 18:39, you wrote:
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Wesley Parish [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Sent: Saturday, May 08, 2004 10:41 PM
> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject: Re: Meet With MS
> >
> >
> > When is Microsoft going to release the full, non-encumbered
> > specs for WinML,
> > their Office2003 file specification, for the purpose of
> > compatibility with
> > OpenOffice.org and AbiWord?
>
> This I agree with 100%
>
> At the same time I've been spending some time looking at what people are
> actually using in their office applications.
>
> Frankly most of the new features I've seen in the MS offering seem to be
> little more than visual noise.
>
> > Has Microsoft ever considered the brownie points it might
> > garner by releasing
> > under the MIT/X11 license, the Microsoft-owned source code to
> > Win NT 4.0,
> > Win95, and Office97?
>
> Why do we want to see this?
>
> I'm not saying that we don't want to see them but I'm unclear as to what
> advantage would be gained?

See below.  Microsoft can either learn to play nicely while it's still got 
time, or it can face continuing loss of goodwill.  And I do have some respect 
for Microsoft as a software company from my MS Word-on-Mac days in 1990-91, 
just none whatsoever for its management.
>
> > Is Microsoft going to license its patents that directly
> > affect Mono and Samba,
> > on the same basis as IBM with Linux?  Ie, blanket coverage.
>
> What is Mono?

One of two GPL'ed versions of .NET - DotGNU is the other, much less well 
known.
>
> What are the spicifics of this license and we want to see carried forward
> and does anyone have details of the current issues?

IBM stated in 1999 - if I could remember who said it, one of the Linux/390 
guys, if I remember correctly - that IBM wouldn't treat the use of its 
patents in Linux as a matter of infringement.  Then Linux insisted on an 
explicit patent license before he would accept a certain piece of IBM code - 
the details are available on the kernel hackers list, if I remember 
correctly.
>
> On the Samba front, do we have enought technical information out of MS to
> keep moving forward?

Samba are amongst the world's leading reverse-engineers.  In 1999, if I 
remember correctly, the Samba team was alledged to be saying that Microsoft 
was using their source code to debug NetBEUI.  I don't know the truth of 
that.
>
> I was recently reading about WinFS which I understand is going to be
> powered by MS SQL Server.  Do the samba guys have full details of the specs
> to interface with the new technology that's comming?
>
> It seems to me that OSS is constantly playing catch up.  Gates has been
> reported as writting OSS off as little more than a catch up team.

On the gripping hand, we have VinodV - in the Halloween Papers - talking about 
Open Source as the quickest way for a research topic to reach production 
status.  It's only in compatibility with commercial products that that 
occurs.
>
> Linux is pushing off the net and into business as a back end / front end /
> interface system.
>
> By 2006 when Longhorn is due for release does MS want IT people out there
> telling people not to upgrade because it's not fully compatible with their
> OSS systems.
>
> Now before anyone suggests that this would be in MS interest because then
> MS can play the "don't bother with OSS then because you can't garanttee
> compatibility" card, think again.
>
> MS systems are protected from the internet by OSS systems.  If MS systems
> aren't compatible with those systems then don't use them at all.

Which is part of the reason I want Microsoft to release the MS-owned source 
code for obsolete software products and systems.  We can have Microsoft 
degrade gracefully, or implode suddenly.  The first option implies they've 
learnt to live with their competition, the second is the result of pushing 
barrows made of clay through a waterfall.
>
> What's more important?...  The ability to have a pretty wizard flash on
> your screen while you write a letter that you'll then print and post or the
> ability to get an email from point a to point b?
>
> Cheers Don

-- 
Wesley Parish
* * *
Clinersterton beademung - in all of love.  RIP James Blish
* * *
Mau e ki, "He aha te mea nui?"
You ask, "What is the most important thing?"
Maku e ki, "He tangata, he tangata, he tangata."
I reply, "It is people, it is people, it is people."

Reply via email to