On May 20, 2004, at 7:12 PM, Christopher McGinnis wrote:
[...snip...]you are confusing the issue. it's not the idea that can limit your freedom, it's the implementation that can.
that said, your concerns becomes moot.
Jeff
I'm sorry but I don't understand what you're saying.
---Rick
Just because .NET is a Microsoft concoction doesn't mean that writing
applications for Mono's implementation will in anyway lock you into a
Microsoft technology. The idea is out there and will be implemented and
used. If the implementation runs into legal issues it will change to avoid
those problems and Mono compiled applications may become incompatible with
the Microsoft version of .NET.
I'm not concerned with lock in, or MSFT taking mono away, or Linux dying or anything technical like that. I'm concerned, and I think others should be as well, with ubiquity.
Also, what does ethics has to do with this conversation thread? We all know
that Microsoft can be a bully. But I'm sure there are a multitude of other
big business that try and bully as much as they can to get more market
share. That is the nature of business.
Ah. Justification for anticompetitive behavior. I'm sure Bill wished he had more of that sentiment in Europe recently.
Worrying about your right choose
seems like a silly thing to worry about since there we always be a choice
whether is be OS/2, Mac OS X, Solaris, Be, Irix, or a band new OS some
teenager made in his bedroom because he had nothing better to do. Why not
instead worry about what new features you are going to put in your
application, what direction do you want your product to go in, how can you
improve the development cycle to release better products.
Well what if one of my features requires reading Exchanges calendaring stuff on Linux?Or how about playing movies in the latest windows media format? Or I want to write a Visio file manipulator?
To me these seems
like things that should be worried about and to not be a paranoid conspiracy
theorist.
Indeed. Nothing worse trying to premise an argument based on an incorrect reading between the lines.
Your example of a Stalin Soviet Union is way to on the extreme side and only
serves to provide drama.
I suppose it could be read that way, but drama was not what I was trying to create.
As I said earlier the nature of business is to edge out your competitors as best you can.
Does the end in fact justify the means then?
Grow, devour, grow, and devour,that's what business does. It's just that no other business has be able to perform these actions as well or as easily as Microsoft has. If Microsoft started killing babies I'd have to stop using it. If a competitor goes
away, so what.
Oh my.
---Rick
_______________________________________________ Mono-list maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-list
