On Sat, Nov 18, 2006 12:14:26 PM -0900, John Andersen
([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> I'm not confusing anything Marco, I'm simply pointing out that
> the reasons for forks in the past have been MUCH LESS than
> the MS/Novell situation.
>
Duh. Of course they happened for much less, like which desktop or
window manager is the default one. But *only* because it was *much*
easier to do in those cases.
> I think the patents issue is a red herring,
There are two very distinct "patents issues" in this story:
1) "Linux does actually violate some sw patents"
2) "I explicitly act and speak as if #1 were true, to get some quick
cash from MS _and_ screw my competitors"
Like you, I am almost sure that #1 is indeed false, in the sense that
if there had been ground for it, MS would have started a trial years
ago without trying the SCO route.
But regardless of the existence of issue #1, or my opinion of it, one
can indeed be pissed at Novell for #2.
Ciao,
Marco
--
The right way to make everybody love Free Standards and Free Software:
http://digifreedom.net/node/73
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
