Uh, that would be me... Ted Roche wrote:
>On 1/9/07, Matthew Jarvis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >>M$ makes a big stink about using VFP on a Linux platform, right? >> >> >> > >No, somebody (and it wasn't Whil) made a big stink about a 'Softie >trying to lay down a chilling effect on Whil doing a demo on Linux for >Windows. Stink rolled uphill and got lots of nice press, even a >Slashdotting, irrc.... > >Search for Whil's 'Visual FoxPro, Linux and the Jack of Hearts' >retelling of the tale... > >In my opinion, I don't think MS wanted to make any kind of a stink at >all. I think they just wanted to whisper a threat at the right time >and place. I suspect that they haven't got a legal leg to stand on. >However, I'm not willing to spend time in court debating the issue. >I'll choose vendors that want to accomodate "where I want to go >today." > > > >>If MS let's Access play with the other kids, why not VFP? >> >> > >Does MS "let" Access? Or do they have a EULA as chilling as ours? > > > _______________________________________________ Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
