On Thu, 2006-01-12 at 20:22 -0500, ultramancool wrote:
And of course the most important part: to scare the open source
community into thinking they can't use FAT anymore. ;-)
Doesnt FAt come from cpm and therefore prior art? Remember American
judges are often dumber than a box of rocks.
I Agree, things like this will only make the FreeDOS crew rebell with new
FS, MS are doing them selfs no favours at all with this move.
But its been on the brew for along time, maybe they will not do much about
it now.
Hi,
I can't understand the crying about the FAT patent. In the whole world
Andre Tertling wrote:
If I read the patents in question right, they are not exactly FAT
patents but rather LFN for FAT patents. The primary reason for the
patents is to cut a nice slice from the memory stick/card market for M$.
FAT has one large benefit: Because it is so simple, it is easy to
--- Christian Voß [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
I can't understand the crying about the FAT patent.
In the whole world of
file systems are enough candidates to replace the
Grandma of file systems.
And most of them are free. I.e. HFS and HFS+ (the
file systems of MacOS) are
GPL and is
