> I disagree, MS coding for *nix? All the time I am hearing from them that
> open-source should be illegal!!! and now contrivuting to unix by making a
> really good browser? They made a bad one so that you will be forced to move
Wake up. Microsoft is shifting focus to providing services. They re
MT>> the Windows MSIE used to suck bigtime as well. theyv'e got the corporate
MT>> funding and manpower to improve it. and they will.
I do not believe that. Solaris MSIE was "proof of concept" product. It had
played it's purpose, there's no slightest reason to spend on it any more -
it will never
> On Friday 29 June 2001 00:40, you wrote:
> > >> I remember I saw it one, somehere... it's not a linux specific but
> >
> > There's a version of MSIE for Solaris - that's what they call "MSIE for
> > UNIX". I have yet to see one person that saw it (MSIE for Solaris) and
> > doesn't think it sucks
On Friday 29 June 2001 00:40, you wrote:
> >> I remember I saw it one, somehere... it's not a linux specific but
>
> There's a version of MSIE for Solaris - that's what they call "MSIE for
> UNIX". I have yet to see one person that saw it (MSIE for Solaris) and
> doesn't think it sucks big time
On Fri, Jun 29, 2001 at 12:20:39AM -, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I remember I saw it one, somehere... it's not a linux specific but linux can
> abiuosly use it. I saw IE for mac also. Will all those versions include
> bidi?
IE for MacOS has nothing to do with the Unix port, and seems to be a
On Fri, 29 Jun 2001 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> - Original Message -
> From: Miles Teg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2001 9:05 PM
> Subject: Fwd: Re: MS prohibits licensees using open source as development
> t
OTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2001 9:05 PM
Subject: Fwd: Re: MS prohibits licensees using open source as development
tools?
> > Unix version contains software licensed from Mainsoft Corporation.
> > Copyright (c) 1998-1999 Mainsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.
Mainsoft
&
5 PM
Subject: Fwd: Re: MS prohibits licensees using open source as development
tools?
> > Unix version contains software licensed from Mainsoft Corporation.
> > Copyright (c) 1998-1999 Mainsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.
Mainsoft
> > is a trademark of Mainsoft C
> Unix version contains software licensed from Mainsoft Corporation.
> Copyright (c) 1998-1999 Mainsoft Corporation. All rights reserved. Mainsoft
> is a trademark of Mainsoft Corporation.
UNIX VERSION? where?
=
To unsubscribe, send
MS area bunch of hiprocats (tzbuhim). Here is the part of the about in IE5
which nobody reads, look at the part which is marked (by me), I am ignoring
the first line for now... They do use open source code:
Based on NCSA Mosaic. NCSA Mosaic(TM); was developed at the National Center
for Supercomp
On Thu, Jun 28, 2001 at 11:26:42AM -0700, Efraim Yawitz wrote:
>
>
> On 27 Jun 2001, Oleg Goldshmidt wrote:
>
> > Matan Ziv-Av <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >
> > > Do we care about this?
> >
> > Yes, if you work in a mixed Open Source / Microsoft environment.
> >
> > > Does this have anyth
Efraim Yawitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> How can anyone not care about this? What is to prevent M$ from
> selling ('licensing') software with a condition that requires you to
> buy a certain brand of car, read a certain newspaper, or vote for a
> certain political party? Does this kind of s
On 27 Jun 2001, Oleg Goldshmidt wrote:
> Matan Ziv-Av <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Do we care about this?
>
> Yes, if you work in a mixed Open Source / Microsoft environment.
>
> > Does this have anything to do with linux?
>
> Yes. From now on you will have to read M$ and other licens
I wonder though is this licence only for this specific beta product or are
there other products which is released under this licence?
Ely Levy
System group
Hebrew University
Jerusalem Israel
On Wed, 27 Jun 2001, Ely Levy wrote:
> how would it be thier right to do it?
> it's like they would s
how would it be thier right to do it?
it's like they would say we don't allow you to write programs which use
oracle tools after
Ely Levy
System group
Hebrew University
Jerusalem Israel
On 27 Jun 2001, Oleg Goldshmidt wrote:
> Matan Ziv-Av <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Do we care about
On 27 Jun 2001, Oleg Goldshmidt wrote:
>
> Gilad Ben-Yossef <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > I wonder if someone will have the balls to call their bluff and sue
> > them for not realeasing the source code for Windows, IE, etc.. I'm
> > pretty sure there's a line of Perl *somewhere* in their bu
On Wed, Jun 27, 2001 at 02:56:36PM +0300, guy keren wrote:
>
> On Tue, 26 Jun 2001, Omer Zak wrote:
>
> > The situation was blown up, due to Microsoft's own FUD tactics.They
> > claim that GPL is more "infectious" than it really is.They claim that if
> > you edit and compile code using GPLed too
Gilad Ben-Yossef <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I wonder if someone will have the balls to call their bluff and sue
> them for not realeasing the source code for Windows, IE, etc.. I'm
> pretty sure there's a line of Perl *somewhere* in their build
> system... ;-)
You might be interested in read
Oleg Goldshmidt wrote:
> I do agree with Omer's conjecture that it is plausible that the
> license was simply screwed up by an unprofessional lawyer and a very
> pointy-haired executive. On the other hand, the license remains quite
> valid as it is, and M$ are in their right to enforce it. I
On Tue, 26 Jun 2001, Omer Zak wrote:
> The situation was blown up, due to Microsoft's own FUD tactics.They
> claim that GPL is more "infectious" than it really is.They claim that if
> you edit and compile code using GPLed tools, your code must, too, be
> GPLed.This is untrue.
more then this - t
Matan Ziv-Av <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Do we care about this?
Yes, if you work in a mixed Open Source / Microsoft environment.
> Does this have anything to do with linux?
Yes. From now on you will have to read M$ and other licenses with
extra care to figure out whether or not you can use
I have read the EULA in question.
The situation was blown up, due to Microsoft's own FUD tactics. They
claim that GPL is more "infectious" than it really is. They claim that if
you edit and compile code using GPLed tools, your code must, too, be
GPLed. This is untrue.
According to what I unde
On 26 Jun 2001, Oleg Goldshmidt wrote:
>
> At the risk to be close to off-topic, here's a tidbit:
>
> In the SV.com's roundtable (check /.) Bruce Perens asks
> about the newest MS EULA,
>
> http://msdn.microsoft.com/downloads/eula_mit.htm
>
> (Linux is specifically mentioned there, so I *am*
At the risk to be close to off-topic, here's a tidbit:
In the SV.com's roundtable (check /.) Bruce Perens asks
about the newest MS EULA,
http://msdn.microsoft.com/downloads/eula_mit.htm
(Linux is specifically mentioned there, so I *am* on topic :)
While I can see that M$ can be worried about
24 matches
Mail list logo
