Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 8th Jun 2007 15:01 UTC, submitted by AdministratorX
Permalink for comment 246526
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
News
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/18/13 21:06 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/18/13 7:37 UTC
Linked by fran on 05/18/13 1:38 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/17/13 23:35 UTC, submitted by kragil
Linked by MOS6510 on 05/17/13 22:22 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/17/13 22:15 UTC, submitted by Tom
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/16/13 21:41 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/16/13 17:04 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/16/13 13:17 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/16/13 12:06 UTC
More News »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2006-04-21
I really don't understand where you get these "catch-up" ideas. Windows interoperates with old versions of itself. If the Samba folks (or the OOo or any other group that tries to interoperate with microsoft's stuff) made their software correctly, it would just behave as an old protocol version and do the right thing, just as Office and Windows does.
I really don't understand where you get these ideas. Windows and/or Microsoft's Windows programs often don't interoperate with old versions of themselves - Vista drivers, programs, and Word 97 anyone?
As Jeremy Allison stated in court, if Microsoft released the specs to it's "Common" "Internet" "Filesystem", or simply stopped continually changing it, Samba would just behave correctly and do the right thing, just as Office and Windows do.
I think you need to realise that OSS devs are frankly very interested in becoming compatible with Microsoft. It's not fun and requires a high-level of skill because Microsoft are always making gratuitous changes, so it's just one of those things that doesn't get done quickly. (Jeremy Allison himself said that Linux should be looking to create a directory service which uses a database instead of lists.) Microsoft could do it when they needed to because, er, our protocols are open, theirs and aren't and they are, er, theirs.
For a "Platform Agnostic" you seem ready to give Microsoft a helluva lot of credit they don't deserve. Maybe you should ditch platform-agnostic for platform-knowledgeable.