Linked by Kroc Camen on Tue 17th May 2011 12:05 UTC
Permalink for comment 473703
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 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
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/15/13 23:03 UTC
More News »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2009-05-30
Really this is the problem. Tech from Microsoft in a lot of places with correct legal documentation is accepted by the FOSS developers.
From the enemy point of view is invalid. Remember Microsoft does submit code to the Linux kernel under the agreements of course not to patent sue over those parts.
The from the enemy claim is a Mono group smoke screen not true for most of the Linux world.
From enemy without required treaty paper work is an issue. Having FSF and other legal assessment groups point to the flaws hello problems.
By the way those waiting on silverlight on OS i and android. You are going to be waiting. Monotouch is not a silverlight ABI because the silverlight ABI does not suit the designs of android or OS i.
Silverlight app on either OSi or android would be like a battery power vampire.
Idea that .net works in browsers is another nice myth.