Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 10th Aug 2012 16:06 UTC, submitted by poundsmack
Permalink for comment 531438
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Features
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/18/13 21:33 UTC
Linked by David Adams on 05/16/13 4:23 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/11/13 21:41 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/08/13 14:22 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/02/13 15:28 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 04/29/13 21:06 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 04/24/13 22:24 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 04/18/13 11:21 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 04/16/13 9:29 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 04/15/13 22:44 UTC
More Features »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2005-07-06
Well, it's also the fault of the company that basically takes any name they like, cleans up only after the fact (like it was also with the iPhone IIRC)
And I imagine that, for codebase of such importance (used not only in a fairly crucial line of ~switches, also automotive usage or with... Canadian nuclear reactors), buying of QNX per se wouldn't even be required - the code is certainly in escrow, with arrangements made a long time ago for ownership transfer, were something to happen with its parent company.