Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 14th Dec 2012 22:37 UTC
Permalink for comment 545243
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 06/13/13 14:35 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/11/13 17:07 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/10/13 23:13 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/08/13 14:57 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/07/13 11:40 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/04/13 12:45 UTC
Linked by nfeske on 05/31/13 10:12 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/29/13 16:59 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/24/13 17:26 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 21:38 UTC
More Features »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2005-11-10
Oh wait, that's a good thing. Never mind.
FYI, CalDav is not proprietary http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4791,
If this is an attack on microsoft, they could easily counter by just embracing standards.
But Google can take an open standard and make it proprietary to fit their needs.
And I see Google is keeping it for the business customers which seems to me that they just dont want to pay the licenses for their free customers and want them to move over to paying if they want good advanced features. (Nothing wrong with that) but to play it like they are doing it to support open standards sounds a little fishy (Being that they also got rid of free Google Apps)
Microsoft is stuck though because they can't make money off of using open standards they could of implemented those a long time ago if they could.