Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 18th Dec 2012 00:03 UTC
Microsoft Microsoft has just responded to Google's move regarding Exchange ActiveSync. Sadly, instead of addressing the very real problems consumers are about to face, Microsoft starts talking about switching to Outlook.com.
Permalink for comment 545640
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[3]: Comment by shmerl
by lucas_maximus on Tue 18th Dec 2012 13:00 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by shmerl"
lucas_maximus
Member since:
2009-08-18

I can't speak about ASP.NET specifically,


Well they aren't the same thing then are they?

but the .NET is only just open enough to make some .NET applications barely run. However closed so much that applications are buggy or even unusable because of major features being unavailable.


What are you on about?

One great example of this is the DRM extensions; and thus the reason why Netflix, Lovefilm and so on cannot run on Linux (albeit not without running native Windows libraries on WINE).


Again, I dunno what this has to do with parts of ASP.NET being Open sourced.

What's more, .NET was invented because MS couldn't play ball with Java (see below).


So?

OOXML was written because MS wanted to lock people into MS Office but were forced to use an open standard by the EU.

If Microsoft really cared about open standards, they'd have used ODF like nearly every one of their competitors do. Instead, they create their own incompatible standard that nobody else uses but them.


Well the de-facto standard is MS Office, so any competitor that wants to be able to read the same files need to support that or get out of the market.

Sun trying to make people use ODF was a silly move.

C# is another example of MS creating a new standard to trash an existing standard. In this case .NET was invented to trash Java (though C# / .NET has evolved since).


C# version 1.0 was a superior language to Java, Properties alone in the language make it vastly superior as well as the better designed DateTime libraries (two things I can think of off the top of my head).

C# is Java Improved.

What's more, .NET was only developed after MS got sued by Sun for releasing their own incompatible Java run times.


One thing so far is true at least.

If MS cared about standards, they'd have released a Sun Java compatible IDE like Borland had.


Borland Java IDEs were crap, thank goodness they didn't

Please do, because every one of your examples demonstrates how MS had shunned established standards ;)


What established standards? A Document standard on an Office suite with a quite a small user base and a programming language developed by the same people that wanted the said document standards.

Firefox 1 & 2 were significantly more standard compliant than IE. Plus there was Opera, and kHTML-based browsers (even webkit was released in 98, a year before you claimed the competition began)


KHTML and Opera have always had low market share and aren't significant enough to be relevant to the
conversation.

Firefox 1 was more standards compliant than IE6 because it was newer. What the OP always misses is that the reason people moved to it was nothing to do with standards compliance and the fact that at the time it was a better browser with more features.

2009 was when IE8 got released and was the first browser to support CSS 2.1 and XHTML 1.1 properly (I am sure you bring up Opera, but I don't see them as a serious competitor to the other browsers in Market share).

Edited 2012-12-18 13:04 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 1