Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 30th Jan 2013 23:14 UTC
Permalink for comment 551098
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
It all starts out with Microsoft wanting to be paid for active-sync support from Google.
Microsoft thought Google would not pull plug on it. Right Microsoft you don't have market share in phones worth bugger all so Google has no problem pulling it since 90+ percent of the market support webdav. Malice to get money and Stupid it not be aware you are not sitting in a location where you can bargain.
As something of a disclaimer, I was being glib - if I'm being serious, I'd probably describe Microsoft's approach to the *Dav standards as "strategic inaction" rather than outright malice (or incompetence). Not that that paints Microsoft in any more of a flattering light.
I do agree with your overall assessment, though. Google dropping EAS support felt like they were also trying to send an implicit message that the balance of power had shifted in their favour, at least as far as syncing with GMail/GCal goes. And Microsoft's reaction seems like their attempt to concede, without being perceived as giving in completely - in other words "we'll compromise on mobile (for now), but not where it matters to us/makes us the most money (the desktop/Outlook)".
Oh yes, Windows has had a long history of supporting webDav (at least back to Win98)... and they've also had a long history of some of some of the worst webDav support. On Windows, I always end up having to use 3rd-party clients if I want decent performance, or sometimes if I want things to work at all - E.g. want to use Win7 64-bit to connect to a webDav share on an Apache server via HTTPS? You have to edit the registry & add the IP address of the remote server (at least, last I checked)... thanks to a bug that was apparently patched in Vista, but apparently no one bothered to apply the patch to 7.