posted by camo on Tue 12th Feb 2008 04:03
Conversations Having a good think last night about this very question. Apart from the obvious 'money spending answers', what would you change about their software (Windows especially), licensing issues, etc, and would you open source it?

Personally, the first thing I would do was to get rid of windows activation (grrrr..) and relax the license to allow for use on more than one computer, but only on computers that the licensed user owns (or maybe family owned computers), and only for non-commercial-use.

Would I open source Windows? Not at first, but I would open source Windows after seeing the pitchforks and torches of the shareholders as they break down my fence chanting <insert profanity here> as my last dying wish.
Permalink for comment 659
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: Comment by Soulbender
by Laurence on Tue 12th Feb 2008 12:33 UTC
Laurence
Member since:
2007-03-26

I would forbid Ballmer to ever speak in public again. Other than that? Publish protocol specifications. Open standards are more important than open source.


Good answer (and another classic example of why I look forward to reading your replies)

ReplyParent Score: 2