OSNews

Nah, I am not the one complaining about something that is entirely fictious. There is no problem here.

Now just admit it that you're an MS hater. I was one once too.

I don't hate Microsoft. This is quite obvious from my posts about the implementation of desktop metaphors, mail handling in Vista, desktop search, and from my profile. If you look at my posts about Windows 2003 Server, you can see I don't hate Microsoft.

I don't see why you'd need to throw around personal attacks, especially as I hadn't even posted in response to your outrageous claims. Are you still pissed that I called your bluff on the statistics you pulled out of your ass on the file format issue? Or just perturbed that I prefer OpenBSD to Syllable?

In any case, we get that you have a vested interest in everything being GPL compatible. That's what your criticism of XNA boils down to, yet again -- that Microsoft must make its framework open-source (which is the only way it could be ported to every niche platform you want supported). It adds nothing to the discussion to point out in every thread that Microsoft's new solution is not GPL-compatible. We know that.

I don't have a vented interest in everything being GPL. I'm surprised you think I want everything to be GPL. I can personally find several areas where the GPL would be unwelcome in my eyes. Toolkits, frameworks, kernels, libraries in general - pretty much anything not directly end user related would benefit directly from not being GPL. I'm not ready to consider RMS a madman, but I do agree he's taking it a bit too far. OTOH, FLOSS does have certain superior elements in its development style - but it certainly has some weaknesses as well.

The GPL _can_ be beneficial in regard to end user applications, but so can many other licenses. You know very well that I have a lot of MS software installed, and am using them on daily basis (especially VS2005).

I am not aware that I have bluffed in any way in regard to file formats and statistics. Perhaps you're thinking about the Ogg Vorbis debate? Clarification would be nice

I have clearly stated that I don't want MS to open source XNA. I've merely warned that it'll most likely lead to vendor lock-in, and as such should not be used if you want to develop true cross platform games.

I have nothing against you preferring OpenBSD over Syllable or SkyOS or any other OS. Feel free to choose. OpenBSD is a wise choice btw. However, considering your posts I doubt you've ever used anything besides Win ME and XP Home.

BTW:

Using XNA isn't GPL-incompatible. Nor have I stated it is. One might add that GPL-incompability has nothing to do with interoperability and vendor lock-in. And nothing prevents people from writing GPL'ed applications using XNA.