To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Microsoft doesn't have to copy from Linux. MS had its own Unix called Xenix some 25 years ago and it was the most popular Unix for desktop PCs, so I would say they hardly need Linux to copy from.
If Microsoft and their lackies think 25-year-old technology represents today's state of the art, no wonder the company's products are so laughably execrable.
If Microsoft and their lackies think 25-year-old technology represents today's state of the art, no wonder the company's products are so laughably execrable.
Nothing stops Microsoft from offering both the good old stuff and the new cool thing, at same time. Besides, some things are just good the way they were 25 yeras ago and need not replacement. I guess you're too young to know that. Just wait and you'll see :-)
Nowhere I said that 25-year-technology is the only possible way. You're twisting my words.






Member since:
2005-11-10
Next, I don't think Linux copies from Microsoft at all. In fact, I would argue it the other way around.
Microsoft doesn't have to copy from Linux. MS had its own Unix called Xenix some 25 years ago and it was the most popular Unix for desktop PCs, so I would say they hardly need Linux to copy from.