To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
You have it backwards and inside out. The free software community is doing the embracing, not Microsoft. If Microsoft extends it, then the free software community stands to benefit as well.
Microsoft's definition of "extend" means "write software in ways that makes everyone else's version incompatible".
It's hard to believe you don't realize this. What the hell do they do, put cannabis in people's food?
Microsoft's definition of "extend" means "write software in ways that makes everyone else's version incompatible".
Practically everybody's implementation of so-called "open standards" doesn't comply in one way or another. Show me a browser that complies completely with CSS standards, Acid2, without at least screwing up in some way. The point is ... Microsoft isn't alone in producing software that isn't compliant. The difference is ... you're so ideologically-driven that you can't see that.




Member since:
2005-07-08
Yes, if it's part of msft's embrace, extend, extingish, strategy.
You have it backwards and inside out. The free software community is doing the embracing, not Microsoft. If Microsoft extends it, then the free software community stands to benefit as well.
Further, remember that this is an attempt to unseat Flash, which has hardly been a darling in the eyes of the community. Free software isn't in a position, from a marketshare standpoint, to unilaterally drive web programming standards. If developers will be programming for Silverlight, the we need to support it, or free software will have competitive problems in the Web services space, one of its strongest markets.
I realize your historical rhetoric, but it just doesn't apply in this situation.
Edited 2007-05-03 00:38