Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 3rd Oct 2007 19:39 UTC, submitted by gonzo
Thread beginning with comment 276081
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.





Member since:
2007-02-17
"By Steven J. Vaughan-Nichols"
May as well have linked to the alt.destroy.microsoft newsgroup.
Interesting. No denial that C# and .Net was strictly a Windows-only development platform, running only on Windows and capable only of producing applications that were constrained to run on Windows platforms, until such time as Mono was developed.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.NET_Framework
No comment on any criticism of the Microsoft .Net framework:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.NET_Framework#Criticism
http://www.research.att.com/~bs/bs_faq.html#Csharp
No comment on the fact that the Microsoft reference License is the most restrictive of the so-called "shared source" licenses, and that in fact the Ms-RL actually allows no sharing of the source code at all (in the typical Microsoft-spin fashion of naming something for the opposite of what it really is):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_Reference_License#Microsoft_...
At least the Ms-RL text itself has good advice:
http://www.microsoft.com/resources/sharedsource/licensingbasics/ref...
"Do not use the software" is the very best advice anyone can give when it comes to Microsoft software. It surprised me to see such good advice coming from Microsoft themselves.
No actual response on what was actually said in the eweek article, just an attack on the person saying it.
Hmmm. Typical.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem
It appears that MS PR would take any low tactic at all rather than actually debate (or even converse) on the topic of MS lock-in practices.
Edited 2007-10-04 10:54