Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sun 5th Jul 2009 22:03 UTC
Thread beginning with comment 371865
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.
You don't know your history.
*Adobe* prevented Microsoft from including PDF in Office, as Adobe did not want Microsoft to provide said feature for free.
*Adobe* prevented Microsoft from including PDF in Office, as Adobe did not want Microsoft to provide said feature for free.
Kinda funny isn't it? I mean, the MS Office with PDF creation would certainly challenge Adobe's product. But rather than pay the licensing fee (which Microsoft demands of all using their codecs and components) they chose to create a completely useless technology. Well, I guess it's not useless if you're one of the masses... but having someone send me a MDI file when I was living Ubuntu was frustrating.
Just so I can clarify it: you feel that all software should be free of cost and we shouldn't have to pay for what we want to use. Does that sum it up, Thom?






Member since:
2006-11-09
He can't help it... he's the equivalent of Fox News in the United States... completely off-base.
Chances of Microsoft actually supporting an open codec is less than that of an unbiased opinion from some of the folks who frequent this site. (read: Microsoft would never support a non-Microsoft technology even if it would improve interoperability... remember their implementation of their own PDF-killer?)
Kelly