Discussions

Rossj wrote:

Ars wrote: The language of the patent is interminably vague and could apply to any one of a dozen different user interface elements that are found in all modern operating systems, but seems to be most closely related to the idea of "tabbed" dialog boxes, like the ones seen in both Windows and Mac OS X.

Chances of IPI suing Microsoft? I'd put money on 'not going to happen'.

Wikipedia wrote:

Intellectual Ventures is a private company founded in 2000 to invest in "pure invention." Its goal is to develop a large patent portfolio rather than to actually develop new systems.

Shuttleworth Replies!

TFA wrote:

Shuttleworth continued: "Ballmer is saying that Linux is not a safe neighborhood for users. He's implying that simply using open source is somehow dangerous. They need to back off on those claims. They're simply not true. Microsoft must actually state what the infringements are."

I think we need another contest here.

Everybody loves contests.
 
Especially rigged ones.

wkempf wrote:



Ray6 wrote:  wkempf wrote: I rarely agree with the OpenSource Zealots, but in this case, Microsoft in general and Balmer in specific needs to put up or shut up.  This is FUD at it's worst.  If there's proof of violations, then reveal them. Indeed. Always worry about the state of a company when it decides to litigate rather than innovate.

I can't go that far.  First, as far as I'm concerned, Microsoft is doing a lot of innovative stuff.  WPF is just one example.  Second, if someone is guilty, litigation is appropriate.  What's not appropriate is a multi-month FUD campaign where you make vague accusations with no concrete examples, much less evidence.

"Don't do business with them.  They broke the law."

"What law?"

"..."  (crickets chirping)

I don't use Red Hat, but if I did, I'd call FUD on this one.

Windows Assembly Language and Systems Programming by Kauler

One commenter even wrote:

Amazon comments wrote:

Kauler is different. He believes you should write your Windows GUI programs straight in assembler - dialogs, menus, windows and all.

Rory wrote:

If a smaller company does something great, there's no reason it can't challenge the bigger player. Besides, people love all that David and Goliath stuff.

But Goliath is always there. Regardless of the industry, there is always a big guy that some people want to topple.

The way you topple Goliath is by outsmarting him. Microsoft is big, but it moves slowly. If you've got something better to offer, then give it.

W3bbo wrote:



Rossj wrote:  Zeo wrote: Developer Platform Evangelism Bleurgh. Sorry no offense, but isn't that another name for Marketing?

Whilst it can be argued that being a DPE has a positive role for the company, it really doesn't do anything for the advancement of society, computational science, or any of the spin-off areas.

By (aggressivly) promoting the company, isn't it to the detriment of third-party solutions which might be technologically superior, but lost out because Microsoft can afford to put you in that position?

Kinda sickens me, Zeo... head to your boss and ask for a transfer to something interesting, or at least something useful, like... Office Excel.

jason818_253.33 wrote:



raymond wrote:  Dr Herbie wrote:  fdisk wrote:  eagle wrote: Why has Lenn been forgotten? Who's that? Dunno, I forgot. Herbie Revisionism.  Give it another year and the question will be, who was Scoble? Happens everywhere. What have you done for me today?

that is if this was a popularity contest. people have lives to live. Their own things to do.

Wish you the best Rory!

The bigger question is...will it break any existing software? Will it cause any interference with Visual Studio users?