[geeks] Microsoft Surface...

[Phil Stracchino]

Doug McLaren wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 03, 2007 at 01:20:49PM -0700, William Kirkland wrote:
> 
> |  > Wow.  Those are some remarkably broad brushes you're painting
> |  > Microsoft and Apple with.
> | 
> | Yes, I did ... and similar to another discussion on this board, I too  
> | feel that profiling is appropriate. Including it's use when comparing  
> | the ethics and products a company produces especially the how ...
> | 
> | Microsoft tends to acquire a company with a particular piece of  
> | technology they find interesting.
> 
> Is there anything wrong with that?  Seems to be business as usual,
> though often it does stifle the company being acquired.  But on the
> other hand, many companies are built with the express intention of
> being acquired -- because it's either that or an IPO that makes it's
> founders immediate millions.

There's nothing wrong with that, no.  On the other hand, there's been
several occasions on which Microsoft surreptitiously stole a piece of
software technology, then sued the company that actually invented it to
try to intimidate them into turning over the rights (or bankrupt them
under Microsoft's deep pockets).


> | and I may have missed it, but I did not notice anything indicating
> | the great leaps backward Microsoft attempted with Microsoft Java
> | ... as I recall the first paragraph of the java specification
> | REQUIRED that the code be cross platform compatible, yet Microsoft's
> | implementation would not run on any platform except another
> | Microsoft platform.
> 
> Huh?
> 
> The java code itself is supposed to be cross platform.  The JRE itself
> doesn't have to be cross platform.
> 
> | I think that qualifies as deliberate ...
> 
> So you're saying that Microsoft was trying to squash it's competitors
> by not releasing a JRE for the Mac?  (or Sun, Linux, or for Amigas,
> etc.)

No.  Microsoft used the phrase "embrace and extend".  This basically
meant "take over and pollute".  Microsoft wanted to add proprietary
extensions to their Java implementation which would run ONLY on a
Microsoft OS on an x86 platform.  Not to the JRE; to the *language*.
They wanted to break the machine/OS independence and turn it into a /de
facto/ Microsoft proprietary language.


-- 
 It's not the years, it's the mileage.
 Phil Stracchino              phil.stracchino at speakeasy.net
 Renaissance Man, Unix generalist, Perl hacker, Free Stater
 Landline: 603-429-0220                Mobile: 603-320-5438