[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message]

RE: Inside Redhell: Microsoft XAML Blogger Round-Up

• To: "Bill Kearney" <wkearney@i...>,<xml-dev@l...>
• Subject: RE: Inside Redhell: Microsoft XAML Blogger Round-Up
• From: "Bedros Hanounik" <Bedros.Hanounik@t...>
• Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 13:31:50 -0800
• Thread-index: AcOpW9cbh4xzqpmhRO2dq6Z7xknsuAABWUnA
• Thread-topic: Inside Redhell: Microsoft XAML Blogger Round-Up

>You greatly misrepresent Intel's efforts behind PCI.  The lead up to
PCI >was fraught with conspiracies and scams that make the current stuff
look >like child's play.  FutureBus, S100, NuBus, ISA, EISA, etc.

Regardless, the main concept is the same. Intel (a major player)
introduced a new technology(PCI), got feedback from the industry and
gave it (and the control of its future) back to the industry to benefit
in THEIR OWN platform. Including DEC which used PCI in Alpha processor
platform.


>The democracy has voted, they bought MS products.  If only by refusing
to >accept the costs presented by other operating systems.  MS was less
>expensive and people recognized (and continue to) it's value at it's
price.

Sure! The state of California ordered MS to pay 1.1 Billion to their
customers despite "people recognized (and continue to) it's value at
it's price". Those evil people in California don't realize how low MS
charges for their products.


>Fashionable as bashing MS has become, arguments without basis in fact
still
>don't work.

I'm not anti MS, I'm anti proprietary technology. The openness of PC
platform made the PC so affordable almost everybody can buy one.
Proprietary hardware platforms died or going to die. Proprietary
software platforms (such as MS windows) will do the same soon. Now it's
the software platform turn's to be open and stable so we don't waste so
much money and time redeveloping or porting our products, and hence
cheaper software. Even if you rely exclusively on Microsoft platforms,
it'll be too costly to maintain, because every couple years they change
their own ways of doing things.


-Bedros

disclaimer: my personal opinions, don't necessarily represent my
employer's opinion.


----- Original Message -----
From: "Bedros Hanounik" <Bedros.Hanounik@t...>
To: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <clbullar@i...>; "Michael Champion"
<mc@x...>; <xml-dev@l...>
Sent: Wednesday, November 12, 2003 2:55 PM
Subject: RE:  Inside Redhell: Microsoft XAML Blogger Round-Up


Actually, it's OK for a group to ignore standards, because it represents
many companies. It's NOT OK for Microsoft to ignore standards, because
it's a single entity.

It's amazing how people with such intelligence don't figure it out!

Go and read history books. Dictatorship and fascism is bad. Democracy,
fair and open competetion is good.

It doesn't matter how great and innovative XAML is; It's useless if it
doesn't incorporate feedback from major players in this field, and gives
the control over it's future to the industry.

Intel introduced PCI bus in early 90's and instead of imposing it on the
industry, they created PCI group and that group set the PCI standards.
Nowadays, everyone is using PCI bus even non-intel platforms.

If Microsoft is really sincere about their technology, they would follow
the same path; but they won't.



-----------------------------------------------------------------
The xml-dev list is sponsored by XML.org <http://www.xml.org>, an
initiative of OASIS <http://www.oasis-open.org>

The list archives are at http://lists.xml.org/archives/xml-dev/

To subscribe or unsubscribe from this list use the subscription
manager: <http://lists.xml.org/ob/adm.pl>

• Prev by Date: OT: Bus History was Re: Inside Redhell: Microsoft XAMLBlogger Round-Up
• Next by Date: RE: Inside Redhell: Microsoft XAML Blogger Round-Up
• Previous by thread: RE: Inside Redhell: Microsoft XAML Blogger Round-Up
• Next by thread: RE: Inside Redhell: Microsoft XAML Blogger Round-Up
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread