phil osborn wrote:
> >From: Adrian Tymes <email@example.com>>Subject: Re: Nanotech/Opensource:
> >Opinions Needed.
> >Date: Sun, 09 Jul 2000 19:14:35 -0700
> >"Robert J. Bradbury" wrote:
> > > On Sun, 9 Jul 2000, Paul Hughes wrote:
> > > > 1) As you may have heard Microsoft is trying very much to regain
> > > > by putting all of their software back into their central servers.
> > >
> > > Could you cite a reference for this? (It sounds a bit far-fetched.)
> > > Perhaps you mean that they intend to move to an active license
> > > monitoring system for their software -- i.e. their software comes
> > > from their servers when you need it. This is "software on demand"
> > > or "software rental".
> >No, he means "putting all of their software back into their central
> >servers". Yes, it's boneheaded. Yes, it'd be massively stupid for
> >responsible consumers to switch to. Doesn't mean they ain't gonna try
> >to get away with it, and doesn't mean a lot of people won't buy it
> >anyway just because it's "the latest version from Microsoft" (and older
> >versions, as always, aren't supported anymore). Reference what little
> >*is* known about their .net initiative.
> > > > The only way you'll be able to use software in the future is by
> > > > in to their system.
> Noone seems to have noticed that MicroSloth has just apparently monopolized
> certain text publication formats. Yahoo mag mentioned, as I recall, that S.
> King could not read his own recently E-published novel on his Mac, as it was
> released in an MS proprietary format that required their unlocking reader
> software. Crichton's new book is also supposed to be coming out in this
really? What format is this? You know, they are not the only company
that does this. Corel Ventura 7 & 8 files can only be read on Ventura (a
Win only app), even though Corel has its own flavor of linux out on the
market. Ventura will not be available on linux for at least another 6-12
months. It's not a conspiracy, its called cashflow pipelining.
Microsoft, BTW is developing its own Office applications and other apps
to work on linux, which the e-book format will work on. The reason it
does not work on Mac, and why MS is likely not interested in investing
the money in developing a reader for the Mac, is that the current Mac OS
is a lame duck. Thats right. The next version of the Mac OS is going to
be linux based, and will not run ANY current Mac applications, so there
is limited utility in developing new apps that run on the current Mac
platform. You Mac users will have to buy all new applications (isn't
this the third time that Apple has done this to you Mac users, yet you
continue to complain about the *Microsoft* conspiracy/monopoly?). Why
should MS pay for developing an app that has at best a one year
life/marketability to it?
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Oct 02 2000 - 17:34:40 MDT