Lists Home |
Date Index |
From: "Dare Obasanjo" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> I was wondering how long it would take for someone to throw in a good dose of
> anti-Microsoft paranoia, I'm surprised it lasted this long. :)
Leaving aside Microsoft's legal status as a monopolist, are you saying that any
criticism or watchfulness of MS is paranoia? That is naive in the extreme.
Actually, I did not even criticize MS, but only a tendency which some people in
MS seem to have, which can be put down to groupthink without resorting to anything
more sinister. In fact I went out of my way to mention that some in MS are
doing excellent work, in my experience, and that that I had heard from senior
management that keeping to standards was company policy.
> Personally, I've always felt that if one wants to debate a point and be taken
> seriously it makes sense to avoid ad hominem attacks and unwarranted finger
> pointing especially if these points can be easily refuted. Here are a few
> questions I'd like to ask you;
An ad hominem attack is one that attacks a person rather than an idea. I am not saying
Mr Rys is wrong in this because he works for MS. That would be ad hominem.
I have given reasons why I think he is wrong, to say who it would disadvantage:
> 1.) Exactly how common is piping XML (not ASCII) used in UNIX applications? I
> have never seen a UNIX app that does this.
Many programs use standard input.
> 2.) Why would MSFT want to break XML usage in .NET languages like Perl and
I have never said that MS wants to, if you read my original post.
> 3.) Since when did every opinion put forward by an employee of a corporation
> on a public discussion forum become CAST IN STONE company policy?
Again, I never said that.
> 4.) Micheal is not the only one who was in favor of XML 1.1, so what are your
> conspiracy theories regarding the others that mentioned support for the idea
> on XML-dev or Reuter's Health or the W3C for that matter? Launching into a
> paranoid anti-MSFT tirade does little to improve perception of the validity of
> your dissent but does make one wonder whether your reason for dissension is
> even rational or based on the Anything But MSFT meme that flows all across the
Because I did not launch into a paranoid anto-MS attack, I cannot answer you.