Lists Home |
Date Index |
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.
Additionally, the semiconductor industry with it's capital costs, development
run up times and expenses is an exceptionally poor parallel.
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.
Fashionable as bashing MS has become, arguments without basis in fact still
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bedros Hanounik" <Bedros.Hanounik@tarari.com>
To: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <email@example.com>; "Michael Champion"
Sent: Wednesday, November 12, 2003 2:55 PM
Subject: RE: [xml-dev] 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.