Re: [ANNOUNCE] XML/Ada 0.5 released

Re: [ANNOUNCE] XML/Ada 0.5 released

[dewar]

<<Are you intending on extending this policy at some point to the GNAT
runtime, GtkAda or other frameworks (executables of course have always been
GPL) under the ACT wing?
>>

First of all, we have no firm policy even in this case, so far our customers
have reacted entirely positively (those who have raised the issue), so it is
not an issue for them. 

Second, we will do things on a case by case basis, so it is not clear what
will happen in the future.

Re: [ANNOUNCE] XML/Ada 0.5 released

[Emmanuel Briot]

[Posted on behalf of Robert Dewar]



First, a general note, the direct posts you saw from me in this
thread are not posts at all, but the results of some very strange
cc mechanism in what were intended to be personal replies to David
Botton. I apologize for these, they were definitely worded as private
mail to Dave, and not for general consumption (in particular I
certainly would not have posted the comment about RR, and I want
to make it clear that I appreciate RR's efforts in the Ada area,
indeed they are a technical partner of ours, and we point customers
in their direction, but we certainly do not regard them as a competitive
force, quite the contrary, we regard them as partners).

None of these posts should be regarded as official comments from ACT, they
are simply off hand comments to David. I will refrain from answering
any of David's email in the future to prevent this strange occurrence.
It never occured to me that a cc could be used in this way to create
a direct post that looks like it was deliberately posted as an
article.

  > I am glad to see you back, Mr Dewar, I hope it's not just a temporary
  > thing.

As I explained, any posts that appear directly from me are entirely
accidental, and most certainly that phenomenon is temporary. I do not
intend to post my personal email here, and once again, apologize for
doing so (email is a tricky area, with all sorts of traps like this :-)

I do watch some threads, and will post indirectly from time to time
when it is appropriate to do so.

-----------------------------------------

Second, a couple of specific comments (these ARE intended as posts).
In general from now on, only posts coming indirectly from someone
else at ACT are intentional posts :-)

  Florian said

  > But what will you do if someone contributes code under the GPL?  Or
  > won't you accept such contributions?  (Maybe that's a highly
  > theoretical issue at this point, but you never know...)

I must say I am completely puzzled by this comment. All the code in
question IS under the GPL, so certainly people can contribute GPL'ed
code. You have to explain what on earth you mean here :-) Furthermore
people have contributed a lot of GPL'ed code in the past, as well as
GMGPL'ed code where appropriate, so there is nothing theoretical about
such a possibility.

  Ted said

  > Since a copy was cc-ed to me, I too was wondering where it was. I'm glad to see
  > it finally appear, as it has some good info in it (despite the personal
  > attacks).

Please do not regard it as a personal attack if I correct plain inaccurate
information, and if I suggest more careful checking up on information. It
really doesn't help if incorrect stuff is posted. if you are relying on
your memory, check first :-)

  > Now perhaps you can see why I got so defensive all of a sudden. I'll leave it up
  > to everyone else's judgement whether what I said was reasonably close to the
  > truth, based on the old messages I referenced. What started that thread that
  > contained the RMS suggestion to use a modified GPL is unfortunately lost to the
  > mists of time, but my memory of it was that someone piped up about their lawyers
  > refusing to allow use of GNAT due to the GPL/LGPL issue. 

No, nothing is lost in this mists of time, and the facts are quite clear, 
despite Ted's memory to the contrary. Here are the historical facts (if
you like, go back and check the document trail, you will find this all
documented).

1. The original GNAT contract required all software to be released under
the GPL or LGPL and the copyright assigned to the FSF. The idea was to
release the runtime under the LGPL. This was a direct response to my
suggestion of what the contract should say.

2. On examination, we became concerned that the LGPL was not the right vehicle
because of two factors

  a) the annoyance of distributing objects
  b) the issue of generics

So I created the GMGPL very early on, and we used it from the very beginning
for all GNAT sources (neither the GPL nor the LGPL was ever used for any
GNAT runtime sources). We then discussed with Stallman to ask if he had
any objection to the change.

He was confused at first, and thought we were suggesting using the *GPL* for
the runtime library, and he encouraged us to look to the C model and use a 
modified non-restrictive version of the GPL, but that was what we were already
doing in any case.

So once again, no, there was no one who "piped up about their lawyer
refusing to allow use of GNAT" that had any influence on this decision
which was made long before any lawyer had a chance to pipe up :-)

Sure, there were lawyers who piped up, and we went through many occasions
on which we had to demonstrate to lawyers that our GMGPL license for the 
runtime meant that they could use the system without concerns. Now days,
we provide a formal license agreement to our customers that clarifies all
issues. In the case of non-customers, there really is no clear legal license
agreement, and indeed it is a bit unclear in court what the status would be
for users of the public version (in other words, courts would have to decide
whether the fact that you had published a statement that something was
distributed under the GPL constituted receiving specific permission for
copying, we hope it would, but we do not know till it is litigated).
For customers, the situation is like dealing with any other company,
indeed it is like dealing with Microsoft, except our license is a bit
more liberal than theirs :-)

(by the way, I comment on Microsoft's latest outburst that they have a lot
of chutzpah to complain that they don't like the license we choose to give
because it means they cannot abscond with *our* intellectual property :-)

But back to piping up lawyers ... as I said in my previous message, we knew
perfectly well that using the GPL for everything would have caused trouble
(not the least of which is that it would have been non-responsive to the
DoD contract which required the LGPL to be used for the runtime :-)
Neither the decision to use the LGPL, nor the subsequent decision to
replace it with the GMGPL had anything to do with external lawyers. Indeed
at that time, we knew more about how GPL licensing works than virtually
all IPR lawyers (now of course Microsoft, Redhat, WRS, IBM etc have large
armies of lawyers who have studied these licenses VERY carefully).

(another side comment on Microsoft is that of course when they try to spread
FUD about open source software in general, and the GPL in particular, what
they are really trying to do is to stop people using the stuff. It must be
very frustrating for Microsoft that not only is there important software
that they don't own it, but they can't even buy it, no matter how much
money they have :-)

Re: [ANNOUNCE] XML/Ada 0.5 released

[Ted Dennison]

In article <l81yq2twlt.fsf@berlin.int.act-europe.fr>, Emmanuel Briot says...
>[Posted on behalf of Robert Dewar]
>(by the way, I comment on Microsoft's latest outburst that they have a lot
>of chutzpah to complain that they don't like the license we choose to give
>because it means they cannot abscond with *our* intellectual property :-)
..
>(another side comment on Microsoft is that of course when they try to spread
>FUD about open source software in general, and the GPL in particular, what
>they are really trying to do is to stop people using the stuff. It must be
>very frustrating for Microsoft that not only is there important software
>that they don't own it, but they can't even buy it, no matter how much
>money they have :-)

They also can't use their famous "embrace and extend" technique, as they have to
make the sources available for any extensions they distribute. :-)

For anyone who doesn't know what Microsoft comments we are referring to, see:
http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/exec/craig/05-03sharedsource.asp

There's a response from Alan Cox posted at
http://news.wideopen.com/fc/2-118,209-119,509967

and a response from Linus at
http://web.siliconvalley.com/content/sv/2001/05/03/opinion/dgillmor/weblog/torvalds.htm

---
T.E.D.    homepage   - http://www.telepath.com/dennison/Ted/TED.html
          home email - mailto:dennison@telepath.com

Re: [ANNOUNCE] XML/Ada 0.5 released

[Marin David Condic]

I thought the English translation of "Embrace And Extend" was "Engulf And
Devour" :-)

I definitely get the feeling that Micro$oft is running scared because of
things like Linux, etc. Just goes to show that the American Free Enterprise
System doesn't always need anti-trust suits in order to remain in fine
working order.

MDC
--
Marin David Condic
Senior Software Engineer
Pace Micro Technology Americas    www.pacemicro.com
Enabling the digital revolution
e-Mail:    marin.condic@pacemicro.com
Web:      http://www.mcondic.com/


"Ted Dennison" <dennison@telepath.com> wrote in message
news:iLyJ6.4497$vg1.349668@www.newsranger.com...
>
> They also can't use their famous "embrace and extend" technique, as they
have to
> make the sources available for any extensions they distribute. :-)
>

Re: [ANNOUNCE] XML/Ada 0.5 released

[Preben Randhol]

On Mon, 7 May 2001 11:06:51 -0400, Marin David Condic wrote:
> I thought the English translation of "Embrace And Extend" was "Engulf And
> Devour" :-)
> 
> I definitely get the feeling that Micro$oft is running scared because of
> things like Linux, etc. Just goes to show that the American Free Enterprise
> System doesn't always need anti-trust suits in order to remain in fine
> working order.

Yes it does. The only reason why Linux isn't already bought and devoured
by Microsoft, is that it isn't something you can buy. It is unattainable
so they are now sucking their thumb and crying : "Mammy, Mammy! I don't
like GPL. It is nice as I won't get so much money for my crappy software
anymore! It forces me to make something that works!" It isn't for
nothing that Sun bought and released the source code of Star Office.

What they want is to get an alternative to M$ Office, because if they do
get that then people can start uninstalling Windows and install other
OSes.  Now "everybody" needs to have Windows because they get
documents in Word or Powerpoint format.  It isn't for nothing either
that Micro$oft won't use an open file format for Word, Excel,
Powerpoint etc.., nor make a port to Linux and other Unices...

-- 
Preben Randhol ------------------- http://www.pvv.org/~randhol/ --
                 �For me, Ada95 puts back the joy in programming.�

Re: [ANNOUNCE] XML/Ada 0.5 released

[Marin David Condic]

I read the article that Ted pointed to and I have to agree - they sound like
whining crybabies. "We can't compete against someone who is giving their
stuff away for free, so its not fair!!! They should stop!!!" (If its such a
lousy business model, then why would they be so worried? Just wait for the
business model to implode, like the dotcoms they site as examples. Maybe its
not such a lousy business model after all? Otherwise why would Micro$oft be
out trying to share their source code now?)

While there are potential problems with Open Source Software (divergence,
infection & the potential for abuses) it is hard to imagine that reasonably
intelligent people are suddenly going to jump on the Micro$oft Shared Source
stuff if it is more restrictive. Semi-sane developers will ask "What's in it
for me?" If I can work with OSS stuff at no cost to me with the possible
risk of GPL infection, is there some reason I want to start paying Micro$oft
money for access to *their* source? Or at least risking that by using
Micro$oft's source I am exposing myself to a predatory giant with a history
of eating its "partners"? Gee! I think I'll take my chances with some
version of the GPL!

Its a little like the Internet itself. The government built it with an eye
towards making something that couldn't be stopped by nuclear war. Now they
discover that they can't stop it with legislation. (Duh!) Now this Linux
thing is out there unleashed on the world of PC developers and users, and
Windoze is finding it hard to compete & they have now way of stopping it.
(boohoohoo!!! I weep for Micro$oft!) If Windows hadn't been so "proprietary"
it might have avoided this sort of competitor.

MDC
--
Marin David Condic
Senior Software Engineer
Pace Micro Technology Americas    www.pacemicro.com
Enabling the digital revolution
e-Mail:    marin.condic@pacemicro.com
Web:      http://www.mcondic.com/

"Preben Randhol" <randhol+abuse@pvv.org> wrote in message
news:slrn9fdgsv.946.randhol+abuse@kiuk0156.chembio.ntnu.no...
> Yes it does. The only reason why Linux isn't already bought and devoured
> by Microsoft, is that it isn't something you can buy. It is unattainable
> so they are now sucking their thumb and crying : "Mammy, Mammy! I don't
> like GPL. It is nice as I won't get so much money for my crappy software
> anymore! It forces me to make something that works!" It isn't for
> nothing that Sun bought and released the source code of Star Office.
>
> What they want is to get an alternative to M$ Office, because if they do
> get that then people can start uninstalling Windows and install other
> OSes.  Now "everybody" needs to have Windows because they get
> documents in Word or Powerpoint format.  It isn't for nothing either
> that Micro$oft won't use an open file format for Word, Excel,
> Powerpoint etc.., nor make a port to Linux and other Unices...
>

OT: Microsoft Follies (was: [ANNOUNCE] XML/Ada 0.5 released)

[Ted Dennison]

In article <9d6i89$3nf$1@nh.pace.co.uk>, Marin David Condic says...
>While there are potential problems with Open Source Software (divergence,

I had to laugh when they raised that issue. How many different "Windows" OS's
does Microsoft have floating around now? At least 4, no matter how you count.
Just about any serious Windows app has to have some code somewhere that detects
the Windows version and does completely different things depending on which one
it is. One good example is trying to get see if a certain program is running.
There's an API for it in 9x. With NT you have to do a series of convoulted
real-time registry lookups (which won't work on 9x).

---
T.E.D.    homepage   - http://www.telepath.com/dennison/Ted/TED.html
          home email - mailto:dennison@telepath.com

MS crybabies (was Re: [ANNOUNCE])

[Stanley R. Allen]

Marin David Condic wrote:
> 
> I read the article that Ted pointed to and I have to agree - they sound like
> whining crybabies. "We can't compete against someone who is giving their
> stuff away for free, so its not fair!!! They should stop!!!" 

Of course, Microsoft would never give away a major
product for free in order to preclude competition.

-- 
Stanley Allen
mailto:Stanley_R_Allen-NR@raytheon.com

Re: Microsoft Follies (was: [ANNOUNCE] XML/Ada 0.5 released)

[Marin David Condic]

Excellent point! Even with absolute control over their own product, they
couldn't stop it from diverging! Sort of the "Tower of Babel" all over
again. Internally, you have a community of programmers (& managers) who
aren't going to be nice little robots all performing in lock-step ballet
with each other. For business reasons and probably also for turf-wars,
protection of feifdoms, etc., multiple paths evolved. Maybe you can exercise
more discipline over the programmers & managers internally than you could
over a widespread group of OSS developers - but still, managing programmers
is like hearding cats... :-)

MDC
--
Marin David Condic
Senior Software Engineer
Pace Micro Technology Americas    www.pacemicro.com
Enabling the digital revolution
e-Mail:    marin.condic@pacemicro.com
Web:      http://www.mcondic.com/


"Ted Dennison" <dennison@telepath.com> wrote in message
news:xSAJ6.4705$vg1.368306@www.newsranger.com...
> In article <9d6i89$3nf$1@nh.pace.co.uk>, Marin David Condic says...
> >While there are potential problems with Open Source Software (divergence,
>
> I had to laugh when they raised that issue. How many different "Windows"
OS's
> does Microsoft have floating around now? At least 4, no matter how you
count.
> Just about any serious Windows app has to have some code somewhere that
detects
> the Windows version and does completely different things depending on
which one
> it is. One good example is trying to get see if a certain program is
running.
> There's an API for it in 9x. With NT you have to do a series of convoulted
> real-time registry lookups (which won't work on 9x).
>
> ---
> T.E.D.    homepage   - http://www.telepath.com/dennison/Ted/TED.html
>           home email - mailto:dennison@telepath.com

Re: [ANNOUNCE] XML/Ada 0.5 released

[tmoran]

>For anyone who doesn't know what Microsoft comments we are referring to, see:
>http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/exec/craig/05-03sharedsource.asp
>
>There's a response from Alan Cox posted at
>http://news.wideopen.com/fc/2-118,209-119,509967
>
>and a response from Linus at
>http://web.siliconvalley.com/content/sv/2001/05/03/opinion/dgillmor/weblog/torvalds.htm

  Both Cox and Linus seem to frame the question as Open Source vs
Microsoft, as if MS was the only alternative, and commodity shrink
wrap the only kind of software.

  They would also be more convincing if they cut out the illogical
statements and emotional ad hominem remarks:

Cox:
>he mysteriously forgot
>The obsession
>Craig is apparently unable to grasp the concept
>Craig also appears so obsessed
>Apparently Craig also has problems reading licenses.
>strangely neglects

Linus:
>Mundie seems to hate so much
>I wonder if Mundie has ever heard of Sir Isaac Newton?
>I'd rather listen to Newton than to
  Mundie.  He may have been dead for almost three hundred years,
  but despite that he stinks up the room less.

Re: [ANNOUNCE] XML/Ada 0.5 released

[tmoran]

>Now "everybody" needs to have Windows because they get
>documents in Word or Powerpoint format.
  Or gigantic, slow, PDF files so even Government web sites
virtually force Adobe's Acrobat on people. :(

Re: [ANNOUNCE] XML/Ada 0.5 released

[Brian Orpin]

On Sun, 06 May 2001 13:50:39 GMT, Emmanuel Briot <briot@gnat.com> wrote:

>[Posted on behalf of Robert Dewar]
>
>First, a general note, the direct posts you saw from me in this
>thread are not posts at all, but the results of some very strange
>cc mechanism in what were intended to be personal replies to David
>Botton.

Tricky this email stuff.  The messages clearly state that they are 'To'
the mail-news gateway that David obviously uses as well as David himself.

From David's posts
Reply-To: comp.lang.ada@ada.eu.org
Cc: <dewar@gnat.com>
To: <comp.lang.ada@ada.eu.org>
Return-Path: <David@Botton.com>

So clearly if Robert had simply replied the reply to address is the
mail-news gateway at ada.eu.org.

Hardly some strange cc mechanism.

It just sounded to me like Robert was blaming David for his own
incompetence with an email client.

GIGO

-- 
Brian Orpin    BAE SYSTEMS, Edinburgh
"If you really know C++, there isn't much you can't do with it, though it may 
not always be what you intended!"  Tucker Taft 1998 

Re: [ANNOUNCE] XML/Ada 0.5 released

[Larry Kilgallen]

In article <tj4fftggst1onf6itc6cvts8t3tnlfbhqg@4ax.com>, Brian Orpin <abuse@borpin.co.uk> writes:

> So clearly if Robert had simply replied the reply to address is the
> mail-news gateway at ada.eu.org.
> 
> Hardly some strange cc mechanism.
> 
> It just sounded to me like Robert was blaming David for his own
> incompetence with an email client.

Regardless of those involved, I would blame the design of the user
interface for the mail program.  The program that I prefer _never_
automatically adds other names to a REPLY.  The other one that I
happen to use always displays a full list when I am composing the
list, but still it would be possible to make a mistake.

Computers are supposed to be programmed to serve the humans,
not the other way around.

Larry Kilgallen

Re: [ANNOUNCE] XML/Ada 0.5 released

[Jeffrey Carter]

Larry Kilgallen wrote:
> 
> Computers are supposed to be programmed to serve the humans,
> not the other way around.

What planet are you from? This is Earth, 2001 CE, where the latest,
greatest, hottest, bestest, OS is ... [drum roll] ... a new
implementation of UNIX?

Re: Microsoft Follies (was: [ANNOUNCE] XML/Ada 0.5 released)

[Samuel T. Harris]

Marin David Condic wrote:
> 
> Excellent point! Even with absolute control over their own product, they
> couldn't stop it from diverging! Sort of the "Tower of Babel" all over
> again. Internally, you have a community of programmers (& managers) who
> aren't going to be nice little robots all performing in lock-step ballet
> with each other. For business reasons and probably also for turf-wars,
> protection of feifdoms, etc., multiple paths evolved. Maybe you can exercise
> more discipline over the programmers & managers internally than you could
> over a widespread group of OSS developers - but still, managing programmers
> is like hearding cats... :-)
> 

Once thing which continues to amuse me is that when I
look at the Windows API stuff, I can identify different
"epochs" of API creation. Naming schemes, the order of
parameters, the style of the documentation all show a
partitioning of the calls into little stylistically
consistent groups.

-- 
Samuel T. Harris, Principal Engineer
Raytheon, Aerospace Engineering Services
"If you can make it, We can fake it!"

Re: [ANNOUNCE] XML/Ada 0.5 released

[David Starner]

On 8 May 2001 07:22:10 -0500, Larry Kilgallen wrote:
> Regardless of those involved, I would blame the design of the user
> interface for the mail program.  The program that I prefer _never_
> automatically adds other names to a REPLY.  The other one that I
> happen to use always displays a full list when I am composing the
> list, but still it would be possible to make a mistake.
> 
> Computers are supposed to be programmed to serve the humans,
> not the other way around.

If you build an idiot-proof program, the world will build a better
idiot . . . and we've all had those days when we were that idiot and
screwed up what couldn't be screwed up. Most mail programs provide a
reply and reply-all, and I always reply-all and edit the messages,
because the address I usually want it to go to (the list) isn't what
reply will use. 

It's easy to always blame the software, but it's often only an
accomplice to your errors, and the easiest part to replace.

-- 
David Starner - dstarner98@aasaa.ofe.org
Pointless website: http://dvdeug.dhis.org
"I don't care if Bill personally has my name and reads my email and 
laughs at me. In fact, I'd be rather honored." - Joseph_Greg

Re: Microsoft Follies (was: [ANNOUNCE] XML/Ada 0.5 released)

[Marin David Condic]

Would you call this study "Software Archeology" or "Software Anthropology"?
I'm wondering if we'd discover evidence proving the existence of Piltdown
Man... :-)

MDC
--
Marin David Condic
Senior Software Engineer
Pace Micro Technology Americas    www.pacemicro.com
Enabling the digital revolution
e-Mail:    marin.condic@pacemicro.com
Web:      http://www.mcondic.com/

"Samuel T. Harris" <u61783@gsde.hou.us.ray.com> wrote in message
news:3AF854C4.406F464C@gsde.hou.us.ray.com...
>
> Once thing which continues to amuse me is that when I
> look at the Windows API stuff, I can identify different
> "epochs" of API creation. Naming schemes, the order of
> parameters, the style of the documentation all show a
> partitioning of the calls into little stylistically
> consistent groups.
>

Re: Microsoft Follies (was: [ANNOUNCE] XML/Ada 0.5 released)

[James Rogers]

Marin David Condic wrote:
> 
> Would you call this study "Software Archeology" or "Software Anthropology"?
> I'm wondering if we'd discover evidence proving the existence of Piltdown
> Man... :-)
> 

I think there are a lot of unexplored opportunities for software
"sciences". While working briefly as a contractor in a shop doing
Y2K amelioration a few years back I realized I had become a
software proctologist.

Jim Rogers
Colorado Springs, Colorado USA

Re: [ANNOUNCE] XML/Ada 0.5 released

[David Botton]

I must apologize if it was not obvious that my e-mails included the CLA
gateway address in the CC line. I will certainly make a point of indicating
so if I ever do so in the future. It was not my intention to do any thing
underhanded.

David Botton


----- Original Message -----
From: "Emmanuel Briot" <briot@gnat.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
To: <comp.lang.ada@ada.eu.org>
Sent: Sunday, May 06, 2001 9:50 AM
Subject: Re: [ANNOUNCE] XML/Ada 0.5 released


>
> [Posted on behalf of Robert Dewar]
>
>
>
> First, a general note, the direct posts you saw from me in this
> thread are not posts at all, but the results of some very strange
> cc mechanism in what were intended to be personal replies to David
> Botton.


> None of these posts should be regarded as official comments from ACT, they
> are simply off hand comments to David. I will refrain from answering
> any of David's email in the future to prevent this strange occurrence.
> It never occured to me that a cc could be used in this way to create
> a direct post that looks like it was deliberately posted as an
> article.

Re: Microsoft Follies (was: [ANNOUNCE] XML/Ada 0.5 released)

[Ted Dennison]

In article <9d6pnr$6a6$1@nh.pace.co.uk>, Marin David Condic says...
>
>Excellent point! Even with absolute control over their own product, they
>couldn't stop it from diverging! Sort of the "Tower of Babel" all over
>again. Internally, you have a community of programmers (& managers) who

As another good illustration of this, just yesterday I purchaced a new Windows
game (Tropico) which listed on its box no less than 5 Windows OS's that it runs
on. That's acutally a really nice effort on PopTop's part. Most game companies
only list one or two, and refuse any support calls from users on unlisted
variants, like NT. Most of my software development tools at work are even worse.
They support either NT or 2K, and nothing else.

You'd think Microsoft would take great pains to *avoid* the "forking" issue. :-)

---
T.E.D.    homepage   - http://www.telepath.com/dennison/Ted/TED.html
          home email - mailto:dennison@telepath.com

Re: Microsoft Follies (was: [ANNOUNCE] XML/Ada 0.5 released)

[Ted Dennison]

In article <9d9nni$9sb$1@nh.pace.co.uk>, Marin David Condic says...
>
>Would you call this study "Software Archeology" or "Software Anthropology"?
>I'm wondering if we'd discover evidence proving the existence of Piltdown
>Man... :-)

You mean Hungarian Notation isn't evidence enough? :-)

---
T.E.D.    homepage   - http://www.telepath.com/dennison/Ted/TED.html
          home email - mailto:dennison@telepath.com

Re: Microsoft Follies (was: [ANNOUNCE] XML/Ada 0.5 released)

[tmoran]

>You'd think Microsoft would take great pains to *avoid* the "forking" issue. :-)
  One might think the airlines could simplify ticketting, meals, etc. and
save money if they had one class, instead of Economy, Business, First.  ;)
  I wonder what courses Gates took during his short time at Harvard.
Econ or CS?

Re: Microsoft Follies (was: [ANNOUNCE] XML/Ada 0.5 released)

[Ted Dennison]

In article <TLfK6.549$%i7.302004@news1.rdc1.sfba.home.com>, tmoran@acm.org
says...
>
>>You'd think Microsoft would take great pains to *avoid* the "forking" issue. :-)
>  One might think the airlines could simplify ticketting, meals, etc. and
>save money if they had one class, instead of Economy, Business, First.  ;)

Perhaps, but it ceartianly wouldn't save the airlines any money if they had the
different classes flying on different planes using different schedules. B-)

The only OS in their panoply that I think you could really make an argument for
needing to be separate is Wince.

The trick to making money on "discrimintory pricing" is to keep the services
provided as similiar to each other as possible. Microsoft already does that
quite well with their "student versions" that are the exact same versions of
their software, but sold at school bookstores for %20-50 less. Note that a new
"student version" of Win2K costs less than a new consumer version of WinMe. 

---
T.E.D.    homepage   - http://www.telepath.com/dennison/Ted/TED.html
          home email - mailto:dennison@telepath.com