On 2006-08-22, billwg <billwg@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> "Ray Ingles" <sorceror@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
> news:slrneema3o.kle.sorceror@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> On 2006-08-22, billwg <billwg@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> "Find a need and fill it" is the age-old advice, roy! If that means
>>> setting a new standard as a lone supplier, so be it.
>>
>> http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/e4b3136c7101cab2
> Microsoft used NetBEUI
NetBEUI was an example, of course, not the point. You say above that
companies want to set their own standards. We've already covered this.
Here'e a representative portion of the reply you claim not to
comprehend.
"The best option for a company is to control, and milk, a standard -
Microsoft has made that a core business model. The problem is, this is
only optimal for that company. Other companies that use that standard
are in a much weaker position. If they can't own the standard, companies
will generally prefer a standard that *nobody* owns - like TCP/IP."
There is quite a bit more understanding of this point these days, both
inside and outside the industry. Hence the recent surge in interest
regarding "open formats".
> linux is doomed because all it can do is
> react to trends created elsewhere. It will never lead and always follow.
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/6dd70d3fa7087035
Read from "So you repeatedly claim, but I have asked you no less than
three times before:"
--
Sincerely,
Ray Ingles (313) 227-2317
Linux is as much about being Communist, as is the phrase, "of
the people, by the people, and for the people". - Jon Sculley
|
|
