____/ [H]omer on Monday 27 August 2007 02:40 : \____
> Verily I say unto thee, that Linonut spake thusly:
>> I think DFS might be correct after all. This guy certain talks about
>> open-source trashware:
>>
>> http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1895,2174730,00.asp
>>
>> Opinion: I recently took a look at Microsoft's most active
>> open-source projects and -- there's no polite way to say
>> this -- they are all junk.
>>
>
> .----
> | Now you may never have heard of this project, but I admit it does
> | sound cool. That is until I looked closer at it and see that it's
> | based on C#, WPF (Windows Presentation Foundation, formerly
> | Avalon), WCF (Windows Communication Foundation, formerly Indigo),
> | and .Net 3.5. In other words, it's an "open-source" program built
> | entirely from Vista-oriented proprietary languages and frameworks.
> | Is a project really open-source when all its parts are proprietary?
> | I don't think so.
> `----
>
> That really is the crux of the matter, isn't it?
>
> How can any project be truly Open when its compiler toolchain, APIs, and
> indeed entire framework is Closed?
>
> Survey says ... uuuuaaaaahh.
Imagine GPL-licensed blocks of code of Silverlight? How about OSI's approval?
What would ESR say?
--
~~ Best of wishes
Roy S. Schestowitz | "Quote when replying in non-real-time dialogues"
http://Schestowitz.com | RHAT GNU/Linux | PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
03:00:01 up 20 days, 5:53, 5 users, load average: 1.66, 1.65, 1.84
http://iuron.com - help build a non-profit search engine
|
|
