Clogwog wrote:
> http://blog.seattlepi.nwsource.com/microsoft/archives/116377.asp
> Next one? Roy Schestowitz?
It would be nice to believe that these things are genuine. We do need to be
in on the new smb spec. I hate being synical but can't help feeling this is
to ensure that the new smb packets can not be used by Linux unless they
agree to include closed source technologies.
"Our patents threat may be fake, but if we can put them into a position
where they have no choice but to use one of our genuine patented
technologies then we have them by the short and curlies".
We will need those packets, but as I understood it MS were going to open
that up to Linux anyway. After all it is no use only the clients talking
via smb, they need the services doing it too.
|
|
