Mr. Arnold said:
You do know that MS doesn't own .Net? That's right MS gave it all away.
The reason .Net even exist is because of the fallout between Sun Micro
Systems and MS about the use of Java by MS. VB.Net is proprietary to MS.
Microsoft does own .Net and has the trademarks to the .Net name.
Let's let Microsoft speak for itself, shall we? "Microsoft .NET is a
brand associated with Microsoft technology. .NET is not a platform, an
application, or a service. Rather, it is a set of capabilities in
products that enables people, information, systems, and devices to
connect and exchange information seamlessly through the use of Web services.
The Microsoft .NET Connected logo program was developed to highlight
specific products that exhibit Web service connectivity through the use
of the .NET Framework, an integral component of the Windows operating
system. Products or services that meet the criteria to use the logo but
have chosen not to license the logo should use the phrase "Microsoft
..NET-connected" (but not the Microsoft .NET or Microsoft .NET Connected
logos) according to the guidelines set forth on this Web page."
This can be found at
http://www.microsoft.com/about/legal/intellectualproperty/trademarks/usage/net.mspx.
You should really read it. They are quite specific about who can use
".Net" and how. Some of it may surprise you.
What Microsoft actually submitted to the ECMA (along with help from
Borland, Fujitsu, Hewlett-Packard, Intel Corporation, International
Business Machines, ISE, IT University Copenhagen, Microsoft Corporation,
Monash University, Netscape, Novell Corporation, OpenWave, Plum Hall,
Sun Microsystems, and the University of Canterbury New Zealand ) was
actually 2 items - the CLI specification
(
http://www.ecma-international.org/publications/standards/Ecma-335.htm)
and the C# specification
(
http://www.ecma-international.org/publications/standards/Ecma-335.htm).
This was a brilliant move on Microsoft's part. It gave the illusion of
participating in open standards while placing a 6-9 month (as
Microsoft's own pages state at ) wait for any adoption of standards even
via the ECMA's Fast Track process.
This gives Microsoft a never-ending buffer of a minimum of 6-9 months
AFTER they propose changes to the standard (which they seem to do about
every 2 years).
This 6-9 months is just for the ECMA to "Fast Track" the changes to
..Net. Then, competing languages and IDEs must incorporate those changes
(add another 6-12 months) and then the coders must learn and incorporate
the changes into their new code (another 6-12 months).
That's a 18-36 month lead on the competition! What software company
wouldn't do that? And, it just so happens that .Net versions are coming
out in approx. 36 month intervals! Surprise, surprise, surprise! As
soon as the competition catches up - BAM! - Microsoft takes another step.
This has long been a (largely successful) business practice of
Microsoft's - distract and destroy. By keeping others chasing the
moving dot, they can happily work on other concepts and markets with
very little fear of anyone actually opposing them.
For instance, the good (but simple minded) folks over at Novell just
can't seem to wrap their tiny skulls around the notion that Mono will
ALWAYS be playing catch-up to Microsoft. That places Microsoft just
where they want to be - in control of the future of desktop computing.
The thing that I find strange is how willingly supposedly intelligent
people simply follow along like crack addicted sheep.
Linux distros had better wake up as well and start innovating instead of
following and trying to match Microsoft.
After all, who wants to match slow and clumsy feeling apps and OSs?
jim
