Re: Now that's monopoly power...

In article <Etqdnca8wLZzJtHVnZ2dnUVZ_judnZ2d@xxxxxxxxxxxx>,
Steve de Mena <steve@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Alan Baker wrote:
In article <WM6dnW3vP4qNANHVnZ2dnUVZ_h_inZ2d@xxxxxxxxxxxx>,
Steve de Mena <steve@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Alan Baker wrote:
In article <mPSdnZkDxPiLBNHVnZ2dnUVZ_jydnZ2d@xxxxxxxxxxxx>,
Steve de Mena <steve@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Alan Baker wrote:
In article <GLudnQ9KCIf0EdHVnZ2dnUVZ_s_inZ2d@xxxxxxxxxxxx>,
Steve de Mena <steve@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Alan Baker wrote:
In article
<c988a6ed-dc3a-43db-be22-9488897894a1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
Edwin <thorne25@xxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Jun 8, 5:01 am, Mitch <mi...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
In article
<011fb295-4fdc-4254-b9db-6c39dfcc2...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
Edward Scholl <edsch...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

You're objecting to my word for Microsoft's influence? Is that
all,
seriously?
Okay; "pushing."
You just go on now and try to refute what I wrote if I used that
milder
word.
well hell, if you'd just said that, no one would have any issues-
OF
COURSE ms WANTS developers to get certified and release drivers
for
hardware as quick as possible!
You'd think so -- but this new requirement doesn't help that at
all.
How does having Windows 7 drivers certified before Windows 7 is
released "not help at all?"
So according to you the only two options are either force developers
to
test for a beta OS that may never be released
Huh? How could a Microsoft OS be in Beta 1 stage and "never be
released"?

Steve
You think that every piece of software that makes it to beta stage is
released?

LOL
No. Did I say that? The next version of Windows, by Microsoft, is
what is under discussion, and you questioned whether it would be
released.
Yup. If the delays in Vista are anything to go by, then MS may be
forcing developers to expend resources on an OS they may never get
released in the form in which they first present it.
Beta 1 of Vista was in September or October 2005. No one was
talking about when something is first presented. We were talking
about the Beta 1 release.

But Vista isn't what they set out to build, now is it? Vista is what was
left after they had to slash everything else away.

Those things they slashed away I think you referring to (Longhorn)
never had a "Beta 1".

Microsoft is not forcing developers to do anything, by the way.

They are, actually.

They are forcing developers who want certification for Windows Vista to
to testing against an entirely different product.

"WHO WANT CERTIFICATION". That's a major clarification.

So what? You're claiming there are no manufacturers who want it?


I don't know anyone who cares if a driver is "certified" or not. I
just want it to work.

And how do you determine that *prior* to purchase?

--
"The iPhone doesn't have a speaker phone" -- "I checked very carefully" --
"I checked Apple's web pages" -- Edwin on the iPhone
"It is Mac OS X, not BSD.' -- 'From Mac OS to BSD Unix." -- "It's BSD Unix with Apple's APIs and GUI on top of it' -- 'nothing but BSD Unix' (Edwin on Mac OS X)
'[The IBM PC] could boot multiple OS, such as DOS, C/PM, GEM, etc.' --
'I claimed nothing about GEM other than it was available software for the
IBM PC. (Edwin on GEM)
'Solaris is just a marketing rename of Sun OS.' -- 'Sun OS is not included
on the timeline of Solaris because it's a different OS.' (Edwin on Sun)
.

Relevant Pages
Loading