5 ms·
They have been on there, but not as standard Windows components. Perhaps they had lofty goals to replace the tools with a "better" version and changed direction
by wangchow 10y ago
They have been on there, but not as standard Windows components. Perhaps they had lofty goals to replace the tools with a "better" version and changed direction.
- exo762 10y agoReplacing something with "better" version is step #2 of EEE.
- oldmanjay 10y agoReplacing something with a better version is also the basis of the success of life. It's all in how you approach things.
- eitland 10y agoIf you are going to argue that Microsoft is out on a new EEE trip you are going to have a hard time now that it releases everything as Open Source.
- dragonwriter 10y ago> now that it releases everything as Open Source. Windows? Office? SQL Server? Seems to me, that Microsoft now releases "everything" as open source only by the most ridiculously limited definition of "everything".
- jessaustin 10y agoThere have been EEE accusations against e.g. systemd, so it's not clear that other OSS couldn't get the same. Actually now that I think about it I don't see why EEE would depend on unreleased source at all.
- aanm 10y agoThey aren't, but the only reason for these aliases in the first place is that type of attitude. curl is a commonly used utility, so lets replace the command with completely different.
- bad_user 10y agoOpen source projects should really register trademarks and sue companies like Microsoft. It really doesn't pay to be the good guy. After all, if anybody used the word Windows for an alternative OS, I'm pretty sure Microsoft wouldn't be happy.
- adontz 10y agohttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_Corp._v._Lindows.com,_Inc https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_Corp._v._Lindows.com....
- Senji 10y agoYou shouldn't be able to trademark function names and executable file names. Therein lies madness.
- pritambaral 10y agoOTOH, if I (or a big entity like, say, Apple) released something called Java which didn't really behave like Java™, that would also result in a bit of madness. I think trademarks are good; and when compatible alternatives exist, of say, a product named 'Foo™', they should be able to market themselves as 'Foo™ compatible' (and obviously not as 'Foo™').
- soneil 10y agoSo assuming they have a similar problem where 'ls' is aliased to 'dir'. Who should have trademarked 'ls'?