4 ms·
2 differences between MS and Apple in this context. MS was very supportive of developers in its ecosystem. And they were never this arrogant.
by subbu 17y ago
2 differences between MS and Apple in this context. MS was very supportive of developers in its ecosystem. And they were never this arrogant.
- allenbrunson 17y agoUnless, of course, you were a developer at Stac Electronics: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stac_Electronics http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stac_Electronics ... or one of the many other companies that produced something that Microsoft decided would be better if it was bundled with the OS. I'm not defending Apple here, but come on, be realistic.
- cookiecaper 17y agoBundling something with the OS isn't wrong. Linux distributions come bundled with tons of software. Is that wrong? There are lots of competing softwares for Linux, usually only one for each purpose is included. You can still develop and sell a competing application, you'll just get less traction because people already get an application with similar functionality for free. Apple has killed off a whole class of developer tools with this and stated that if you don't use the software they want, they'll revoke your license. An equal analogy would be MS revoking the right to sell Windows software for anyone that refused to browse with Internet Explorer.
- allenbrunson 17y agodid you read the linked article? i'm guessing not. if all microsoft did was write a clone of stac's product and bundle it with the OS, then that would be questionable, but not too bad. But no, what Microsoft did was pretend they were interested in buying Stac, gained access to all their source code as part of their "due diligence," then "changed their minds" and created a nearly identical product "from scratch." Stac was able to get the courts to agree that this was dirty pool, and it cost Microsoft over 80 million dollars.