3 ms·
Is there any reason for MS to do this besides vendor lock-in?
by skohan 6y ago
Is there any reason for MS to do this besides vendor lock-in?
- klodolph 6y agoI think what happened is Microsoft started using these before standardization, the definitions got changed during the standardization process, and Microsoft didn’t follow (presumably, to avoid breaking code). This is not really an unusual turn of events, and not something peculiar to Microsoft. Standards development is rarely “standards-first”. Instead, you implement your proposal, put it into use, and then go through the standards process. This is usually the way it should be done, and it’s how WHATWG did HTML5, it’s how Google did HTTP/2, etc.
- lelanthran 6y agoYes, but at the time the Annex K definitions were out, there were so few people actually using Microsoft's implementation that Microsoft could have changed the implementation to behave the way the standard prescribes. After all, ISTR the interface remains the same for most (if not all) the Annex K functions.
- klodolph 6y agoSo few people other than Microsoft themselves, yes. And for various reasons I don’t think Annex K was going to get popular, and making improvements to standards compliance wasn’t going to change that.
- lelanthran 6y agoThey campaigned for Annex K based on what they implemented. Annex K got changed during standardisation. Not completely their fault.