4 ms·
Why exactly? Mind elaborating some on that statement? Because I disagree.
by Rainymood 11y ago
Why exactly? Mind elaborating some on that statement? Because I disagree.
- nabaraz 11y ago1.flooding market 2. stagnant platform 3. not proper direction 4. rushed release 5. longer and less transparent updates etc.
- icebraining 11y agoThat still sounds like Microsoft to me.
- vladiliescu 11y agoReally? With all the new things coming out of Redmond and with them open sourcing the full server side .NET stack[1], the description above still sounds like MS to you? [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8595905 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8595905
- icebraining 11y ago"All the new things" You mean, flooding the market without a proper direction? :) As for open sourcing, I don't see how that invalidates any of the points. None of them had "keeping platforms proprietary".
- WorldWideWayne 11y agoExactly what could Microsoft do that would indicate to you that they have proper direction? Alternatively, please point to a company that you think has proper direction and tell us why.
- vladiliescu 11y agoimo, it invalidates the following: 2 - the platform is not stagnant, be it Windows or .NET - new things are coming out; 3 - there is a proper direction, less towards Windows/Office as desktop apps and more towards services; 5 - the updates do happen more often, and at least for .NET they're done in a transparent way (being open source and all)
- junto 11y agoI guess the OP is talking more about debatable abuses of monopoly.