I'm sure that Microsoft wants Windows to be the best platform on which to run.NET, Visual Studio to be the best tool for creating.NET applications, etc.
However, it would not suit their needs just yet to be the only game in town. This is why they will submit C# and the CLR to ECMA for standardization.
Later, if someone wants to develop a large-scale, distributed web application on Linux, they can choose to use Sun's Java (TM) or the standard.NET platform.
Many (I would think) don't like being under Sun's thumb any more than Microsoft's, and might find this appealing, particularly when you can use C#, C++, Python, or just about any other language you want to develop for.NET.
Once you're developing for.NET, it doesn't matter much whether.NET is on a Linux machine or a Windows machine, or does it? What if it turns out that Windows machines are simply much better (in an overall business sense) at running.NET? What if Visual Studio makes it far easier to develop large-scale, distributed web apps? All of the sudden you're buying Windows 2000 servers, Visual Studio, etc. I can even imagine people using Visual Studio on Windows to develop.NET apps to run on Linux boxes...
As some others have noted, Corel's problem can be summed up in two words: Michael Cowpland.
Over the course of some 15 years he's taken a company with a suite of good products (the Corel Draw suite) against which Microsoft has never even TRIED to field real competition and run it into the ground in a Quixotic quest to compete against Microsoft in areas where Microsoft had already attained uncontested dominance.
Along the way he has repeatedly screwed investors by pumping Corel's stock by jumping on every flavor-of-the-day technology conceivable and then failing to deliver. He blows millions on pie-in-the-sky R&D projects just to get at Microsoft, the stock sky-rockets on hype, then hits the basement when said buzz-word fails to make the PC, OS, Microsoft, etc irrelevant within 3 weeks. Remember WordPerfect Office for Java?
Ironically, Corel Linux seems to be the only one of these projects that has succeeded at all (because the open source community did most of the work) and, again, Corel has missed the boat by targeting the area in which Linux is LEAST likely to succeed in the near term, the desktop.
My only regret is that I didn't short their stock when it was at $40.
Over the last decade, the American Association of University Women has frequently been guilty of sowing politically motivated disinformation of this type based on fishy "research." Check out this recent article by Christina Hoff Summers: http://www.theatlantic.com/issues/2000/05/sommers. htm I have yet to read her latest book, but can highly recommend "Who Stole Feminism?" [http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0684801566 /qid=962722496/sr=1-1/102-7334716-147452 9]
Slashdot Mirror
I'm sure that Microsoft wants Windows to be the best platform on which to run .NET, Visual Studio to be the best tool for creating .NET applications, etc.
.NET platform.
.NET.
.NET, it doesn't matter much whether .NET is on a Linux machine or a Windows machine, or does it? What if it turns out that Windows machines are simply much better (in an overall business sense) at running .NET? What if Visual Studio makes it far easier to develop large-scale, distributed web apps? All of the sudden you're buying Windows 2000 servers, Visual Studio, etc. I can even imagine people using Visual Studio on Windows to develop .NET apps to run on Linux boxes...
However, it would not suit their needs just yet to be the only game in town. This is why they will submit C# and the CLR to ECMA for standardization.
Later, if someone wants to develop a large-scale, distributed web application on Linux, they can choose to use Sun's Java (TM) or the standard
Many (I would think) don't like being under Sun's thumb any more than Microsoft's, and might find this appealing, particularly when you can use C#, C++, Python, or just about any other language you want to develop for
Once you're developing for
As some others have noted, Corel's problem can be summed up in two words: Michael Cowpland.
Over the course of some 15 years he's taken a company with a suite of good products (the Corel Draw suite) against which Microsoft has never even TRIED to field real competition and run it into the ground in a Quixotic quest to compete against Microsoft in areas where Microsoft had already attained uncontested dominance.
Along the way he has repeatedly screwed investors by pumping Corel's stock by jumping on every flavor-of-the-day technology conceivable and then failing to deliver. He blows millions on pie-in-the-sky R&D projects just to get at Microsoft, the stock sky-rockets on hype, then hits the basement when said buzz-word fails to make the PC, OS, Microsoft, etc irrelevant within 3 weeks. Remember WordPerfect Office for Java?
Ironically, Corel Linux seems to be the only one of these projects that has succeeded at all (because the open source community did most of the work) and, again, Corel has missed the boat by targeting the area in which Linux is LEAST likely to succeed in the near term, the desktop.
My only regret is that I didn't short their stock when it was at $40.
unrecognized
Over the last decade, the American Association of University Women has frequently been guilty of sowing politically motivated disinformation of this type based on fishy "research." Check out this recent article by Christina Hoff Summers: http://www.theatlantic.com/issues/2000/05/sommers. htm I have yet to read her latest book, but can highly recommend "Who Stole Feminism?" [http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0684801566 /qid=962722496/sr=1-1/102-7334716-147452 9]