The 'widget' isn't supposed to be modified by the user. It is an appliance.
There are a number of instances where this is the appropriate (and only sane) way to handle an item. The support nightmares that can occur by a customer changing the source to an embedded appliance in an uncontrolled way are more than I want to consider.
I have no idea what the widget is. One possible example of a widget would be a DSL router. You have a couple of configuration options, and the widget just sits there and provides a connection between the phone company and your LAN. It may provide a DHCP server, could provide some QoS features, or could even provide a fax by e-mail facility. It isn't expected nor appropriate that the customer modify it to allow them to run FreeCiv on their DSL router.
If you were to require a shipment of a CD with the product, it is quite likely to confuse a number of people. Customer: What do I need this for? Support Person: You don't need it, sir. Customer: Then why the heck did you ship it to me. Support Person: Our lawyers said we had to.
You would be adding cost to the product and (in many cases even worse) causing customer confusion. In some cases, it could even cause liability problems.
I think what the US government is doing to you and your company is truly disgraceful. You have been here in the United States for 20 plus years guiding the world by its hand with your incredible software and hardware innovations! I'm a big supporter of truly innovative companies like yours and I feel the government has no right at all to interfere whatsoever with any innovative products, services, integration, R&D, emerging markets, etc.! PERIOD!
What inovations?
Either you are a cowardly MicroSoft employee, once again trying to stuff public opinion, or you are truely deluded.
MicroSoft doesn't innovate, they either buy out a competitor or they reimplement the technology, usually badly.
TCP/IP was available in other systems long before it was available on PCs. The WinSock TCP/IP interface came about from private citizens building a stack. Eventually, MicroSoft copied it and included it in the OS.
Web Browsers started at CERN (thanks, Europe) and Mosaic was developed at a university.
Virtual Memory, memory protection, share libraries (DLL for those who only speak MS), and most of the other things in Windows were implemented on a LOT of systems before the PC got them.
Anyone remember the trouble MicroSoft got into for copying another companies disk compression file system, and then they implemented it so badly that it would corrupt the filesystem?
Anyone remember all the problems with EMS, High Memory, and Extended Memory? The war of the DOS Extenders? I remember PharLap and Watcom having protected mode utilities long before MS put anything in the system.
I think the whole computer industry would have been much better off if there had never been a MicroSoft.
Even FUD wasn't invented by MicroSoft, IBM and others used those tactics before MicroSoft. They may not have gotten as many people duped as MicroSoft has, but they did it.
I don't think it is nitpicking. The article is playing a shell game here, saying that you have standard hardware components and then expecting the whole software system should be totally open.
It would be correct if you were to look at the software APIs. Things like OpenGL, X-Windows, NFS, RPC, POSIX Threads, etc. are the standard software components that make up the system.
When you buy an SCSI disk, you don't get any details of what the internal design of the disk is. If there is an embedded processor on it, you may get a firmware file but I've never seen anyone distribute the source which would allow you to recreate that firmware.
How many people have the source for the firmware inside their printers?
There is a big difference between proprietary operating systems that continually invent their own interfaces and operating systems that support open standards.
Slashdot Mirror
I think you are probably missing the point.
The 'widget' isn't supposed to be modified by the user. It is an appliance.
There are a number of instances where this is the appropriate (and only sane) way to handle an item. The support nightmares that can occur by a customer changing the source to an embedded appliance in an uncontrolled way are more than I want to consider.
I have no idea what the widget is. One possible example of a widget would be a DSL router. You have a couple of configuration options, and the widget just sits there and provides a connection between the phone company and your LAN. It may provide a DHCP server, could provide some QoS features, or could even provide a fax by e-mail facility. It isn't expected nor appropriate that the customer modify it to allow them to run FreeCiv on their DSL router.
If you were to require a shipment of a CD with the product, it is quite likely to confuse a number of people.
Customer: What do I need this for?
Support Person: You don't need it, sir.
Customer: Then why the heck did you ship it to me.
Support Person: Our lawyers said we had to.
You would be adding cost to the product and (in many cases even worse) causing customer confusion. In some cases, it could even cause liability problems.
What inovations?
Either you are a cowardly MicroSoft employee, once again trying to stuff public opinion, or you are truely deluded.
MicroSoft doesn't innovate, they either buy out a competitor or they reimplement the technology, usually badly.
TCP/IP was available in other systems long before it was available on PCs. The WinSock TCP/IP interface came about from private citizens building a stack. Eventually, MicroSoft copied it and included it in the OS.
Web Browsers started at CERN (thanks, Europe) and Mosaic was developed at a university.
Virtual Memory, memory protection, share libraries (DLL for those who only speak MS), and most of the other things in Windows were implemented on a LOT of systems before the PC got them.
Anyone remember the trouble MicroSoft got into for copying another companies disk compression file system, and then they implemented it so badly that it would corrupt the filesystem?
Anyone remember all the problems with EMS, High Memory, and Extended Memory? The war of the DOS Extenders? I remember PharLap and Watcom having protected mode utilities long before MS put anything in the system.
I think the whole computer industry would have been much better off if there had never been a MicroSoft.
Even FUD wasn't invented by MicroSoft, IBM and others used those tactics before MicroSoft. They may not have gotten as many people duped as MicroSoft has, but they did it.
Exactly what has MicroSoft innovated?
It would be correct if you were to look at the software APIs. Things like OpenGL, X-Windows, NFS, RPC, POSIX Threads, etc. are the standard software components that make up the system.
When you buy an SCSI disk, you don't get any details of what the internal design of the disk is. If there is an embedded processor on it, you may get a firmware file but I've never seen anyone distribute the source which would allow you to recreate that firmware.
How many people have the source for the firmware inside their printers?
There is a big difference between proprietary operating systems that continually invent their own interfaces and operating systems that support open standards.