I want to publicly comment on the "spreading lies on this issue" that I'm being accused of by many of you in the/. community. I'll keep my reply simple:
1) Microsoft called this move "open source" in all of there communications with me. In fact, the title of the mail in my inbox from Microsoft is: "Important: Microsoft & Open Source Announcement" . They also referred to it as "open source" in the voice mail they left me the night before.
2) I put "open source" in quotes to highlight the fact that this is NOT open source . That was the entire point of the blog for those of you who obviously didn't read it in it's entirety.
3) Many people on/. tried a new and novel approach and actually read my post before commenting/forming their opinion. Two notable examples of this radical behavior include:
Slashdot Mirror
I want to publicly comment on the "spreading lies on this issue" that I'm being accused of by many of you in the /. community. I'll keep my reply simple:
/. tried a new and novel approach and actually read my post before commenting/forming their opinion. Two notable examples of this radical behavior include:
1) Microsoft called this move "open source" in all of there communications with me. In fact, the title of the mail in my inbox from Microsoft is: "Important: Microsoft & Open Source Announcement" . They also referred to it as "open source" in the voice mail they left me the night before.
2) I put "open source" in quotes to highlight the fact that this is NOT open source . That was the entire point of the blog for those of you who obviously didn't read it in it's entirety.
3) Many people on
"Will Hurley captures the move accurately" - Matt Asay, CNet
"William Hurley says Microsoft is going "open source," and those quote marks are his point." - Dana Blankenhorn, ZDNet So thanks to all of you who commented after actually reading the post. For the rest of you, I hope this helps to clear things up.