﻿<rss version="2.0" xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:itunes="http://www.itunes.com/dtds/podcast-1.0.dtd" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"><channel><title>Open Source for Enterprises: Recent Comments</title><link>http://opensource.arrowhand.com</link><description /><generator>Quick Blog</generator><lastBuildDate>Fri, 04 Jul 2008 19:14:39 GMT</lastBuildDate><item><title>Comment on VCs Rule</title><link>http://opensource.arrowhand.com/2006/12/05/vcs-rule.aspx#comment-339910</link><dc:creator>Dinesh</dc:creator><description>I would like to hear more about this subject - what not to say about WEB 2.0.</description><guid isPermaLink="true">http://opensource.arrowhand.com/2006/12/05/vcs-rule.aspx#comment-339910</guid><pubDate>Sat, 05 May 2007 18:53:45 GMT</pubDate></item><item><title>Comment on Linux is just imitation</title><link>http://opensource.arrowhand.com/2007/01/18/linux-is-just-immitation.aspx#comment-239316</link><dc:creator>Colin Hope-Murray</dc:creator><description>I am not sure why Mr Delaney fancied that he would be blasted, since toasting seems more appropriate. Claiming that Microsoft is innovative and Linux is a simulacrum or pale imitation of the Redmond OS is a bit of the kettle calling the pot black. Any computer historian could point out all the adoptions and imitations that have brought Windows to what it is today. Does VMS, Vines, and SMB ring a bell or two to name a few.  And who could forget how long Microsoft eschewed a browser let alone making it the predominant user interface with IE after Netscape/Mozilla had led the way.  &lt;br&gt; &lt;br&gt;So I can only take his ludicrous comments with a pinch of salt.  However the point here is not who has the upper hand or who has the corner in innovation.  More important by far is the notion that innovation prospers on a bedrock of previous hard gained knowledge and standardization.  World scientists base their breakthrough discoveries on mathematical proofs and models that stretch back 4000 years.  Equally they challenge and stretch the scientfic method endlessly creating new frontiers, modifying and or rejecting previous scientific notions when they no longer make sense.&lt;br&gt; &lt;br&gt;I dont think there is any doubt that Microsoft is one of the forces of innovation, but they dont have a monopoly and in reality stand in the shadows of innovations in the world of Open Source (ie not just Linux) and innovations like Chat(Jabber), browsers (Motif/X), Wikis and others. Again it is not just Open Source, Apples innovation sit on MAC/OS which itself is a derivative of BSD Unix. The list is endless but I hope the point is made.  It doesnt really matter who is in the lead, what matters is that there is a constant flow of innovation, and that yesterday's best innovations become today's commodities inspiring and supporting human creativity.  It is therefor in everyone's interest (including Microsoft) to contribute to the growing foundation of computer standards.&lt;br&gt; &lt;br&gt;It was interesting to see Mr Delaney pour scorn on Mono as a pale imitation of Microsoft's .NET capabilities.  For Microsoft is one of the great proponents and supporters of Mono, helping to define the capability and recently reaching an agreement with Novell (the current owners of the code).  Microsoft are wise enough to foresee that their revenues are best served with their applications (Office, Enterprise Server etc), and if Linux now comprises more than 30% of the server market, they should not be excluded from running in that environment.  Mono offers a means to extend their business not to take it away.  Microsoft sees the value of joint innovation, perhaps Mr Delaney would be able to see the same if he could only peer through his Windows on the world.</description><guid isPermaLink="true">http://opensource.arrowhand.com/2007/01/18/linux-is-just-immitation.aspx#comment-239316</guid><pubDate>Tue, 30 Jan 2007 21:56:37 GMT</pubDate></item></channel></rss>