Since when is this about releasing code? I thought MS was only supposed to release full API specs to allow for compatibility. Forcing them to release code sounds quite anti-capitalist.
That's a good point. My guess is it's all about incrementalism. First the APIs, then the code. Pretty soon EU will force them to stop charging for access to the code as it discriminates against the small/individual developers.
You're only now realizing that the EU is anti-capitalist?
"thought MS was only supposed to release full API specs to allow for compatibility. Forcing them to release code sounds quite anti-capitalist.
"
I remember the hoo-haw about the Windows API specifications clear back in the 16-bit days. I made extensive use of the Developer's kit back then. One of the things that it did was to warn developers that certain calls to certain .dll libraries might not be supported in future versions.
I paid close attention to that, and always followed whatever MSFT considered "best practice." Guess what? The old 16-bit apps I did still run perfectly, and they weren't simple stuff. But I followed the rules carefully.
Sometimes MSFT didn't follow the rules in its own apps, and used some undocumented calls. I suppose that was a minor advantage to them, but not very much of one.
Software that followed the rules did just fine. I still use an old version of Ami Professional, a 16-bit app, for a couple of tasks in XP. It still works perfectly, too, and boy is it fast, compared to the current version of Word.
I have to agree, if that is what is now at issue here. We don't need MS-Windows source code. Who would want that buggy conglomeration of kludges anyway? It's the APIs that are important for interoperability. I don't want to run Microsoft software even if someone is able to look at their code. I prefer stuff that actually works.
No no no. It's always been about the documentation. MS released some 12,000 pages of specs, but it was inadequate or undecipherable and EUC told MS to go back and rework it. Now MS says 'screw the docs' and dumps a load of source code (for licensing, which means MS gets paid for it) and throws in 500 hours of tech support. This is Microsoft's idea.
I wouldn't want to be a developer who has to look at that code and then find out that I'm "tainted" under the license terms and that I can't work on my project anymore.