"John Bokma" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> So you think that MS, based on something that might (or might not
> happen) somewhere in a future, burned a lot of money?
By the way, this is based on the same flawed premise that a lot of
post-Y2K griping was based on. It went like this, "wow, we get all concerned
and spent all this money on a problem that never even happened". Well,
perhaps it didn't happen because we were all concerned and spent all this
money on it.
It is still a realistic possibility that operating systems will be
commoditized and something other than the end-user's OS will be the target
for most software development. It could be the language (like Java), the
server (like the guts of web-based applications), or the browser (like the
UI of web-base applications).
Microsoft's current stance is to prevent this from happening if they
can. If they can't, then they'll try to make sure that whatever they can't
stop has Microsoft at the heart of it whether that's by "Microsoft
thin-client OS" or "Microsoft Java" or whatever.
By the way, if you read my other posts, you can see that I have no
anti-Microsoft bias. They have every right to have their vision of the
future of computing and to put their resources behind it. And it's hard to
find a company whose future vision doesn't include their products in some
important place. ;)
DS
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
