__/ [ John Bailo ] on Sunday 18 June 2006 06:35 \__
> Stephen Fairchild wrote:
>
>> Roy Schestowitz wrote:
>>
>>> | 10.No Microsoft Linux!: Microsoft could have and should have done its
>>> | own version of Linux. It could have bought a Linux distro vendor or
>>> | just christened some branch of Windows (with some Unix-compatibility
>>> | add-ons) as Microsoft Linux. By doing this, Microsoft could have thrown
>>> | a real monkey wrench into Linux companies' plans.
>>
>> Linus owns the trademark and would likely sue. How can you get away with
>> calling a software stack, Linux, without including the kernel?
>
> They would also have to explain to millions of customers who *got* the
> Facts, why they were doing such a thing.
Precisely. In the corporate market, it is rather hard to stock and promote
two competing products. It is defeating the purpose as one seems to compete
with oneself. When one brand is abandoned or forced exit from the market,
that's when an alternative can be introduced, at the expense of the -- shall
we call it -- predecessor. Windows has not yet been weakened sufficiently,
so this will not happen any time soon.
Best wishes,
Roy
--
Roy S. Schestowitz | Previous signature has been conceded
http://Schestowitz.com | GNU is Not UNIX ¦ PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
6:50am up 51 days 12:04, 12 users, load average: 0.25, 0.42, 0.67
http://iuron.com - proposing a non-profit search engine
|
|
