A Letter to the Gnome Foundation

,----[ Quote ]
| Having Gnome team members promoting the agenda of its main opponent, however,
| is not only counter-productive but also reflects negatively on the project
| and its credibility. GNOME is supporting its main opponent by explicitly
| participating in the official Ecma / ISO process; by participating informally
| at the conferences; and, presumably, by participating inside of actual
| development. It seems that Gnome is becoming Microsoft’s catspaw to damage
| and slow down open source and open standards.
|
| [...]
|
| For example, one high profile team member can cause a lot of trouble for
| Gnome, especially when promoting proprietary technologies in opposition to
| open source and open standards. Quotes like, “Time to play with C#, ASP.NET
| and some nifty toys (you can make almost Windows feel like Linux now)” seem
| to be promoting themes advanced by bloggers at Gnome’s (and open standards’)
| main antagonist, Microsoft.
`----

http://fanaticattack.com/2007/a-lett...oundation.html

More on the 'traitor'. It's a good thing that some people cover that serious
issue. Time for the FSF to give some people a good boot? Who do they work for?


Related:

Microsoft's Open-Source Trap for Mono

,----[ Quote ]
| If you do, you're nibbling on the cheese of a trap that will eventually snap
| shut on you and kill up your program and quite possibly your job and
| finances. *
`----

http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1895,2191754,00.asp


Is .NET on GNU/Linux a Trojan Horse?

,----[ Quote ]
| There were two basic propositions in my mind on how could they hurt Free
| Software.
|
| * 1. Copyright threat? -- If Mono stuff is under a Free Software
| license, once Microsoft or Novell change the licensing terms
| over the Free .NET implementation we can just fork away. This
| is where my trust into Free Software licenses comes into play.
| * 2. Software patents threat? -- Nothing new, there is patent
| saber rattling already and no software is safe from patents anyway.
`----

http://www.libervis.com/article/is_n...a_trojan_horse


C'mon, Miguel... tell us this is not true!

,----[ Quote ]
| Come on, Miguel! Please tell us this is not what you said. This must be a
| forgery. Google must have f+cked up with its archive. Microsoft hackers must
| have cracked the hosting server. Or your email account, and they posted under
| your name. Or you didn't mean it. You had a terrible headache that Wednesday
| night. You thought it's April Fool's Day, and it was a good joke. You just
| wanted to test if it gets noticed.
|
| Whatever. Just tell us that it is not what you really think about OOXML.
`----

http://www.kdedevelopers.org/node/2985


Miguel, Mono and Microsoft

,----[ Quote ]
| is Mono's role in the deal that of a hook to make customers write
| .NET applications because they can be run on Linux - only to find
| later on that they are armless or legless because of a change in
| the .NETspecifications, a change which Microsoft decides not to
| make public?
|
| [...]
|
| And here we have an individual who decides to replicate one of
| the proprietary company's development environments - for reasons
| best known to him alone - and keeps telling people that the reason
| he's doing it is so that he can pull people over from the
| proprietary company's side to his side!!!
`----

http://www.itwire.com.au/index.php?o...81&Itemid=1091


Miguel de Icaza: "The Microsoft / Novell partnership should have included a
technical Mono/.NET collaboration"

,----[ Quote ]
| Also, another thing that rubbed people the wrong way was the promise
| to the community. And part of the problem with the current promise
| is that it was an important consideration as part of the deal but
| they did not get the right wording in place on time. Folks on both
| companies are trying to improve this to actually mean something
| meaningful.
`----

http://derstandard.at/?id=2818611&_index=0


Miguel de Icaza: The EU Prosecutors are Wrong.

,----[ Quote ]
| If Microsoft had produced 760 pages (the size of ODF) as the
| documentation for the ".doc", ".xls" and ".ppt" that lacked for
| example the formula specification, wouldn't people justly demand
| that the specification was incomplete and was useless?
|
| I would have to agree at that point with the EU that not enough
| information was available to interoperate with Microsoft Office.
|
| If anything, if I was trying to interoperate with Microsoft
| products, I would request more, not less.
`----

http://tirania.org/blog/archive/2007/Jan-30.html