[ Thanks to Kelly
McNeill for this link. ]
“When Microsoft’s recent investment in Corel was announced, one
part of the deal confused me. The contract specified that Corel
must port .NET to Linux if Microsoft should ever asked them to do
so.”
“Does Microsoft want .NET on Linux, or not? If they do, why not
just require the port as a part of the contract? Otherwise why
bother including the addendum to the contract? I thought it odd
that a shrewdly managed company would leave such an important part
of its overall strategy undecided. Gates himself has suggested that
.NET was a “bet the company” initiative. How could they be so
unsure?”
“In my opinion, a .NET for Linux didn’t seem like such a good
idea in the first place. If Linux had .NET, then the OS would
become a much more viable competitor to Windows as it would be able
to run the company’s Office software. Is there a reason why
Microsoft might want to weaken Windows that way?”