The Notebook Review forums were hosted by TechTarget, who shut down them down on January 31, 2022. This static read-only archive was pulled by NBR forum users between January 20 and January 31, 2022, in an effort to make sure that the valuable technical information that had been posted on the forums is preserved. For current discussions, many NBR forum users moved over to NotebookTalk.net after the shutdown.
I don't like it because I think it is on thin ice license-wise. That is, it is not clear that Microsoft cannot at some point decide that it is infringing on their licenses and start taking legal action. I know that the people who develop Mono say that this won't happen but they have not demonstrated to
my satisfaction that they are safe from Microsoft. I've heard just about every argument and found none convincing.
Thomas, please use Google and go read the arguments on both sides of the issue instead of making a knee-jerk post. Nobody is saying that the issue is whether or not languages are patentable.
From the last article it's sad to see that we rely on companies to advocate for what we all should advocate for. Open source access to information. At least it's somewhat positive to note that HP, Apple and Sun, (probably among others), are standing up for a royalty-free licensing framework for the web. However, we all should take little comfort in the fact that most companies are doing this not because they believe in Open Source, but instead because with IBM and Microsoft moving forward as patent juggernauts, they're likely to have to pay in the future too.
From a net development perspective, I would run from anything that smelled like it was patentable, if for no other reason than to make the point that we don't need them. Mind you this is coming from someone who does not develop for a living.. Still..
Problems? See this thread at archive.org.
