On Mon, 10 Oct 2011 09:55:08 -0700, Darren New wrote:

> On 10/9/2011 21:42, Jim Henderson wrote:
>  > Are you sure about that?
> 
> Pretty sure. Certainly people like suing Microsoft more than they like
> suing open source projects. :-)

You haven't been following the legal battles against Android and the 
extortion Microsoft has engaged in over supposed 'patent infringements' 
Linux has on Microsoft patents.

Something Microsoft rattles a lot of sabers over, but which they refuse 
to be specifically precise about *which* patents are involved, because OSS 
developers would work around that.

>> If Acrobat Reader crashed a Windows box, it would be Adobe's problem
>> regardless of if Microsoft distributed the file or if they got it from
>> Adobe.
> 
> Yet, oddly, people blame Windows when a video driver crashes. Fancy
> that.

Odd that nobody's ever sued Microsoft over that (at least not that I've 
heard of), but somehow there's a threat of that happening with Acrobat 
Reader, apparently.

>> But a "repository" for Windows is just a "download" site.  It doesn't
>> include actual software management elements per se.
> 
> The management elements are built into the software you download. That's
> why, for example, you have things like "Programs\Common Files" and
> "Add/Remove Programs" and things like that.
> 
> Now, yes, the fact that each program manages its own means you have to
> deal with legacy software repositories, so it doesn't always work as
> cleanly as it might. DOOM still installs to C:\DOOM or some such.
> However, there are actual software management elements available, *if*
> you want to make use of them. Many small projects don't.

Installation directories aren't "software management elements" - things 
like dependency resolution are.

Jim

Post a reply to this message