Dot Not Use This Version of Ruby

Dr. Roy Schestowitz

2008-03-17 10:58:21 UTC
Modified: 2008-03-17 10:58:21 UTC

Microsoft 'extending' Ruby with .NOT [sic]

Among the good news today is the fact that Apache continues to gain, despite Microsoft's attempts to game the system. At the moment, Microsoft tries to snatch Apache away from GNU/Linux and put it on top of Windows instead [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6].

GNOME text Performance tweaks is one thing, but what if Microsoft 'extended' software or languages its own way just as it did with Java? The news today comes from the Register and it speaks about the .NET-oriented version of Ruby. You might still recall the recent news about a project dying/being merged so that developers fall under Microsoft's wing (or wrath). Here is the latest:

Microsoft hopes to deliver the .NET-tuned implementation of the phenomenally popular Ruby, IronRuby 1.0, by the end of this year.

We wrote about Ruby in this context on several occasions in the past [1, 2, 3, 4]. Always remember that Microsoft wants Ruby developers to be Windows-dependent, Microsoft-dependent, Microsoft licence-dependent and it wants to deprive rival platforms. It remains a selfish gesture whose purpose is only to serve Microsoft. Nothing has ever changed at Redmond, except pretense. ⬆

"Don’t encourage new, cross-platform Java classes, especially don’t help get great Win 32 implementations written/deployed. [...] Do encourage fragmentation of the Java classlib space."

--Ben Slivka, Microsoft

Comments

Logan

2008-03-17 16:59:49

"Microsoft ‘extending’ Ruby with .NOT [sic]"

Bet yet: .NYET (russian for NO)
Roy Schestowitz

2008-03-17 20:58:57

Yeah, I came across this one before. :-)

Ironically, the name also gives away its role as an embrace, extend and extinguish ambition (replacing the Web). See this good interview with timbl (from yesterday):

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/7299875.stm
Josh Charles

2008-03-18 13:20:43

Wow, you really are some conspiracy nut.

Your conclusion that "Microsoft wants Ruby developers to be Windows-dependent, Microsoft-dependent, Microsoft licence-dependent and it wants to deprive rival platforms" is not supported by the evidence at all.

FAIL!
Victor Soliz

2008-03-18 16:36:04

Your claim that there's no evidence is contradicted by evidence.

Of course that's what Microsoft wants I could deliver you simple quotes like "I'd like all open source to run on top of windows" ~ Steve Ballmer, but that's way too easy.

There mere fact that MS is pushing it on .net is enough evidence, regardless of any attempts to trivialize or minimize it .
Roy Schestowitz

2008-03-18 19:30:25

Wow, you really are some conspiracy nut.

It's a fact, not a conspiracy or a speculation. We sometimes make speculations, but this is hardly one of them.
Niklas Brzesinski

2008-03-18 21:39:54

We already know that you have no evidence; Jeff Waugh and others easily blew your cover there. It's all just incongruous quotes, hearsay and speculation of the 'don't you see the pattern?' kind. I wouldn't call you a 'conspiracy nut', but a tad misguied and hugely obsessive you certainly are.
Roy Schestowitz

2008-03-18 21:55:00

Well, apparently, the "misguied and hugely obsessive" includes the likes of Bruce Perens too. Got this one some hours ago:

I need you to help me protect Open Source. Would you please visit http://techp.org/p/7/ read the message there, and sign it?

If you would like to discuss this with me directly, please email or call 510-984-1055.

Many Thanks

Bruce Perens -- Bruce Perens / 1563 Solano Ave. / PMB 349 / Berkeley CA 94707 USA / 510-984-1055

Mind the comments next to my signature.

Dot Not Use This Version of Ruby

Comments

Recent Techrights' Posts