Great find, tinjaw! I tend to sidestep all that Mac sux — Linux sux — Microsoft sux chatter (I just hate it when Microsoft lies or buys their way out of stealing others' IP). I would think the frustration that devs have is a simple one: For the most part, you can only run Microsoft software on a Microsoft OS, forcing you to buy Windows, whether you need it or not. Otherwise, Microsoft intentioally builds its software so that it does not
play well with others. It's a company focused on shareholder profit, not standards.
My own antagonism toward Microsoft started back in 2003 just before Office 2003 was released. Then came WGA, OGA, the numerous restrictions built into Vista, along with its EULA restricting my future decisions on hardware upgrades to my system with regard to "device" changes, and that the promises of Vista are nowhere near the reality. I pretty much agree with Chris Pirillo on a lot of points about Vista. Office 2007 is another train wreck that could have been avoided. And add to it that it's more expensive than ever to run Microsoft software and to buy hardware for it. I now hear people bragging
about the $6000 they spent on their Vista systems. That's insane, or rather unsustainable — I shouldn't need an expensive system to run your software.
Microsoft wants to lock me into their software, and to handicap my data to their software, too. That's where I drew the line. I've been actively computing for more than 20 years, and my personal data is too valuable to be solely dependent on a corporation. I want that control
, and conversely, I don't want Microsoft to have it. I don't hate Microsoft per se, but it's not in my best interest
to continue my dependence on their software in the long term. I'd be interested in knowing what's in everyone's "development stack" of tools.
Just a refresher, this explains the free software side: http://www.gnu.org/p...losophy/free-sw.html