3
Votes
Again.
Wait… What do you mean that Skype for Asterisk isn’t actually open-source? That it is never part of the Asterisk source package? And that you need to pay in order to use it?
Preposterous.
© 2009 TM Repository
Comments
I can see two problems in the article:
1- Skype was NEVER good to FOSS, period. Anyone claiming Microsoft is “ruining Skype for FOSS” should really get a lesson in history (or better yet, a reading comprehension lesson).
2- If you remove all references to “open source” from the article, he does have something resembling a point. If Microsoft promised to keep supporting non-Microsoft platforms, then dropped support for a platform (be it Asterisk, Mac OS X, Android, or anything else), then they broke their promise… Except, Microsoft doesn’t own Skype yet. This just proves my first point, it’s Skype itself that hates you. Whether it’s under Microsoft’s umbrella or not won’t change anything.
Considering how much FOSS entities like SJVN have been railing against Skype in the past, you’d think it was pretty clear that Skype wasn’t an open platform.
Since they don’t buy anything, why would they understand the difference between the actions of a company before it is bought and the actions of the same company after it is bought?
Gosh, that sounds complicated. I think I’ll restrict myself to logging bugs in the X.Org stack from now on.
Bwahahahahahhahahahahaha!
Is Skype actually bought? AFAIK this buyout didn’t even pass all regulations – not to say any integration with existing Microsoft management/engineering.
You must be signed in to leave comments.