Getting offtopic [Evolution-hackers/encryption of MAPI]

[David Collier-Brown]

"Christopher R. Hertel" wrote:
> We have, in fact, asked Microsoft for the IDL interface specifications.
> The answer was reasonable but non-committal.  The issue is being handled
> via the SNIA/CIFS documentation working group.

and
> > Remember, for companies like Microsoft, their 'intellectual property' is
> > part of the equation of the worth of the entire company.
> 
> Yes.  ...and there is no reason that they would or should release such
> information while it is legal for them to keep it private.

	Actually there are reason pro and con, and they will 
	differ depending on what department you're in!

	Legal will probably find reasons to conserve/preserve
	  the short-term business advantage by arguing protection
        Marketing will worry about annoying customers and regulatory
	  bodies, causing a longer-term disadvantage to the firm, and
	Engineering will look for reasons to make their work at
	  least a de-facto standard, if not an RFC.

	Therefor you can expect to hear the same company say
	at least two mutually contradictory things about the
	same question on the same day.  And it doesn't matter
	if the company is Microsoft, Sun or H-P: if it's big
	enough it'll have internal conflicts.


	Coming back to the question of publication of IDL
	specifications, encouraging the proponents of release
	and politely disagreeing with its detractors is
	probably wise... as is publishing books about one's
	analyses of the protocols (Thanks, Luke!)

--dave
[Luke's book is at
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1578701503/qid%3D967118786/104-2433721-1127907
]
-- 
David Collier-Brown,  | Always do right. This will gratify some people
185 Ellerslie Ave.,   | and astonish the rest.        -- Mark Twain
Willowdale, Ontario   | //www.oreilly.com/catalog/samba/author.html
Work: (905) 415-2849 Home: (416) 223-8968 Email: davecb at canada.sun.com