Getting offtopic [Evolution-hackers/encryption of MAPI]
David.Collier-Brown at canada.sun.com
Thu Aug 24 12:10:44 GMT 2000
"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.
> > 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!)
[Luke's book is at
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
More information about the samba-technical