Board:   [DeveloperNet] Unix/Linux Development
Subject: Microsoft vs. open-source
From:    Nightfox
Date:    Wed Apr 07, 2010 08:51

  Re: Microsoft vs. open-source
  By: Rassilon to Nightfox on Wed Apr 07 2010 13:48:00

 >  > I'm not really sure what it meansto be an "authorized Windows developer"
 >  > except perhaps certified by Microsoft as conforming to their UI standards
 >  > and trusted by Microsoft to not do anything malicious perhaps..

 > That's exactly what it is...

But you don't *have* to be an "authorized Windows developer" in order to
develop software for Windows.  There are plenty of software companies and
Windows developers who I'm sure don't have that title.

Nightfox

---
 ■ Synchronet ■ Digital Distortion: digitaldistortionbbs.com
.