<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Microsoft stuns Linux world, submits sou&#8230;</title>
	<atom:link href="http://cafyn.com/e/301/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://cafyn.com/e/301</link>
	<description>Like Twitter, just longer.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 10 Feb 2010 21:32:22 +0800</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: kahwee</title>
		<link>http://cafyn.com/e/301/comment-page-1#comment-150</link>
		<dc:creator>kahwee</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 25 Jul 2009 06:47:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cafyn.com/e/301#comment-150</guid>
		<description>I think it&#039;s likely Microsoft would come out with it&#039;s own Linux-variant but it&#039;s unlikely Microsoft would move Windows from what it already is today. Windows can still remain Windows and Microsoft can still move into Linux the Red Hat way.

I can imagine it&#039;s an option that they&#039;re evaluating since many governments are moving into open source operating system and Microsoft is most eligible for a share in the open source enterprise business. They&#039;ve almost got nothing to lose here and can advertise greater interoperability and still place their commercial titles into the open source Linux. Nothing but pride is preventing Microsoft from forking Ubuntu as a base to create Microsoft Open Source Operating System 2010 Enterprise Edition.

So I say why not? Haha, the GNU fans would curse and swear though.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think it&#8217;s likely Microsoft would come out with it&#8217;s own Linux-variant but it&#8217;s unlikely Microsoft would move Windows from what it already is today. Windows can still remain Windows and Microsoft can still move into Linux the Red Hat way.</p>
<p>I can imagine it&#8217;s an option that they&#8217;re evaluating since many governments are moving into open source operating system and Microsoft is most eligible for a share in the open source enterprise business. They&#8217;ve almost got nothing to lose here and can advertise greater interoperability and still place their commercial titles into the open source Linux. Nothing but pride is preventing Microsoft from forking Ubuntu as a base to create Microsoft Open Source Operating System 2010 Enterprise Edition.</p>
<p>So I say why not? Haha, the GNU fans would curse and swear though.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: uzyn</title>
		<link>http://cafyn.com/e/301/comment-page-1#comment-146</link>
		<dc:creator>uzyn</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 20 Jul 2009 21:14:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cafyn.com/e/301#comment-146</guid>
		<description>OK you beat me to this. Wanted to blog about this too and since you&#039;ve done it, I&#039;ll just add my comment I originally wished to append here:

Could we be seeing a new UNIX-based OS from Microsoft? Just like how Apple did with the transition from OS 9 to OS X.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>OK you beat me to this. Wanted to blog about this too and since you&#8217;ve done it, I&#8217;ll just add my comment I originally wished to append here:</p>
<p>Could we be seeing a new UNIX-based OS from Microsoft? Just like how Apple did with the transition from OS 9 to OS X.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
