I agree, for the most part. I do think that this is evidence of an unwillingness to cater to the needs/desires of the Linux community, and therefore should be made public. However, there is no evidence that I have seen of direct action to exclude, only of intentional inaction not to include. However subtle, there is a difference. One reeks of malice, the other of apathy.
Either way, I'll spend my money buying things from a company who is interested in supporting and complying with accepted standards, and will do so even more happily with a vendor who is actively interested in supporting Linux.
Bookmarks