<?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: Moving home</title>
	<atom:link href="http://damieng.com/blog/2007/08/22/moving-home/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://damieng.com/blog/2007/08/22/moving-home?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=moving-home</link>
	<description>A .NET developer in silicon valley</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 25 Dec 2011 15:10:30 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: steve</title>
		<link>http://damieng.com/blog/2007/08/22/moving-home#comment-2049</link>
		<dc:creator>steve</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 24 Aug 2007 14:30:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://damieng.com/blog/archive/2007/08/22/moving-home.aspx#comment-2049</guid>
		<description>One thing I&#039;ve learned during my time in IT is that the best technology is not the most important thing, the number of people using it in a given context can make a huge difference. Betamax anyone?

I guess with .Net whilst there are a lot of people using it, the culture is such that there are less people releasing stuff openly than in environments that are themselves open and thus it&#039;s an established part of the culture. Microsoft never really promotes an &#039;openness&#039; and seems happy to alter the API / patterns however they like, whenever they like, whatever helps drive their own products. I think this sets a tone that ripples around the community.

Java is a funny one - whilst it was proprietary tech it still had an &#039;open&#039; culture because of the vendor independence and the long-running Java Community Process (JCP) that let experienced people influence the API direction. I think that led directly or indirectly to a large number of quality open source projects, like Hibernate, Struts, Spring, Eclipse. I think this shows that even your tech doesn&#039;t need to be open so long as your process and attitude is (of course, Java is open too now), to promote the same thing out in the community.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>One thing I&#8217;ve learned during my time in IT is that the best technology is not the most important thing, the number of people using it in a given context can make a huge difference. Betamax anyone?</p>
<p>I guess with .Net whilst there are a lot of people using it, the culture is such that there are less people releasing stuff openly than in environments that are themselves open and thus it&#8217;s an established part of the culture. Microsoft never really promotes an &#8216;openness&#8217; and seems happy to alter the API / patterns however they like, whenever they like, whatever helps drive their own products. I think this sets a tone that ripples around the community.</p>
<p>Java is a funny one &#8211; whilst it was proprietary tech it still had an &#8216;open&#8217; culture because of the vendor independence and the long-running Java Community Process (JCP) that let experienced people influence the API direction. I think that led directly or indirectly to a large number of quality open source projects, like Hibernate, Struts, Spring, Eclipse. I think this shows that even your tech doesn&#8217;t need to be open so long as your process and attitude is (of course, Java is open too now), to promote the same thing out in the community.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

