Name: Anonymous 2012-05-19 16:52
Let's not even go into how kludge-ridden x86 is and the prefix bytes and segments and all that Z80 compatibility crap. This is just about the licensing. Some ``free software'' folks are perfectly happy with using x86 and giving Intel more money, instead of using a truly open architecture like SPARC (GPL licensed). Intel fans mention AMD and VIA (who both have a limited-time license from Intel) as some kind of proof that x86 is ``open''. It's safe to say that the Windows platform is more open because ReactOS and WINE (which are both unaffiliated with Microsoft) can run Windows software without their developers being sued by Microsoft. How can someone who claims to support free software advocate using non-free hardware from a monopolist that played the same dirty tactics with PC manufacturers on AMD and non-x86 manufacturers that Microsoft played on OS/2 and *nix?