The "stinking truth".

[Mikey]

> I apologize for any feather-ruffling; not my intention.  I think we just
> have a simple misunderstanding here.

Absolutely not.  I tried to write my original email several times
before I settled on TRYING to ruffle feathers to try to prove a point,
so if I didn't ruffle any then I suck.

Apparently I don't understand the state of things, because it was my
understanding that the MC engine was generally sufficient for what
we're doing.  At least the second part, about the IDE, is correct.
Obviously by "open source" I don't mean you can license it or use it
or whatever, but you can hack it, thus the source for the IDE is open,
i.e. interpreted, and the engine still operates if you change it.  To
repeat, I thought that the crux of the engine was open source (in this
case, OS means that you can get the source and compile it for
yourself).

You're absolutely correct that referring to M$ instead of MS is doing
exactly what I was preaching against, and it is behavior that I do not
tolerate from vendors.  In technical discussions, though, it is, IMHO
easier to identify than MS, because there is no known (to me anyway)
alternative meaning to the abbreviation, so I have taken to using it
when referring to that firm.