Seth Schoen takes a look at Microsoft's response to iTunes for Windows (I discussed MS's response here: Microsoft on iTunes for Windows) and finds Microsoft's declaration of higher numbers of compatible systems as compared to Apple's iTunes to be risible (Madness):

Interoperability isn't a popularity contest. It's about the answer to this question: What does a prospective implementer have to do in order to make the implementation work? "Read the public specification" is the right answer. Answers involving signing contracts and paying money are the wrong answer. Microsoft and Apple both have media formats with the fatal defect of an attempt to require contractual privity with implementers. (In the free world, that attempt will fail, but that's little comfort to us in the United States.) Here Fester is suggesting that Microsoft's media format is obviously preferable because more implementers have signed Microsoft's license than Apple's.

His argument is not logic. It is Vae victis! [Link added]

via A Copyfighter's Musings