>Rewrites are difficult and expensive.

I saw you write just the opposite in other threads - glad to see we have the same view, and maybe experience, on this crucial issue

>>.Net is more like an expected way for Microsoft to cut development costs (I write 'expected' because there are so few examples of successful software rewrites) rather than an outstanding added value for its customers;
>Can you explain this a bit?

explain what? I'm a bit lost in thread

>They did try to push this stuff but the market as a whole didn't accept them. In the end, more fully supporting standards is better for both MS and users.

standards are written by a committee of vendors where the strongest holds the pen.
instead of simply saying "use these cool proprietary features", ms could have developed compelling services based on these features to keep ahead of the standards - and I must confess I often thought it'd turn out that way.