My BS meter just pegged
|
| Author | Content |
|---|---|
| herzeleid May 06, 2007 10:07 PM EDT |
What "customer demand" would that be? Interoperability BTW can be easily achieved if microsoft simply adheres to standards. No need for any phony patent protection racket, or silly linux-on-windoze virtualization schemes, thanks. |
| tracyanne May 06, 2007 10:56 PM EDT |
Quoting:Interoperability BTW can be easily achieved if microsoft simply adheres to standards. But the cash cow is harder to milk. |
| jimf May 07, 2007 1:24 AM EDT |
The recent dealings with our old friend MS had many distrustful of Novell. I was willing to give them the benefit of the doubt, but, the latest unholy alliance with Novell, MS, and Dell has convinced me it's true. I don't expect that the Linux community is going to be looking favorably at any of this, and, rightfully so. I think it stinks. |
| helios May 07, 2007 1:32 AM EDT |
Did anyone here, and I am being serious...did anyone here think that Microsoft was going to let Dell offer Linux on any of their top-tier production machines without "proper supervision"? I am not surprised at the move as much as I am the speed in which it was made. Now...watch carefully. The next move they make will redefine audacious. Microsoft has just put into play a self-fulfilling prophesy for Dell. "See, we told you nothing good would come from that Linux bunch. Now you get in the car and come home with Daddy...I'll fix you some hot chocolate and we can talk about it..." h |
| tracyanne May 07, 2007 2:07 AM EDT |
Looks like I won't be buying that DELL computer after all. |
| jezuch May 07, 2007 2:49 AM EDT |
Quoting:"See, we told you nothing good would come from that Linux bunch. Quoting:Looks like I won't be buying that DELL computer after all. Now THAT's self-fulfilling... |
| hkwint May 07, 2007 4:19 AM EDT |
Indeed, I remember I yesterday said "Microsoft decides which (interview) questions Dell may answer or not". It seems these questions to be answered by Dell, include demand questions; Microsoft tells which demands may be met and which not. Also, I remember Microsoft was angry, because OEM's 'should answer to demands', not 'create' demands. However, Microsoft may create demands, and it tries to create demand for Novell "Windows tax" Linux instead of just 'plain whatever-distro Linux'. I will buy Dell neither, neither will I use Suse. (LXer member) cyber_rigger was very right in his - now infamous - thread 'Boycot HP, Dell etc., but it took me some time to see it. BTW the "boycot Dell" thread: http://lxer.com/module/forums/t/15999/ |
| SFN May 07, 2007 4:20 AM EDT |
This is exactly the kind of post to which JohnPatDell needs to respond. |
| jdixon May 07, 2007 4:34 AM EDT |
> ...to which JohnPatDell needs to respond. Don't hold your breath waiting for a response which actually says anything. JPD doesn't set Dell policy, his job is PR. |
| henke54 May 07, 2007 4:37 AM EDT |
some kind of a 'thumbscrew' on redhat? -->Quoting:As Sumner Lemon noted in PC Advisor, Dell said it would focus on corporate customers who aren’t already using Linux – as in Red Hat. Dell has been a long-time and major supporter of Red Hat Linux.http://www.localtechwire.com/business/local_tech_wire/opinio... Quoting:It's now clear why Dell decided to sell Ubuntu on some machines; I'd like to see the people who lauded this move, now come out and criticise Dell for snuggling up to Novell. They have no foot on which to stand.http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=435615 |
| SFN May 07, 2007 4:53 AM EDT |
Quoting:Don't hold your breath waiting for a responseI never do. Quoting:JPD doesn't set Dell policy, his job is PR.That's exactly why he should respond. Clearly the public (in this case, us) are not happy. As a PR person, he needs to deal with us on this. Remember number6x's post from here: http://lxer.com/module/forums/t/25168/ ? The general point there was don't try to BS us. This is an opportunity to communicate with us and not BS us. |
| richo123 May 07, 2007 5:13 AM EDT |
>That's exactly why he should respond. Clearly the public (in this case, us) are not happy. As a PR person, he needs to deal with us on this. I am with jdixon on this one. Dell pays people to do PR not develop logical arguments. Propaganda != Rational discourse. He has proably figured out already that we are a lost cause. |
| SFN May 07, 2007 5:17 AM EDT |
So, rather than speak the truth, spew lies or come say something that falls in the middle, the person they pay to do public relations shouldn't say anything at all? I want that job. |
| bigg May 07, 2007 5:18 AM EDT |
Pardon my ignorance, but what does anything in the article have to do with Dell selling Ubuntu desktops and laptops? |
| SFN May 07, 2007 5:27 AM EDT |
Dell, Microsoft's biggest bedmate, claims that they will start selling PC's with Linux pre-installed. Shortly afterwards, they announce that they will join an effort that squeezes money out of users and into the pockets of Microsoft. I would think that has the potential to influence many people's decision to buy these PCs. |
| Scott_Ruecker May 07, 2007 5:35 AM EDT |
JPD may no longer have a job... |
| SFN May 07, 2007 5:36 AM EDT |
Do tell. |
| Abe May 07, 2007 6:05 AM EDT |
Quoting:Dell Joins Microsoft and Novell Collaboration Exactly like I predicted here on LXer when Dell announced pre-loading Linux on its desktops. Now, keep in mind that, Dell wouldn't do this without the agreement and blessing of Conanical. PCLinuxOS is BEST and hopefully will stay out of all of this shenanigan. |
| bigg May 07, 2007 6:38 AM EDT |
As I read this thread, the only thing I can conclude is that Rob Enderle is right. It is very, very stupid for any major hardware vendor to enter the Linux market. I seriously doubt that Dell is going to give the Linux community the right of veto over all business deals. > PCLinuxOS is BEST You mean that Linux distribution that is a big-time distributor of Microsoft software? Not only do they give you Microsoft software, they give it to you for free. Tells us what they think about open source. > Now, keep in mind that, Dell wouldn't do this without the agreement and blessing of Conanical. I'm sure Michael Dell gave Mark Shuttleworth a call and asked his permission to sign the contract. It's really not complicated. If Dell offers the lowest price on Linux compatible hardware, buy from them. If not, then buy from someone else. You don't need to spend hundreds of hours connecting dots to put all the conspiracy theories together. |
| SFN May 07, 2007 6:41 AM EDT |
Quoting:It's really not complicated. If Dell offers the lowest price on Linux compatible hardware, buy from them. If not, then buy from someone else.It's simpler than that, even. If you want to buy from them, then do. If not, then don't. That's why this becomes an issue. Do their actions make you want to buy from them? |
| bigg May 07, 2007 6:46 AM EDT |
> That's why this becomes an issue. Do their actions make you want to buy from them? Their actions have no effect on my buying decision. The 'actions' I am concerned with are how much money I have to pull out of my bank account and the value I get for that money. I don't make my decisions based on whether or not they sell Novell products. |
| SFN May 07, 2007 6:47 AM EDT |
Then buy from them. Not everyone uses the same criteria to make their decisions. |
| bigg May 07, 2007 6:58 AM EDT |
@SFN: My point is that Dell is not going to be selling Linux for very long if they have to care about all of these other things. Windows users are not going to abandon Dell because they sell Ubuntu. Dell is entering into an agreement that has nothing (that we know, though I am sure there are many varieties of speculation out there) to do with them selling Ubuntu, and the immediate response here is "Boycott Dell!!!!" There's just no way any major hardware vendor will put up with that. |
| SFN May 07, 2007 7:03 AM EDT |
So people should buy what Dell is offering even if they don't want to because it's good for "the cause"? Is that what you're getting at? |
| tuxchick May 07, 2007 7:10 AM EDT |
Let's get back to the flagrant BS here, which is the alleged customer demand for interoperability and IP protection. Microsoft expends more resources foiling interoperability than it does developing decent software, and spends an equal amount trying to instill IP terror and paranoia everywhere. And yet Linux is the bad guy. And now we can add Dell to the list of protection racket accomplices? My head hurts. Though it is good to keep in mind that this is more evidence of the emptiness of Microsoft's armory, since they have amped up the bluster and head games. |
| bigg May 07, 2007 7:20 AM EDT |
> So people should buy what Dell is offering even if they don't want to because it's good for "the cause"? Is that what you're getting at? No, what I'm getting at is that Linux users apply, shall we say, 'peculiar' criteria when making purchase decisions. Those criteria make selling computers without Windows a dumb idea. > Microsoft expends more resources foiling interoperability than it does developing decent software, and spends an equal amount trying to instill IP terror and paranoia everywhere. Yes, these "interoperability" deals don't make a lot of sense to me, given that Linux and open source software are freely available to anyone. I don't understand how a deal is necessary or beneficial for customers. The strange thing is that Linux and Windows are most interoperable already, with a few exceptions like Office documents, and Microsoft could fix the problem without any interaction with Novell or anyone else. |
| tuxchick May 07, 2007 7:23 AM EDT |
" Microsoft could fix the problem without any interaction with Novell or anyone else." Precisely why I am so suspicious of these deals. MS' rhetoric is still very anti-FOSS. |
| SFN May 07, 2007 7:33 AM EDT |
Quoting:No, what I'm getting at is that Linux users apply, shall we say, 'peculiar' criteria when making purchase decisions.And in this case, the peculiar criteria would be whether or not they believe the seller assists Microsoft's efforts to squeeze Linux users? |
| bigg May 07, 2007 7:43 AM EDT |
> And in this case, the peculiar criteria would be whether or not they believe the seller assists Microsoft's efforts to squeeze Linux users? I don't want to get into the whole Novell/Microsoft debate again. Dell has been doing business with Microsoft for decades now. If you want to construct conspiracy theories, that's up to you. I'm just saying that no matter what Dell, HP, Gateway, Lenovo, or any other company does, the conspiracy theories will run rampant in the Linux community, and in a matter of minutes there will be a boycott. If Microsoft tried to exert even half the control the Linux community demands, Microsoft would be bankrupt in a month. There is nothing in the article that indicates "the seller assists Microsoft's efforts to squeeze Linux users?" |
| SFN May 07, 2007 7:49 AM EDT |
Quoting:There is nothing in the article that indicates "the seller assists Microsoft's efforts to squeeze Linux users?"Yes, you're right. There's nothing "in the article" that indicates that. I can't even begin to imagine a world where a press release from Microsoft would indicate such a thing. |
| bigg May 07, 2007 7:57 AM EDT |
> I can't even begin to imagine a world where a press release from Microsoft would indicate such a thing. And I can't imagine a day going by on LXer where there is not a conspiracy theory about how Microsoft is going to destroy Linux. The appropriate response would be to say, "We better keep our eyes open. It's possible Dell is working with Microsoft to hurt Linux." The response here is, "Dell is obviously working with Microsoft to destroy Linux. And because Dell is making deals with Canonical, that means we should boycott both Dell and Ubuntu. Dell selling Ubuntu was actually Microsoft's idea. Mark Shuttleworth is being paid by Microsoft to do the deal with Dell." |
| dcparris May 07, 2007 8:36 AM EDT |
Three things: (1) I'm with Dino - GNU/Linux is nearly invincible, if not actually invincible. It is highly unlikely that MS could actually destroy it. In order for Ballmer to destroy GNU/Linux he will need to resort to Hitler's tactics. Why? Because he may be able to push us around, but he would have to kill us in order to destroy us. And even then, there is still the issue of the GNU GPL. His only other option is to succeed in getting the three branches of government to overturn the GPL and all other FOSS licenses. And that would only impact the US. So GNU/Linux and FOSS will still survive. (2) I'll side with Bigg here. Keep your eyes open. Is Dell collaborating with MS? They have been from the beginning. What if they're loyalties are changing? What if, like any good business, they are simply expanding their offerings, albeit keeping to their primary line of business? The difference between Dell and your local car dealership is that Dell is not restricting their inventory to cars from collaborating manufacturers; they're offering software from competing developers. (3) I can't imagine Dell would ask Canonical for permission to sell SUSE boxes. They might have informed Canonical they were doing so, and Canonical probably has no real beef with that. But ask permission? I doubt it. If I run a business, I will be the one to decide who I buy may parts from. Unless I have signed some sort of exclusivity deal, I ain't asking anyone's permission, even if I give them a polite notice that I will distribute competitors products or software as well. |
| SFN May 07, 2007 8:56 AM EDT |
Quoting:I'll side with Bigg here. Keep your eyes open. Is Dell collaborating with MS? They have been from the beginning. What if they're loyalties are changing? What if, like any good business, they are simply expanding their offerings, albeit keeping to their primary line of business?Actually, I agree. That's why I said that JohnPatDell should respond. We need to hear Dell's story on this and add that along with any other information we get to the mix so that we can make an informed decision. As for the concept of destroying Linux, who brought that up? |
| dthacker May 07, 2007 9:08 AM EDT |
If I was selling a lot of corporate machines, I'd make sure that I had machines that would interact with the rest of the enterprise. Dell gets access to that capability through SuSE. If I found the low end of the market was costing me money instead on making me money, I'd abandon it. Microsoft just gave all it's low end support burden to Dell and Ubuntu. There is no conspiracy, just business as usual. Dave |
| dcparris May 07, 2007 9:59 AM EDT |
> As for the concept of destroying Linux, who brought that up? That's the general gist behind any conspiracy theories regarding MS and whoever. MS is out to trivialize/destroy GNU/Linux. They probably are, but can they succeed? I doubt it. Seriously. |
| devnet May 07, 2007 10:34 AM EDT |
Quoting:> PCLinuxOS is BEST Excuse me? Why don't you go out and get some information before you shoot your mouth off about something you obviously know nothing about. I tell you, you could have went all day without bad mouthing a linux distro in this thread...but you had to do it. Makes me wonder about your motives because it obviously isn't to strengthen. |
| SFN May 07, 2007 10:56 AM EDT |
I thought I had misunderstood that before. It really does say that, doesn't it? |
| bigg May 07, 2007 11:50 AM EDT |
> I thought I had misunderstood that before. It really does say that, doesn't it? Yes, it does. > Why don't you go out and get some information before you shoot your mouth off about something you obviously know nothing about. You completely missed my argument. Abe said PCLinuxOS is the best because they don't have deals with Microsoft. Yet they're distributing Windows Media codecs. Hence, a contradiction in his logic. I don't have to agree with anything I'm writing to show that someone else's logic is flawed. In fact, when you're demonstrating proof by contradiction, or reduction to absurdity, you don't agree with everything you are writing, by definition. You are quite sensitive about your favorite distribution, but that does not in any way imply that I am bashing any distribution. {Or maybe I am imagining things? Maybe Windows Media codecs don't come from Microsoft? You can't have it both ways. Either Microsoft is bad and has to be avoided, or it is good and should be embraced. If Novell did that, it would simply be more evidence that they do what Microsoft tells them to do.} |
| cjcox May 07, 2007 12:11 PM EDT |
First, let met assure you I don't like the deal with Microsoft (noting however that 99% of its detractor have NO IDEA what they're talking about). BUT... some here have suggested that this new deal with Dell is evil because Dell wouldn't be doing Linux if it weren't (somehow) Microsoft approved. HOWEVER, the fact is that Dell has been doing Linux on their server line for quite some time. And there's a very active internal Dell community on Linux. The recent deal with Ubuntu in response to Dell's survey about what was important to customers was paramount. You see it means that Dell is now realizing that there might be > 1% of its market base that is interested in Linux. While that may seem small.. it's a really big number (Dell often times moves more than half a million units in a month). The survey was about Linux support on the desktop, something that Dell has never seriously considered (well.. they may have looked at it in the past... but it was rapidly tossed out). So Dell customers would like to see Linux in a desktop fashion. Choosing Ubuntu first appeals to (probably) the majority of the requesters who are probably not decision makers, but rather just Dell enthusiasts. Nothing wrong with that. It's still a very large number. I knew that Novell wasn't going to stand still. Novell really wants to foster an enterprise desktop Linux market. Love Novell or hate Novell... the fact is that unlike other enterprise Linux players, Novell really believes their distribution is ready for enterprise desktops. These are exciting times. The idea that we'd (the Linux community) would somehow be better off without SUSE is simply ludicrous. It's like saying, I like blue, so let's kill off everything green. Linux has always been about offering freedom and choice. To view the Microsoft deal as somehow doing permanent damage to the GPL is just foolish. The GPL is strong. SUSE is still free. Novell didn't violate any terms of the GPL (though obviously GPLv3 has become centered around the idea of restricting patent holder's rights to Linux... we'll see how that pans out and whether or not free software developers can live with the idea of large business opting out of Linux). How is all of the Novell bashing benefiting Linux? It's not. In fact, it's very likely that it will push major businesses to another free OS that they already know and love, Solaris. People need to decide what the goal is. If the goal is to destroy SUSE, then destroy them... but I think our creativity could be used better somewhere else. All I know is that the Dell - Novell deal will result in MILLIONS of additional Linux users... if that's a bad thing, feel free to explain it. |
| SFN May 07, 2007 1:51 PM EDT |
Quoting:All I know is that the Dell - Novell deal will result in MILLIONS of additional Linux usersYou KNOW that? Interesting. I'm not even sure I believe that, let alone know it. EDIT: Oh and remember, that's not a Dell/Novell deal. It's a Dell/Microsoft deal. Just like it was a Novell/Microsoft deal. |
| hkwint May 07, 2007 2:45 PM EDT |
Quoting:If you want to buy from them, then do. If not, then don't. Quoting:No, what I'm getting at is that Linux users apply, shall we say, 'peculiar' criteria when making purchase decisions. Well, that basically is the same. The mentioned peculiar criteria make up if I want to buy from them or not. Actually, to me my own criteria are not that peculiar: -Dell sells Red Hat servers. Bonus-points to Dell -Dell sells Ubuntu computers. Bonus points to Dell -Dell sells Novell Linux computers. Novel Linux users pay Microsoft for IP, which I'd say is extortion, since the mentioned IP is not enforceable. At least not where I live. So minus points for Dell. In this scheme, conspiracy doesn't matter that much, it's the actions Dell takes which gives them bonus points or not. To me, that isn't peculiar. It's even the way marketing is designed to work: use ads to make the consumer give 'subliminal bonus points' to probuct / producer X. The amount of bonus points decides if I want to buy from them or not. If I want to buy from them, I do, If I don't want to buy from them, I mostly don't, unless it saves me a big amount of money. For example, I rather not buy Intel because they build plants on (internationally assumed) Palestinian territory. However, if the Core2duo is two times faster and two times as cheap as 'AMD whatever', the 'subliminal bonuspoint-system' is convoluted by the more instinctive 'bargain' brain-signal. Bigg, from your previous posts at LXer I know you don't use the bonus-point system and you don't hate Microsoft; you just go for the best deal. I wish I was like that, since it would make life simpler. For me however, Microsoft has earned far more minus points than bonus points (though I wasn't aware of that 'system' in the beginning, but since I write about Microsoft I am). Therefore, I won't buy Microsoft software, unless necessary, and I won't buy Dell hardware, unless it's really cheap and works with Gentoo or Sabayon. I don't mind using Windows-codecs e.a. that much, since there isn't an easy way for me to pay for those codecs for my Linux-distribution. If I could pay $5 to use it in a way which is convenient for me (NO creditcard, NO Paypal, just give me iDeal!). Thinking that money goes to Microsoft is ignorant, Microsoft pays billions of dollars to Philips, Sony, Matshushita, Victor. co., France Telecom and so on because those are the companies inventing those 'media formats' and earning the bucks, not Microsoft. |
| bigg May 07, 2007 4:04 PM EDT |
> Bigg, from your previous posts at LXer I know you don't use the bonus-point system and you don't hate Microsoft; you just go for the best deal. I wouldn't say I don't use a bonus-point system, for instance, if HP supported Tux500 and Dell didn't, I would be willing to pay a little extra for an HP/Compaq. All we know is that there was some kind of deal between Microsoft and Novell and Dell. We don't even know what kind of deal they made, yet everyone is ready to throw Dell under the bus. I can see the difficulty of any company trying to sell to Linux users: a news story comes out, nobody knows what is going on, yet the pitchforks are coming out of the closet. This sends a signal to HP and any other companies thinking about this market, and it's not a good signal. I'm not telling anyone how to buy computers. I'm just saying that Dell might be making a mistake. |
| azerthoth May 07, 2007 4:30 PM EDT |
Actually I think you had it right when you said "Nobody knows whats going on, yet the pitchforks are coming out of the closet." Seems alot of that going on lately. The real shock to me is that here we have a company that has been dealing with microsoft since ... oh forever and now that they have made another deal with them before they have even shipped their first "mainstream linux" box and the crowd is reaching for the torches. What part of the reality tree fell off and missed me on the way down? A company that does business with MS, still doing business with MS ... anyone else having a DUH moment? |
| Abe May 07, 2007 4:59 PM EDT |
Oh boy, this is going to be a long post! but that is OK since I didn't have time to respond earlier.Quoting:I seriously doubt that Dell is going to give the Linux community the right of veto over all business deals. We never expected that from any business, we are not the owners, we hold no stocks and most of all we are not interested. We just respond accordingly to any FOSS related business decisions made any company. Quoting:You mean that Linux distribution that is a big-time distributor of Microsoft software? Not only do they give you Microsoft software, they give it to you for free. Tells us what they think about open source. What software you are hinting about? codecs? Codecs are not software, they are merely format templates to encode/decode data, you must know that. MS codecs are necessary evil and PCLinuxOS makes them available to break the lock-in MS uses to break compatibility with other systems. I personally applaud PLClinuxOS for making them available. They are extending the computer freedom we all enjoy. Quoting:If Dell offers the lowest price on Linux compatible hardware, buy from them. If not, then buy from someone else. Quoting:The 'actions' I am concerned with are how much money I have to pull out of my bank account and the value I get for that money. Cost is not on my list of who I should or shouldn't buy hardware from. There are other criteria that are more important to me. Some of them are product quality, quality of service, business trust worthiness, and most of all whether the company respects my freedom or not. Quoting:You don't need to spend hundreds of hours connecting dots to put all the conspiracy theories together.[quote] May be 'peculiar' to you, others think otherwise, and who says you are right? Quoting:Yes, these "interoperability" deals don't make a lot of sense to me, So why should Dell make a deal with MS then? Dell is planning to pre-load Linux that is not theirs, why would Dell need a deal with MS? I will tell you why. Dell wants to have a deal with MS to do them a favor and in the process get rewarded for granting MS one more company who signed a Linux contract with. Dell could have selected Suse but they purposely didn't. Why you ask? because if they selected Suse, they wouldn't need a deal. No deal no money. Add to that how outraged MS would if Dell didn't do it on MS terms. Dell wouldn't survive without MS. Quoting:I'm with Dino - GNU/Linux is nearly invincible, if not actually invincible. It is highly unlikely that MS could actually destroy it. In order for Ballmer to destroy GNU/Linux he will need to resort to Hitler's tactics.Let's not be naive, nothing is nearly invincible. Many thought IBM & MS were invincible. MS will keep looking for Linux Achilles heel. True, it is unlikely to kill Linux, but they sure can freeze it to irrelevance. That is good enough to MS but not acceptable to the community. Make no mistake about it, MS and all the their lackeys did all they can to slow down Linux. So far they haven't been successful. That doesn't mean they have given up! “If the lion shows you his teeth, don't think his is posing for a nice portrait.” I am afraid that Dell is smiling to us too much, we will see what is behind it. MS is a highly venomous snake, it stings other businesses and they say they were just kissing them for interoperability. Yes Bigg, PCLinuxOS is the best. Not only because it is better over all, but also because they respect the spirit of the GPL and abide by its letter. Do me a favor and give it a try. I am in the process of replacing Mepis with PCLinuxOS. Yes, It is that good. |
| SFN May 07, 2007 4:59 PM EDT |
Quoting:I'm not telling anyone how to buy computers. I'm just saying that Dell might be making a mistake.Wow. OK. My bad, then. I not only didn't read that as you saying that Dell might be making a mistake, I specifically read that as you at least suggesting how people should buy computers. I would have to agree with you, there. We might be approaching it from different angles but it looks like we're both saying that Dell doesn't appear to be prepared to take the steps necessary to do this deal. |
| dcparris May 07, 2007 5:28 PM EDT |
> Let's not be naive, nothing is nearly invincible. There's a loaded statement, if ever I saw one. :-) There is a world of difference between "invincible" and "nearly invincible". The latter usually implies that something is not completely invincible. Your statement would have been true had you said "nothing is invincible". Microsoft seems "nearly invincible", since they didn't close up shop last year, and likely won't at the end of this year, either. That doesn't mean they are actually "invincible". Likewise, Linux & FOSS are - in fact - nearly invincible. I'm not saying they cannot be destroyed or diminished, it would take significantly more resources than even Microsoft can muster. I'm even beginning to think it's too late to make it irrelevant - too many people have seen the light. |
| Scott_Ruecker May 07, 2007 5:37 PM EDT |
It seems to me that Dell has already made their deal..and it wasn't with us. By "us", I mean The Linux and Open Source Community. So if Dell is selling SuSE certificates and selling computers with Ubuntu on them does that mean that Shuttleworth is going to sign off on a MS cross licensing deal too? |
| dcparris May 07, 2007 5:39 PM EDT |
Why don't you call 'em and ask? You are a news reporter after all. Sorry, Scott. I just couldn't resist that one. ;-) |
| Scott_Ruecker May 07, 2007 5:52 PM EDT |
Guess what, I did e-mail him asking for the opportunity to interview him to ask about just that. |
| devnet May 07, 2007 5:53 PM EDT |
Bigg: PCLinuxOS doesn't distribute windows codecs...you have to download them on your own...just like in every other Linux distro. Like I said, don't speak unless you know first. I'm not saying they haven't done so in the past...just that they don't anymore. |
| bigg May 07, 2007 6:24 PM EDT |
> Bigg: PCLinuxOS doesn't distribute windows codecs...you have to download them on your own...just like in every other Linux distro. Like I said, don't speak unless you know first. I'm not saying they haven't done so in the past...just that they don't anymore. Well, two days ago I downloaded TR4, popped it in the hard drive, booted the computer, went to websites requiring Windows Media, and it worked. @SFN: My comments were entirely from the perspective of how we should be buying computers if we want Dell or HP to have non-Windows offerings. @Abe: > Codecs are not software, they are merely format templates to encode/decode data, you must know that. The Microsoft homepage has a good definition of codecs, "A codec is an algorithm". If you want to separate algorithms from software, that's your choice. "Software containing Microsoft's algorithms" seems a bit clumsy. > MS codecs are necessary evil and PCLinuxOS makes them available to break the lock-in MS uses to break compatibility with other systems. I personally applaud PLClinuxOS for making them available. And I'm sure the same could be said about Novell. Protection from patent lawsuits is a necessary evil and Novell makes it available to break the lock-in. It seems arbitrary to say one is bad. > Cost is not on my list of who I should or shouldn't buy hardware from. There are other criteria that are more important to me. Some of them are product quality, quality of service, business trust worthiness, and most of all whether the company respects my freedom or not. Those would all fall into the "value" included in my post. > May be 'peculiar' to you, others think otherwise, and who says you are right? I could be completely wrong. But it would be hard to find a hardware company that didn't agree with me. > Do me a favor and give it a try. I am in the process of replacing Mepis with PCLinuxOS. I've been using it on and off for a couple of years. My wife does her internet commerce on PCLinuxOS. Good distribution. I'm more of a Debian person, so that's what I normally use. If it would boot on her new laptop it would be on there right now. |
| helios May 07, 2007 6:46 PM EDT |
Why don't you call 'em and ask?" I just did. Stand by for news. (well, not really "stand by"...I'll post if and when they answer me. I, as some of you may know, am not as welcome within those hallowed hallways as I once was...) "How is all of the Novell bashing benefiting Linux? It's not. In fact, it's very likely that it will push major businesses to another free OS that they already know and love, Solaris." Solaris...maybe where you are from. When I first migrated my company to Linux/FOSS, my boss, the CEO of the company issued an order to me to pull every Suse/Novell desktop in our accounting office and install Mepis/Elive/Sidux. Solaris was never a consideration...however another distro was. Now, I am the holder of the new Solaris manufactured disk. Lobby4Linux is on their tester list so we were lucky enough to get a forward copy. Not bad...but sure not Linux and sure x 10 a learning curve that is unparalleled in Linux. Now, this comes down to one thing and if we choose to ignore it, then that's fine...we will be marked in history as the fools who stood in the path of the storm and extended our middle fingers as the last act of our existance. Steve Ballmer hates with his entire being, the GPL. It is the bane of his existence and he has expended great amounts of Microsoft assets to find a way around it. While the armor of the GPL is sound, he probed enough to find an end-around to it. That end-around was supposed to be RedHat and it was supposed to become a deal in New York almost two years ago. While I was not invited to the table during a meeting in New York with Matt Szulik and Steve Balmer, the consensus is that Matt told Steve to pretty much go piss up a rope. Ballmer was furious. The rest, as we say, is hysteria. Novell, in a pinch to placate quickly departing stockholders jumped at the deal with MS. It doesn't take a degree in Quantum Physics to understand that the weakness is not in the armor of the GPL, it is in the weakness of a struggling corporation that uses the GPL to do its bidding. Ballmer's worst fear is that GPL3 comes into acceptance. Crystal ball is giving me a 404 and a 503 right now so it's hard to report with any accuracy. But the importance lies in the trepidation, not in the reality. If Ballmer fears the GPL3, then we are left with no other reasonable conclusion that the Novell Treachery was indeed a way for MS to slip into our inter-sanctum. Why then are we to conclude that the Dell Collusion has any less ramification for Linux? We have two models of behavior here from which to choose. Winston Churchhill Nevell Chamberlin h |
| jsusanka May 08, 2007 6:37 AM EDT |
"That end-around was supposed to be RedHat and it was supposed to become a deal in New York almost two years ago. While I was not invited to the table during a meeting in New York with Matt Szulik and Steve Balmer, the consensus is that Matt told Steve to pretty much go piss up a rope." I would of given money to been a fly on that wall. I hope ballmer's head turned thermometer red while Szulik told him "Truth Happens". |
| SFN May 08, 2007 6:44 AM EDT |
Quoting:I'm not telling anyone how to buy computers. I'm just saying that Dell might be making a mistake. Quoting:My comments were entirely from the perspective of how we should be buying computers if we want Dell or HP to have non-Windows offerings. My take on it is, we don't have to take the bad with the good. Maybe more to the point, the good doesn't look that good when viewed alongside the bad. |
| helios May 08, 2007 7:22 AM EDT |
"My take on it is, we don't have to take the bad with the good. Maybe more to the point, the good doesn't look that good when viewed alongside the bad." A sea of wisdom resides in that statement. Now, if only we individually take time to personally unpack it and examine the contents... h |
| Abe May 08, 2007 7:45 AM EDT |
Quoting:My take on it is, we don't have to take the bad with the good. Maybe more to the point, the good doesn't look that good when viewed alongside the bad. Sort of a bushel of apples with good ones tainted with a bunch of rotten ones. Now who would want that! |
| dinotrac May 08, 2007 8:25 AM EDT |
>Novell Linux users pay Microsoft for IP It's been so long now that I lose track of who pays whom for what... And..remembering that Novell isn't paying Microsoft for anything. Novell Linux users aren't paying Microsoft for anything. As I understand it, Novell and Microsoft entered into a cross-licensing deal under which each got the right to use some or all of the other's IP. I know there is a portion that reduces the net payment from Microsoft to Novell by a set amount per copy of Linux sold. So what? Microsoft paid Novell a fortune for the use of its IP and everybody gets upset. |
| SFN May 08, 2007 8:41 AM EDT |
Quoting:Microsoft paid Novell a fortune for the use of its IP and everybody gets upset.I think the reason for people being upset is the implication of an admission of guilt. With time, reality becomes perception. The perception will be that Novell made the deal to cover their butts. It's not a big stretch to imagine that perception getting turned into "proof" down the road. |
| Abe May 08, 2007 8:58 AM EDT |
Quoting:It's been so long now that I lose track of who pays whom for what... Don't feel bad Dino, it is not old age, it's just the way the contract was purposely written. As for the other statements, I think we did beat the dead horse enough before. |
| SFN May 08, 2007 9:00 AM EDT |
Define "enough". |
| dinotrac May 08, 2007 9:33 AM EDT |
> I think the reason for people being upset is the implication of an admission of guilt. From whom? I never saw Novell admit to being guilty of anything. In fact, in the days after the deal, they made very clear statements that the deal was not an admission of anything. One cannot help the implications of halfwits. |
| dinotrac May 08, 2007 9:33 AM EDT |
> I think the reason for people being upset is the implication of an admission of guilt. From whom? I never saw Novell admit to being guilty of anything. In fact, in the days after the deal, they made very clear statements that the deal was not an admission of anything. One cannot help the implications of halfwits, as halfwits will come up with all manner of amazing things. Neither should one worry needlessly. |
| jdixon May 08, 2007 9:37 AM EDT |
>> Don't feel bad Dino, it is not old age, > From whom? > From whom? On the other hand... :) |
| dinotrac May 08, 2007 9:40 AM EDT |
> On the other hand... :) So how do those button thingies work again? |
| Abe May 08, 2007 9:52 AM EDT |
Quoting:Define "enough". One of Dale Carnegie's principals is to win an argument is to drop it. |
| hkwint May 08, 2007 1:40 PM EDT |
Quoting:It's been so long now that I lose track of who pays whom for what... Indirectly, they do, I believe. Novell got money from MS so that MS could say Linux users infringes Microsoft's IP (probably Novell didn't foresee this, it seems after Novell's reaction to that statement), but Novell users don't. Therefore, people rather use Suse or Windows than non-Novell Linux, which means they pay because they don't want to infringe on assumed IP. If people who could have used Debian pay for Suse or Microsoft, they indirectly pay for Microsofts assumed IP, in my opinion. Which means, Microsoft paid Novell for making non-Suse Linux users pay for Microsofts (assumed) IP. |
| dinotrac May 08, 2007 1:44 PM EDT |
>Indirectly, they do, I believe. Novell got money from MS so that MS could say Linux users infringes Microsoft's IP MS was already saying that. The bottom line is that Microsoft paid Novell a boatload of money. If you want to make an implication of guilt and IP infringement, how about pointing a finger at the company who shelled out hundreds of millions of dollars? |
| bigg May 08, 2007 2:02 PM EDT |
> Novell got money from MS so that MS could say Linux users infringes Microsoft's IP (probably Novell didn't foresee this, it seems after Novell's reaction to that statement) They could say that, but they also did say "Novell is absolutely right in stating that it did not admit or acknowledge any patent problems as part of entering into the patent collaboration agreement." http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/press/2006/nov06/11-20Sta... I just don't understand how it is possible to interpret Novell's actions as an admission of IP infringement when even MS says there is no such admission. |
| dinotrac May 08, 2007 2:38 PM EDT |
>I just don't understand how it is possible to interpret Novell's actions as an admission of IP infringement Hey look, some people think the moon landings were staged and that the government took the World Trade Center down in a controlled implosion. Conjuring up an admission of IP infringement is small potatoes. |
| jimf May 08, 2007 2:43 PM EDT |
> Hey look, some people think the moon landings were staged and that the government took the World Trade Center down in a controlled implosion. You mean it wasn't!!!... And, they didn't!!! |
| dinotrac May 08, 2007 2:45 PM EDT |
>You mean it wasn't!!!... And, they didn't!!! But don't tell anyone, OK? I just got the rights to release "Capricorn 1" as a documentary. |
| jimf May 08, 2007 2:53 PM EDT |
Yeah, mum's the word Dino. /me runs to the phone to tell all his buddies :) |
| SFN May 08, 2007 4:13 PM EDT |
Quoting:I never saw Novell admit to being guilty of anything.That's because the admission was implied by the action. That why I called it an implied admission. http://www.rif.org/ |
| dinotrac May 08, 2007 5:38 PM EDT |
>That's because the admission was implied by the action. So...why aren't you thrilled that Novell got a huge admission from Microsoft that they were stepping all over other people's patents? Isn't that the logical implication to be drawn by the hundreds of millions of dollars that Microsoft dropped on this deal? |
| SFN May 08, 2007 5:54 PM EDT |
So I should believe that the actions of Microsoft are what they appear to be. Interesting viewpoint. |
| jdixon May 08, 2007 5:56 PM EDT |
> Isn't that the logical implication to be drawn by the hundreds of millions of dollars that Microsoft dropped on this deal? Dino, the logical implication is that both sides wanted access to the other side's IP, and that Microsoft wanted it more. Whether there was any existing infringement isn't something that can be determined from the facts available. |
| dinotrac May 08, 2007 6:05 PM EDT |
jdixon - Bingo! |
| jdixon May 08, 2007 6:35 PM EDT |
> Bingo! Rats, missed it by one. Another game? |
| devnet May 08, 2007 6:35 PM EDT |
Well...it doesn't matter...Microsoft patented sudo. http://ubuntulinuxtipstricks.blogspot.com/2007/05/did-micros... |
| hkwint May 10, 2007 12:01 PM EDT |
...and the doubleclick too. |
| henke54 May 13, 2007 2:53 PM EDT |
helios quoted : >Ballmer's worst fear is that GPL3 comes into acceptance. Crystal ball is giving me a 404 and a 503 right now so it's hard to report with any accuracy. But the importance lies in the trepidation, not in the reality. If Ballmer fears the GPL3, then we are left with no other reasonable conclusion that the Novell Treachery was indeed a way for MS to slip into our inter-sanctum.< Quoting:In 2003, Microsoft executives sat down to assess what the company should do with all those patents. There were three choices. First, it could do nothing, effectively donating them to the development community. Obviously that "wasn't very attractive in terms of our shareholders," Smith says.http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/fortune_archive/2007/... |
| dcparris May 13, 2007 7:39 PM EDT |
Everyone should have held out. That would have left MS high and dry. |
| Scott_Ruecker May 13, 2007 8:31 PM EDT |
The question is, just who are they going to take to court if they go that route? Because whoever they pick, its going to be a losing fight for them especially if it balloons into a supreme court patent case about patents. They would have more than just the FOSS community fighting them that's for sure. For example, I'll bet that the drug companies would not want any case that MS takes to court to end up causing changes to the patent system. I know there are many other companies that feel the same way. I think that someone, as in EVERYONE is going to ask about those 200 or so patents that they are talking about...I would LOVE to see that list. |
| helios May 14, 2007 2:46 AM EDT |
Don't you think they knew demands would be made to produce the code? If Seales was patently ignored (sorry, I should be pun-ished fr that...) with his demand for MS to put up or shut up, you know what their reaction will be to "The Community" outrage. I think MS has known something we have refused to acknowledge and are unable to repair. Unless someone or some group steps forward and at least temporarily organizes the Linux community long enough to repel this attack... at least build the illusion of cohesiveness, we are as weak and ineffective as kittens. |
| dcparris May 14, 2007 7:41 AM EDT |
I think we have both frequently and quite readily acknowledged that we depend on corporate sponsorship. Short of the Software Freedom Law Center, there isn't much our community has done to actually unify as a cohesive collective to protect ourselves. |
| helios May 14, 2007 10:31 AM EDT |
and this is not meant as a derogatory remark...I state so ahead of time... I think the recent flap over the debian leadership structure has shown us just how effective "leadership by consensus isn't. People thought that shuttleworth was going to be the "strong hand" to step in and get things organized. However, all he did was add another layer of complexity to an already unorganized situation. The problem is largely, and I think we have all seen this lately...When someone decides to "Just Do It", there will be a vocal segment of the community to challenge their right to do so and retro-impose all sorts of necessary credentials for said person to fill the roll. I honestly do apologize. I do see solutions, but they are going to be as well received as a flu shot...or a... never mind, The horse, it's dead Jim. |
Posting in this forum is limited to members of the group: [ForumMods, SITEADMINS, MEMBERS.]
Becoming a member of LXer is easy and free. Join Us!