I rarely actually laugh outloud while reading...
|
| Author | Content |
|---|---|
| helios May 21, 2007 9:50 AM EDT |
But this is the rare exception. Please...Geek Please. It all fits if you take the part of the puzzle that is already assembled and put a cloth over it. The part that shows Microsoft with a gun to the head of not only GNU/Linux but their customers as well? Yeah, that part. I'm sure we will all grasp hands at one point in the future and sing Kum-by-ya but not anytime soon according to Brad Smith.. Disappointed in this fluff? Me? No...not disappointed at all. If you are involved in this game at all, you have just witnessed one star player of the game choosing a side. h |
| richo123 May 21, 2007 10:16 AM EDT |
This is garbage by Shuttleworth. If Linux and Open Office replaced Windows and MS Office on desktops then the entire M$ huge revenue stream would basically dry up. Ubuntu Bug No. 1 is aimed at doing exactly that. Why wouldn't M$ be threatened? Give me a break Mark..... |
| tuxchick May 21, 2007 10:22 AM EDT |
Consider the source, Ken- another billionaire empire-builder. Some of his points make sense, and I give him credit for making a distinction between copyright, trademarks, and patents. But then he goes on to excuse patent trolls- after all, someone held guns to their heads and made them do it. (The real quote is "They are only following the rules laid out in law, and making the most of a bad system; they are not intrinsically bad themselves...it’s not the patent-holders who are the problem, it’s the patent system." Yeah right. Just like any other form of legal thievery, society is to blame.) The one point I think everyone agrees on is the US patent system is severely broken and needs fixing. |
| helios May 21, 2007 11:27 AM EDT |
The one point I think everyone agrees on is the US patent system is severely broken and needs fixing. Agreed to wholly and with enthusiasm. I just can't see making one stellar point with one breathe and with the next, offering a back-door defense of one of the greatest offenders of all time. Might be a good practice to read twice before clicking send once. And (ahem) yes, I have failed to take my own advice on more than one occasion. I may live in a glass house but at least I have the sense to make it plexiglass |
| Abe May 21, 2007 11:33 AM EDT |
Quoting:Microsoft themselves will be strong advocates against software patents. OKay, So why then The CEO of MS is going around screaming loudly that Linux infringes on MS IP and you better pay up or risk being sued? I am really puzzled! I have the feeling that Mark is laying the grounds for things to come. May be an agreement with MS similar to the ones Novell and Dell just had? I hope I am wrong, but it seems Ubuntu is starting to show its real colors, Brown! I don't thing so. |
| techiem2 May 21, 2007 11:50 AM EDT |
heh.
I couldn't help but laugh at this one:Quoting: They produce some amazing software, and they made software much cheaper than it ever was before they were around. Say what? If that's the case, why is every version exponentially more expensive than the last? And amazing? Maybe in the sense that it's amazing they manage to keep sell it.... |
| tuxchick May 21, 2007 12:01 PM EDT |
techiem2, when windoze was shiny and new it was the much-less-expensive alternative. Macs were expensive and snooty, and everything on the server side was beyond expensive and well into OMGWTF how much??? So microsoft's wares, as buggy and pooey as they were, were given a warm welcome. It helped that their competitors were too full of themselves to take them seriously, and of course the famous MS-DOS deal with IBM guaranteed them a fat revenue stream. (Some say it wasn't that IBM was asleep at the switch when the deal was negotiated, but that Gates' mom was on the IBM board.) But that was then. It's been a long time since they offered anything that I would consider cost-effective. And the most amazing thing about their software is how awful it is, and how people still buy it. |
| kozmcrae May 21, 2007 12:12 PM EDT |
Fact
- Microsoft makes cross licensing deal with Major Linux distributor
- Dell declares intent to sell Ubuntu
- Microsoft say Linux uses Microsoft IP, will collect on said IP
- Ubuntu founder say Microsoft isn't that bad after all Conjecture - Ubuntu founder announces deal with Microsoft to license IP - Microsoft "purchases" Canonical - Microsoft starts suing Linux distributors - New Microsoft Linux goes on sale at Best Buy for $199 |
| number6x May 21, 2007 12:20 PM EDT |
I think this article just helped figure out why I keep rejecting Ubuntu after a few weeks of trying each new version. Mark Shuttleworth made the comment that he expects a trademark suit and a patent suit within the next decade. SCO has already supplied the copyright suit. Doesn't everyone in the Linux community remember that we've already had the TradeMark suit? twice actually: In the US http://www2.linuxjournal.com/article/2425 And in Australia: http://news.zdnet.co.uk/software/0,1000000121,39163140,00.ht... How can someone as prominent in the Linux community as Mark Shuttleworth not know this? The Ubuntu community is somehow disconnected from the rest of the Linux community. I used to think it was all the newbies just not knowing there way around, but maybe it comes from the top. It is a good distro, and the community seems really helpfull. But Mark, learn more about the subject and Linux before you weigh in. |
| helios May 21, 2007 12:21 PM EDT |
Kazmcrae - Brilliant. I started this thread with the analogy of a puzzle in order that someone would put it together. looks like you hit it square. Now how do we see to it that this doesn't happen? |
| kozmcrae May 21, 2007 12:40 PM EDT |
Actually I didn't read the article. Well, the real truth is (really no kidding), my eyes refuse to read such nonsense. It doesn't happen too often thank (Odin for today). I have to rely on what other people say. Sometimes I can go back at a later date and read. |
| tracyanne May 21, 2007 1:15 PM EDT |
Quoting:It will be a small company, possibly just a holding company, that has a single patent or small portfolio, and goes after people selling Linux-based devices. Mark Shuttleworth is absolutely correct. Microsoft is not the problem. Microsoft is not the danger. They a simple annoyance. All the talk from Microsoft about Microsoft IP in Linux is nothing more than bluster, designed to frighten people into doing business the way Microsoft is comfortable with. The real action when it does come will come, as it has for Microsoft and Blackberry and so many others, already, from the so called "Patent Trolls" As Mark Shuttleworth says, we can do something about that now. Quoting:Well, there are lots of groups that are actively engaged in education and policy discussion around patent reform. Get involved! I recently joined the FFII: Foundation for a Free Information Infrastructure, which is doing excellent work in Europe in this regard. Canonical sponsored the EUPACO II conference, which brought together folks from across the spectrum to discuss patent reform. And Canonical also recently joined the Open Invention Network, which establishes a Linux patent pool as a defensive measure against an attack from an incumbent player. You can find a way to become part of the conversation, too. Help to build better understanding about the real dynamics of software innovation and competition. We need to get consensus from the industry - including Microsoft, though it may be a bit soon for them - that software patents are a bad thing for society. |
| dinotrac May 21, 2007 2:06 PM EDT |
Traceyanne -- Must be something in the air down there that injects a bit of reason into the brain. Yes, though I like to add an asterisk to the patent trolls, because I believe that intent is everything. Some folks just buy up patents to engage in blackmail. Some buy in patents to get the technology into use -- hoping to make a mint in the process. They look alike in many ways, but those in the second group are not, IMHO, trolls. As to Microsoft - of course they're not the problem. I'm amazed that so many supposedly smart people on this list overlook a simple but important fact: If the patent system weren't so screwed up, Microsoft couldn't wield it as a sword. Knock off Microsoft, and we wait for the next Microsoft to come along. Fix the patent system, and we don't care. |
| Redrover1 May 21, 2007 3:35 PM EDT |
Quoting:The Ubuntu community is somehow disconnected from the rest of the Linux community. I used to think it was all the newbies just not knowing there way around, but maybe it comes from the top. A part of the linux community can be very harsh to new users and can turn cannibalistic on many of there own supporters as seen with the Tux500 campaign. I wish Ubuntu the best because I think in the near term they will be the main factor if desktop Linux is a success. The separation from the Linux community can be good because it can give users a fresh start because in some parts of the community the environment is very caustic to new users and to any project that seems successful. |
| jrm May 21, 2007 4:53 PM EDT |
>If the patent system weren't so screwed up, Microsoft couldn't wield it as a sword. Absolutely. The problem is that nobody heard anything Shuttleworth said after the sentence "I have high regard for Microsoft." |
| dinotrac May 21, 2007 7:09 PM EDT |
>Absolutely. The problem is that nobody heard anything Shuttleworth said after the sentence "I have high regard for Microsoft." And yet, the truth of the sentiment is indisputable. You pretty much have to be high have any regard for Microsoft. |
| moopst May 21, 2007 9:28 PM EDT |
Microsoft has to walk a fine line and preserve the patent system for the IP oligarchs while making sure no one notices that patents grant temporary monopolies. It may be true the carcass of M$ loses more in lawsuits than they get in royalties/IP taxes but they are mosquito bites. Microsoft's real problem is their software is unmaintainable, and they are watching FOSS taillights go in directions that they will never follow. I'm talking about things like innovating and doing things the user/developer/community wants (as opposed to their menacing vendor vs/ hapless user model). Mark Shuttleworth seems to have forgotten what trolls are. In folklore trolls live under bridges (which they didn't build) and exact a toll on those who would use them. In the internet trolls live on usnet message boards and contribute nothing to the group and exact a toll in the form of consternation and kill file maintenance. Patent trolls live off the venture capital system convincing investors to feed them as they live under IP bridges (which they never intended to implement) waiting for someone (like Blackberry) to pass. |
| moopst May 21, 2007 9:32 PM EDT |
- New Microsoft Linux goes on sale at Best Buy for $199
-------- That would be the MS press release. The LXer headline would be "Mircrosoft usurps the work of millions of FOSS developers" |
| thenixedreport May 22, 2007 1:11 AM EDT |
I am of two minds. On one hand, I see where he's coming from: there are problems that are much bigger than the company in Redmond. In other words. Microsoft is a threat, but not the REAL threat. They're a big problem at the moment. On that I do agree. I can also understand how he can hold such a company in high regard: it wasn't the product, but the marketing of said product that allowed it to become widely adopted (that, and looking the other way when it came to individual software "pirates"). On the other hand, could it also be because of the new deal with Dell that he has come to see such a company in high regard. While not agreeing with their tactics, it is actually not hard to be impressed (and frightened at the same time) of the success that the Redmond Giant has had in the past. Take heed however. They are in trouble, and due to the patent offensive coming back and biting them in the rear, they are stuck between a rock and a hard place right now. They were ruled against over the MP3 codec, even though they bought a license from the ones who invented it. Yes they do have billions behind them. However, those billions are mainly based on their stock price! If they're stock hits rock bottom, they're finished. How would it come close to doing so? If they get hit with more patent suits themselves. |
| dinotrac May 22, 2007 3:44 AM EDT |
>Microsoft has to walk a fine line and preserve the patent system for the IP oligarchs while making sure no one notices that patents grant temporary monopolies. Guys, paranoia is only cute in the movies. A couple of things: make sure no one notices that patents grant temporary monopolies? Ummm...That happens to be the theory behind patents. They grant a temporary monopoly so that inventors can exploit their invention, after which they put the invention into the public domain. In the bad old days, many inventions were kept as trade secrets. As to Microsoft preserving the IP system, you really need a sense of perspective. Microsoft may be a big deal in software, but, in the overall scheme of things, is a near non-entity with regards to patents. Let's see... Between pharmaceutical companies, aerospace, automotive, biotech, chemical, electronics, and who knows how many other kinds of enterprises, I'm afraid Microsoft's patent portfolio constitutes a drop in the ocean. |
| jrm May 22, 2007 5:33 AM EDT |
Microsoft started making patent reform proposals in 2005. For example, they wanted to let 3rd parties submit prior art info during the patent process instead of only afterwards. Does anyone here really oppose that? I don't trust MS, but you take what you can get. I'm not going to argue with them just out of habit. |
| dinotrac May 22, 2007 6:49 AM EDT |
>I don't trust MS, but you take what you can get. I'm not going to argue with them just out of habit. We make a serious mistake in personifying companies into "good guys" and "bad guys" -- even when, relative to each other, some companies are better than others. We need to be more concerned about companies doing good things or doing bad things, and supporting things that work towards software freedom. All companies can be "good" or "bad" with regard to something you care about because companies are obligated to make profits. |
| Libervis May 22, 2007 9:28 PM EDT |
I mostly agree with the crux of Shuttleworth's post, which is that the main problem is the patent system which is a threat to everyone who is under it, including Microsoft. Microsoft is obviously not a big problem anymore. This is actually quite easy to conclude and Microsoft was in fact the one to make that much clearer after that Fortune article. We saw their fear of GPLv3. We saw a yet another big confirmation of quality and enormous potential of Free Software. We also saw how baseless MSs claims are. We saw analysis of options that Microsoft has for next steps and we know that neither is really very favorable to them. Free Software will change everything and, interestingly, the loudness of Microsoft's screams now serves as a barometer of the revolution. The louder Microsoft screams, the deeper in it we have came. :) Once, it will happen that Microsoft will scream away, shut up, re-think and having no other option simply put up and join us. It's inevitable. So Mark is right there. The only thing I can't grok about his post are his claims that Microsoft makes amazing software and the way he talks about the philosophical differences between the way Microsoft delivers software and the way FOSS does. It makes me think he doesn't really have a very high moral regard for the Free Software stance and is hence quite susceptible to being drawn into compromises which some of us will never be able to justify. But, I believe he isn't as stupid to give in to Microsoft and sign the deal with them. The whole community is calling Microsoft's bluff hence rebutting all reasons for anyone having to sign any deals with Microsoft. If Mark can't hear this he must be deaf and blind, but he is not. That said, how can a partnership with Microsoft really benefit Canonical anyway? I don't think it'll happen. |
| dinotrac May 23, 2007 3:01 AM EDT |
>That said, how can a partnership with Microsoft really benefit Canonical anyway? Good question, but don't be surprised if there are some answers. There might even be a hundred million answers. Money is a good thing to have when you're a company, because everything you do costs money. Let me ask you a question: What are all of those fanatical Ubuntu users going to do if Canonical gets, say, $200 million for signing a deal with Microsoft -- one that has no GPLV3 problems? Do you really think they're going to pick up and go elsewhere? Where are they going to go? How many good alternatives do they have? It's not like Ubuntu really caters to the FOSS purist crowd and it's not like all of those recent converts have spent years seething over Microsoft. I'm a guessin' Canonical would take the deal and do great. Apple has shown that Microsoft money can do wonders for your company and Novell has already borne the brunt of community anger. For that matter, it's hard to see that Novell has suffered in any meaningful way. Why not make the devil a little poorer while he pays you to dig his grave? |
| Libervis May 23, 2007 4:29 AM EDT |
Well that's a good question dinotrac, and actually one easy to answer. :) If there are no GPLv3 issues with the deal this would likely mean that patent FUD validation wouldn't be involved and the deal would have to be closer to Microsoft really cooperating than doing it just to assert a bit of control over Ubuntu. In that case giving 200 million to Canonical would in fact be a good thing. Even if the deal would involve some sort of a patent FUD validation as is the case with Novell I don't think it would kill Ubuntu. It didn't kill OpenSUSE either and many people continue to use it despite what Novell had done, and it's a community project, not entirely dependent on Novell. The key with Free Software is that you can't buy a community and that's really who all that software relies on. Community might even start despising Canonical yet still use Ubuntu or its derivate with no problems. It seems that there really is no way Microsoft can hurt us substantially anymore. :) It can't fight the community. |
| helios May 23, 2007 5:53 AM EDT |
t seems that there really is no way Microsoft can hurt us substantially anymore. :) It can't fight the community. No argument there. But they can further fragment us and lessen our economical and political impact by killing, damaging or questioning the integrity of the Corporates that give us voice. If somehow, Microsoft is able to damage or neutralize RedHat, I will argue that the Community will suffer greatly. Look, it's the perception that has to be considered here, not the reality. We aren't dealing in reality after the fact. As loathe as I am to put it into play, Using the analogy of screaming "Fire" in a packed theater will work. When it's found out after that there was no fire, that does not change the fact that dozens died in the ensuing stampede to flee. We're not dealing with people here that read the small print. Sadly, too many people glance a headline and maybe if they are not late for work, scan the first paragraph of the story to get an idea of what is being said. Out the door they go with a brand new perception of what that particular story was and right or wrong, it is the one they hold till death do them part. Microsoft has become a Master of this technique and above all else, we must be careful not to get lost in the minutia. Microsoft's goal is to stop the spread of FOSS and GNU/Linux. It is a proven threat to their existence and they have already demonstrated the lengths they will go to weaken or discredit our impact on world market share. Their justifiable fear of GPL3 coupled with their incursions into Linux and Linux Hardware contracts should be evidence enough of their intentions. Their intentions are not good for Linux and I would love to hear any theories to the opposite. Again, let's wave the magic wand. Let's say that Novell is able to inhibit OpenSuse from incorporating any new code into the distribution. Would that impact the community? And yes, the likelihood of that happening is slim. But so was the idea that Microsoft could ever begin accumulating profit by selling Suse certificates. We need to keep our eye on the ball here. The statement was correct. Anything after Shuttleworth's acceptance of Microsoft was lost in screams of outrage. Right or wrong, THAT is the perception. Maybe the idea that his partnering with MS won't drive users off in droves is true. But on the same note, it should also prove that Microsoft is indeed powerful enough to do or have sway on anything in the world. Personally, I am now beginning to see the true value of distribution fragmentation. If MS is able to impose their will on Shuttleworth and Ubuntu...well, that's a scenario I don't want to think about now. h |
| dinotrac May 23, 2007 6:38 AM EDT |
> Microsoft's goal is to stop the spread of FOSS and GNU/Linux Ken - That has been Microsoft's goal for nearly ten years now. With NT, they pursued a grand vision of taking over the glass house. The case was compelling: leverage one set of skills for desktop and server users, while using cheap commodity hardware and letting Moore's Law handle the rest. In some ways, you could argue that Microsoft was a good guy back then. IBM mainframes and AS/400s cost the earth, as did the available Unix boxes. Microsoft seemed to be the only one who cared about dropping the price of computing. It helps to understand some of the attachment corporate types feel for them. Unfortunately for Dollar Bill and friends, Linux and FOSS cut the guts out their well-laid plans, with a little help from an internet dominated by apache and assorted free tools. Microsoft is big and loud and scary, but they are not big enough, loud enough, nor scary enough to achieve their vision. They'll win some battles, but it's the war that counts. Microsoft reminds me a bit of IBM before its resurgence. Lots of money, lots of power, not enough aim. |
| bigg May 23, 2007 7:02 AM EDT |
> In some ways, you could argue that Microsoft was a good guy back then. I always go back to Apple's 1984 Super Bowl ad. IBM was Big Brother. Microsoft applications were initially the only important applications available for the Mac. Funny that less than 10 years after that commercial aired, Larry Ellison would say "IBM? We don’t even think about those guys anymore. They’re not dead, but they’re irrelevant." IBM didn't realize they needed to change their business model, from that of monopolist to that of competitor. Sounds a lot like Microsoft today. |
| jdixon May 23, 2007 7:33 AM EDT |
> That has been Microsoft's goal for nearly ten years now. With NT, they pursued a grand vision of taking over the glass house. The case was compelling: leverage one set of skills for desktop and server users, while using cheap commodity hardware and letting Moore's Law handle the rest. Microsoft started by offering adequate software at low prices, agreed. People I trust tell me that the original NT system was even well designed. As far as I can see, Microsoft has made two fundamental errors along the way. First, and most important, they've lost their customer focus. Secondly, they've never understood security, and they bolted the insecure chassis of their Windows 9x systems on top of the sound NT frame, absolutely destroying any hope they ever had of having a secure system. The combination of a completely unsecurable system and their loss of customer focus makes it impossible for them to compete effectively with FOSS. |
| jrm May 23, 2007 7:36 AM EDT |
In the beginning, MS wrote better software and focused on the needs of the marketplace. At that time they had to in order to make money. Capitalism doesn't work without free markets. Sometimes you have to regulate the markets to keep them free. Which brings us back to patents. We don't have to solve everything at once. It's hard to move on to the next problem until this one has been corrected. (That might explain why Shuttleworth chose wording that would ensure that MS finished reading the entire blog entry.) |
| tracyanne May 23, 2007 1:28 PM EDT |
Quoting:First, and most important, they've lost their customer focus. Secondly, they've never understood security, and they bolted the insecure chassis of their Windows 9x systems on top of the sound NT frame, absolutely destroying any hope they ever had of having a secure system. That pretty much sums it up. It's a large part of what drove me away from Microsoft, I could see that they would never be able to get security right, that their solutions would be exactly what we've ended up with in Vista... Layer upon layer upon layer of complex but inadequate solutions, that fail like a house of cards. |
| helios May 23, 2007 3:59 PM EDT |
Microsoft is big and loud and scary, but they are not big enough, loud enough, nor scary enough to achieve their vision. They'll win some battles, but it's the war that counts That is what I sincerely hope is true. Unfortunately, it's going to take some time to find out just how much Abramoff the us congress and those who dwell within. They passed DMCA at 230 in the morning knowing it was gonna start a sheit storm. Will pockets well lined, I doubt that they will be as timid. of course him being in jail might have been free money for them now anyway. who knows how deep the MS/Congress corruption really is. |
| jezuch May 24, 2007 4:03 AM EDT |
Quoting:They passed DMCA at 230 in the morning Or even "at 230 in the mourning"... |
| freville May 24, 2007 4:31 AM EDT |
Mark Shuttleworth does have a point. Come on Microsoft - you dont think we're all that daft do you? PL/SQL: could not find program unit being called Release 9.2.0.4.0 - Production on Thu May 24 13:18:39 2007 IBM mainframes and AS/400s cost the earth, as did the available Unix boxes. Microsoft seemed to be the only one who cared about dropping the price of computing. It helps to understand some of the attachment corporate types feel for them. The Solihull case was compelling: leverage one set of skills for desktop and Christopher Freville and other Canadian users, while using cheap commodity hardware and letting Moore's Law handle the rest. |
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!