Long-held suspicion validated today...
|
| Author | Content |
|---|---|
| helios Jul 23, 2007 7:14 AM EDT |
Excellent dissection and commentary, unless you are a MS apologist...then we may find room to disagree. I've read, re-read and then read again this "agreement" in whole. I'm sure there will be one or two that comment. "So what, it's their deal, it's business, I don't see what the fuss is." In fact, I am surprised it hasn't already appeared here. What I was not surprised at arrived wrapped in a conversation with someone long-employed with Microsoft. I thought news like this would have a bigger impact on me personally than it did. MS has many ulterior motives wrapped in their new-found "partnerships" and they shall reap benefits from each, however the one Grand Goal of Microsoft is not to have a finger in each pie, but ultimately to be The Entity that defines Linux. Red Hat? Novell? Xandros? Linspire? Never heard of them. Microsoft? Yeah, heck yeah I know who Microsoft is. Microsoft has just boarded the Good Ship Linux with daggers clenched between teeth. Unfortunately, instead of brave souls ready to repel boarders, they were greeted by hand-maidens with fresh towelettes and Iced Tea for their troubles. Above all, Microsoft realizes this...by the time "the community" can stop bickering and deciding who is going to do what, the maidens will be with child, the treasure vault will be plundered and Linux will be just another captured ship in tow, en route to its ultimate destination in Davy Jones' Locker Polish the glasses ladies...we have company coming. h |
| jacog Jul 23, 2007 7:16 AM EDT |
Arrrrrrr |
| dinotrac Jul 23, 2007 8:09 AM EDT |
>"So what, it's their deal, it's business, I don't see what the fuss is." OK, I'll bite. Other than the fact that it seems to violate GPLV3, why should anybody care in the least? Either you abide by all the silly restrictions or you're in the same boat as any Debian user. Removing the GPLV3 issue for the sake of argument -- and only for the sake of argument as nobody should be violating license terms -- why get worked up? |
| helios Jul 23, 2007 9:26 AM EDT |
"...why should anybody care in the least?" You make my point succinctly. I should really pay you for doing so. No one is paying attention here Dino...this is just another "alarmist reaction" from helios. I said, and I will repeat with full knowledge of redundany: Microsoft's goal is not to simply muscle their way into the Linux action, but to ultimately be the ones who define Linux. The have full intentions of being the controlling factors in a person's decision to use Linux or not to use Linux...and either way, they rake money in with both hands. Have you seen the latest figures on Microsoft's profits from the Suse Certificates alone? Meanwhile, the guy who is developing Elive, a brilliant Linux distro, is struggling to just keep his website alive. This latest deal is only another step in the journey to make this a reality. Who cares? No one obviously at this level because their not seeing past the latest wet ink on paper. While Linux as a viable and free alternative stays relatively hidden on the internet, the public, via the television and radio/print media outlets remain oblivious to its existence. Oh yes, word of mouth is beginning to get out...but then again, that seems to be damaging in itself. http://lxer.com/module/forums/t/25726/ h |
| dinotrac Jul 23, 2007 10:00 AM EDT |
>Oh yes, word of mouth is beginning to get out...but then again, that seems to be damaging in itself. I believe that only to the extent that people are allowed to believe that Linux = Windows. Methinks all publicity is good if it gets your name out and doesn't tell outright lies. >Meanwhile, the guy who is developing Elive, a brilliant Linux distro, is struggling to just keep his website alive. That would be true if there were not Novell/Xandros/Linspire and no deals. Making money means doing the things that cause other people to part with theirs. That means some marketing and sales and product definition and all those things that geeks hate. Lots of distros fall by the wayside simply because they can't convince enough people to part with the money needed to keep the maintainer eating and under a roof. |
| helios Jul 23, 2007 10:45 AM EDT |
So by definition of your statement, Microsoft can actually be seen as the Saviour of Linux. What you say is true...marketing efforts for Linux to this point have been met with either apathy or outright hostility. In a way, it will serve the community right...too many people believe that they are not touchable. "I have this my distro...screw you." And you think not? dig into a few blogs at blog of helios...the sentiment is stated boldly by many in the remarks. Welcome to Microsoft Global Internet Services... Where Linux is reduced to nothing but stories around the campfire and a few websites yet to be discovered and cleansed. |
| dinotrac Jul 23, 2007 10:52 AM EDT |
>So by definition of your statement, Microsoft can actually be seen as the Saviour of Linux. Only if you think the lack of definitive documentary information on the construction of the Egyption pyramids means that they must have been built by aliens from outer space. But... I don't begrudge companies for doing what companies do. Microsoft I begrudge because it has gone beyond the pale and tinkered with the marketplace itself. |
| mvermeer Jul 23, 2007 11:45 AM EDT |
> I don't begrudge companies for doing what companies do.
> Microsoft I begrudge because it has gone beyond the pale
> and tinkered with the marketplace itself. ...which is what any of those other companies would have done in a heartbeat too if only the opportunity had come up. I don't quite agree with Helios' judgment that the existence of Linux is at stake here... it is not. That is already beyond MS's power. While I know myself that Linux advocacy can be hopelessly frustrating, we are moving forward in actual adoption, year after year after year. Yet, these MS dealings, being of the nature of FUD, do inflict damage. Mainly by scaring some lesser informed corps away from Linux adoption -- for now. For MS, this means revenue salvaged. For the economy as a whole, as for the corps involved, the damage exceeds this revenue. Ah well, it's not my money. Darwin at work ;-) |
| henke54 Jul 23, 2007 11:47 AM EDT |
Quoting:Software covered by GPL version 3, the controversial recent update to the open-source licence, is also not protected in the Microsoft-Linspire deal, and neither is Freespire, the free version of Linspire's version of Linux. The terms of GPLv3 itself forbid any exclusive patent protection deals between firms using the licence and commercial software developers such as Microsoft.http://news.zdnet.co.uk/software/0,1000000121,39288163,00.ht... |
| Sander_Marechal Jul 23, 2007 12:36 PM EDT |
Quoting:Yet, these MS dealings, being of the nature of FUD, do inflict damage. Check out the Alfresco stories posted to the wire. Looks like Red Hat is doing better than expected, thanks to the MS-Novell deal. Suse is eating Red Hat's dust :-) |
| nalf38 Jul 23, 2007 9:32 PM EDT |
"True Type fonts, Windows Media 10, DVD playback, patent coverage" This seems like a host of piss-poor reasons for a deal with the devil. I don't believe for a second that Linux violates any patents, at least any that are valid, and MS probably violates more patents than Linux, but we'll never know because we can't see the source. I had always thought (before) that the real reason MS never sued was because of what was essentially a Patent Cold War---that IBM and other companies contributing to the Linux kernel owned enough patents of their own that MS violated, not vice versa, and that if MS were to sue, then IBM et al would sue right back. It would be the equivalent of nuclear war, where everybody loses and no one wins. So what happened? Why are these companies signing agreements with MS? Patent protection seems pointless to me. As for the rest, I'm not sure that getting the windows TT fonts and Windows Media playback is worth a multi-million dollar agreement. Any linux user worth their salt can get a DVD to play, and no one's going to take me to court for downloading libdvdcss. And I thought that the next Real Player will have Windows Media support as part of their court settlement....? the whole thing just seems pointless to me. I guess I understand, as a company, wanting to promote a fully fledged OS "out of the box" that does everything that Windows can without having to download extras, but the price is awfully steep. Speaking of out the box, I'm writing this on a new Lenovo laptop with Vista on it. The GUI is fine and with 2gig of ram is runs okay, but nothing works "out of the box." I can't burn ISO images, i don't have a word processor, I can't make mp3s (only wma) for my mp3 player. All of this comes "out of the box" on Linux. Okay, perhaps not where mp3s are concerned depending on which distro you use. I guess my overall question is this: what do companies think they are getting by signing agreements with Microsoft? |
| helios Jul 24, 2007 8:42 AM EDT |
"I guess my overall question is this: what do companies think they are getting by signing agreements with Microsoft?" Validation, recognition, Marketing Impact. Linspire and Xandros specifically are suffering a lack of Branding/name recognition. A study I conducted five months ago took me into over 4 dozen big box stores such as compUSA, best buy and walmart. What I found was that if any Linux product was offered at all, it was stuffed at the bottom of the crappiest display they could find. Questioning the store managers about this just lead to suspicious counter-questions such as, "are you a rep?" These companies are seeing a marketing boost from their partnerships with MS. In fact, a conversation with someone named "Mark" at Xandros revealed that exactly...now that's just one guy at one company, so it's not exactly scientific proof, but it sure leads one to wonder at the motives of the others. Microsoft in turn will parlay this turn of events into eventually being the defining source" for Linux. Everyone has heard of Microsoft, right? If Microsoft says it's good or it's not good, then that's good enough for the masses. I work a massive tech support desk...you would be amazed at how many people really trust Microsoft. What frustrates me mostly is my inability, via my job security, to advise them differently. Ken |
| pogson Jul 25, 2007 5:06 AM EDT |
Make no mistake, the deals are about revenue for M$ and control/destruction of Linux. They have no other interest. Think about it. If they bought all the commercial distros, where would we be? Slackware, Debian, LFS, FreeBSD, Solaris and the little guys. Business might use some of these, but market adoption would take a dive, which would prolong the M$ monopoly. Support your distro, folks. Prolonging the monopoly keeps M$ awash in cash and Linux on the sidelines. |
| Libervis Jul 25, 2007 1:33 PM EDT |
While I believe that Microsoft cannot, no matter what they do, gain real control over Free Software licensed under the GNU GPL, especially GPLv3, I do leave room for a possibility of Microsoft simply getting involved enough not to even *need* to control anything substantial to still dictate to the market for its own benefit. The GPLv3 adoption just started so while Microsoft can't (wont) extend its covenants to GPLv3 software as long as most crucial GNU/Linux components remain under GPL Microsoft will have something to wave around with. And time will go by, they will keep talking, spreading their fiction until people actually start believing some of it. So yes.. I think there *might* be something to what you're saying Helios and so here's a question for you. What do you think we should do about that? Edit: Also, helios, you're often talking metaphorically in some stories, but I'm interested in details. How exactly do you think Microsoft will take control? No maidens please, though. ;) |
| lcafiero Jul 30, 2007 9:27 AM EDT |
(Late to the party. Sorry) While Libervis is putting aside the maidens, I'd like to agree with Helios on his observation, for starters, and add that the last line in Pamela Jones' item rings of relevance, to wit: "For myself, I think it's time to think really seriously about who should be allowed to use the name Linux, before the trademark loses all its traditional meaning." I agree wholeheartedly with this. Technically, Linspire may operate using the Linux kernel, but I don't consider it a Linux distro anymore because it falls out with what I understand is the "traditional meaning" of calling something Linux (or, as I prefer to call it, GNU/Linux, but that's a debate for another time). Same with Novell, Xandros, etc. |
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!