Molecule Man writes, "Microsoft has stopped taking pot shots at Linux and is finally pulling out the big guns. Read between the lines and see how MS wants to lump the GPL with Communism and Witchcraft.
My only thought is that MS waited too long. This potentially will force the big Unix boys into a corner, where they will have to fight back, where they will have to support linux unequivocally."
You need to register though to see it: http://www.nytimes.com/2001/05/03/technology/03SOFT.html
they're just doing what businesses and politicians do: trying to get more power. and competing. it keeps the whole system kinda healthy-like, and is exactly how it's supposed to be.
Lorithar
05-03-2001, 01:10 PM
*sighs* ...
(thanks for the shortcut YarNess)
Microsoft is at it still.
All this for a few lumps of far better code that they desperately need outta the linux tree.
You know ... if they had just listened to the folks from (Then Digital Research) in 1982 their TCP stack wouldn't have the holes it does now.
That would be code chunk #1 on their hit list as far as I know ... I suppose that some smartass in microsoft could juggle the fixes in and try to hide them, but as they say they distribute their code somewhat .. and you KNOW that one of those bodies would a) recognize the code and b) rat them out.
They seem to imply (again) that the average computer type out there has no clue on just WHAT the GPL means. Yes ... I've read it. Yes .. it is slightly restrictive and somewhat 'communistic' in its approach to licence... HOWEVER the point to be made is that if I ship out a package with that licence and there is a small problem with the code, not only is someone going to report the problem, at least half a dozen folks are going to send me the fixes....
HULLOOOOOO... microsoft get the picture ... the days of the monopolistic software giant are on the outs. PERIOD... look at Oracle. I can go get the code, set it up and run it... and if I'm really good, I can keep it running on my system ... for private use.. and never have to pay a penny.... Yes .. if I am a large scale company using it for production (I work for one of those Billy Boy) I have to pay for the licencing ... and I will too, because at the level at which I pay for the licence I get onsite support for x months, and 24hour turnaround to resolution.
Microsoft onsite support .... DOES NOT EXIST folks ... and their 4hour turnaround corporate support costs a ridiculous price (Yes .. the company has paid it..... because we now have over 300 servers running differing flavours of their server software and over 6000 desktops running either NT 4 or win95 (blech))
You know who supports our MS O/S onsite??? compaq .. our hardware provider .. and IBM .. our hardware provider ... ooooh ... so THATS why the servers cost a small fortune... trust me .. .MS causes hardware costs to go up ... (follow the logic ??) ...
I am really getting sick of the EFUD that MS is running these days ....
In any case ... with all the spending on support bodies and calls ... the damned NT print servers flip over once or twice a day ... regularly... MS blames the printer manufacturer ..(HP... hmmmmm .. do they support opensource software and ... Oh.. UNIX... yupppers) and HP points out that it is indeed a kernel loaded dll that dies... not thiers...(Hal.dll ... wonderful pos code from ...MS). And the app servers and user data server tend to have heart attacks at least twice a week ... and for that matter I manage to kill off my desktop at work once or twice a week... (BSOD and byebye unsaved anything...... Unless it happened to be on the eXceed desktop, and the default function there is set to save on disconnect ..what a wonderful idea....)
Sheeesh ... we roll out registry patches and mcaffee updates WEEKLY to fix stupidity in the MS integrated desktop to protect the system from stupid macros and hacks and virii ... the last time we had to fix the core applications on the unix systems to prevent security problems came when someone discovered that we had several systems setup with default hosts.allow - hosts.deny configs. ... which were altered to OPEN the systems up ...
Yes .. Unix/Linux/Aix/HP/UX require some serious skills on the floor for support, and aren't as pretty in some incarnations, but dammit... we aren't calling IBM to troubleshoot AIX apps every other damn day..... Why??? because it damned well WORKS. ... we have been beating the daylights outta our HP/UX support staff, and the HP/UX systems support groups, but thats a skillsets issue on the floor... (okay .. I *don't* know everything ... .yet.... *grins*)
Next rant please........ *grin*....
binary_boy
05-03-2001, 01:37 PM
With open source software, there is no single company for Microsoft to drive out of business with unfair practices. Instead, to combat open source software, they have engaged in a disinformation propaganda campaign. They are trying to paint a picture in the minds of the public, business and government that open source software is bad.
I find it interesting that the company that drove Netscape out of business by giving IE away for free is now crying about the evils of free software.
Fireman-x
05-03-2001, 04:44 PM
The whole idea of free software isn't about price. It's about freedom. I can go ahead and sell my product if I want to. I have to distribute my code with it, but that is a good thing, people will find the hole's, let me know, then innovate on it.
If they take my product, make it better, then resell it, that forces me to try and compete, which lets the consumer have absolutely the best product that they can, because both myself and my new competitor can't screw up or we're in trouble.
EscapeCharacter
05-03-2001, 06:51 PM
Originally posted by Fireman-x:
<STRONG>The whole idea of free software isn't about price. It's about freedom. I can go ahead and sell my product if I want to. I have to distribute my code with it, but that is a good thing, people will find the hole's, let me know, then innovate on it.
If they take my product, make it better, then resell it, that forces me to try and compete, which lets the consumer have absolutely the best product that they can, because both myself and my new competitor can't screw up or we're in trouble.</STRONG>
which is kinda whats going on between mandrake and redhat
Sweede
05-03-2001, 08:11 PM
For you and i, small semi-small people, coders, groups, the GPL is perfect. it allows us to share code and build better projects.
For companies like Microsoft, Borland, Oracle, Powerquest, Allaire, InstallSheild, etc, their ENTIRE foundation of existance is based on the sale of software.
Part of the reason why our economy is such a drag is the sudden rise of .com's and the crappy OSS model'd businesses (RedHat,VA linux, etc) that CANNOT make money because the GPL forbids the sale of their software.
Redhat was something like, 15 million in quarterly retained earnings (the amount of cash left after ALL EXPENSES).
VA-Linux layed of almost their entire staff to avoid going under. Indromeda or whatever it was called, went bust because no one wants to fund a project that cannot make money.
way back in the early 80's when Bill Gates Licensed DOS 1 to IBM, with IBM execs saying "the Hardware makes the money, not to software", he hit the nail on the head and pushed it through all the wood.
Software makes the money, OSS does not make money.
arguments saying that Microsoft is stifiling our "freedom" is pure BS.
Nothing stops you from removing Microsoft Software and installing linux does it?
NO, oh damn, your freedom is being taken away.
If i spend 1000's of hours working thousands and thousands of lines of code, and i use 20 lines of GPL code, the GPL SAYS i MUST RELEASE my 1000's of hours of work for free. That is not freedom, that is a socialist idea.
one persons work benifits everyone, not the individual.
I wrote an economic paper about OSS, the GPL and Socialistic Market styles. My professor, who has a PH.D. in economics, loved it and thought it was one of the most accurate descriptions of the OSS MARKET/Business styles.
Microsoft IS NOT CONDEMMING OSS as a personal choice, they are CONDONING IT as a business model. A lot of people think that it is.
vvx
05-03-2001, 08:28 PM
Originally posted by Sweede:
[QB]For you and i, small semi-small people, coders, groups, the GPL is perfect. it allows us to share code and build better projects.
That's mostly who's using it.
For companies like Microsoft, Borland, Oracle, Powerquest, Allaire, InstallSheild, etc, their ENTIRE foundation of existance is based on the sale of software.
Then perhaps they shouldn't use GPL'd code
Part of the reason why our economy is such a drag is the sudden rise of .com's and the crappy OSS model'd businesses (RedHat,VA linux, etc) that CANNOT make money because the GPL forbids the sale of their software.
I think blaming OSS for our economy is probably a bit of a stretch, many factors caused it probably most notably the overinflated tech stocks (and not just OSS companies)
If i spend 1000's of hours working thousands and thousands of lines of code, and i use 20 lines of GPL code, the GPL SAYS i MUST RELEASE my 1000's of hours of work for free. That is not freedom, that is a socialist idea.
If you spend 1000's of hours working thousands and thousands of lines of code and you use 20 lines of MS copyrighted code, I imagine you'd be in an even worse situation. Yes, the GPL is restrictive but you are the one who used the code knowing darn well about the restrictions. MS' license is even worst, but who cares. If you can't follow the license, you don't use the code. That means you don't use MS code period because you're not licensed to do so. That means you don't use GPL code period unless you want to release under the GPL.
one persons work benifits everyone, not the individual.
We have welfare, social security, and a bunch of other government handouts, where one persons money work benefits for a lot of people. Do you really think the amount of taxes the top 1% pay goes back to themselves? I don't see you complaining about that. If you're making a piece of software, you're free to use whatever license you want, make up your own for all it matters. If you're making software using other people's code in part or whole then it's not really yours to begin with and belongs to the public domain, and there it should stay.
I wrote an economic paper about OSS, the GPL and Socialistic Market styles. My professor, who has a PH.D. in economics, loved it and thought it was one of the most accurate descriptions of the OSS MARKET/Business styles.
My sophemore year in highschool I had this english teacher who was a sexist ***** and evil, she had a PHD in english and told us about it alllll the time. Anyway, the only project I ever got an A on was a poem in which I talk about the evils of the internet and glamourize good old libraries -- I did it because I knew she was anti-technology. Now some of these people are really bright, some are not, but all have opinions.
Microsoft IS NOT CONDEMMING OSS as a personal choice, they are CONDONING IT as a business model. A lot of people think that it is.
I just don't see why MS cares, they don't have to use the thing themselves so what difference does it make, what threat does the GPL pose to them? I recall reading a clarification of one of their past gpl whine sessions in which they said the BSDL was A-OK! It's fairly obvious they like the BSDL because it isn't restrictive, you use 20 lines of BSDL code (or 20,000) and you can close it up and sell however you like. The only way the GPL can harm the business world is if the business world uses GPL code, to me that doesn't seem like much of a threat, unless GPL software continues to grow and becomes the better choice. In the past, if there was a better product out there, MS could buy it. That's what they fear I think, and that is my opinion, not fact, take it as such.
Jerry557
05-03-2001, 08:30 PM
Only one word describes this...TYPICAL! And I can't say I am surprised Microsoft is doing this. Right now, Bill Gates is on a little crusade to milk the public as much money as he possibly can with practices which are borderline illegal.
The new Office XP will be Microsoft's new highly controversal "Subscription Software" which means that you buy it in the store at retail price and have to pay Microsoft more money every year or it shuts off. Now they want names and addresses of customers that buy a PC without Windows pre-installed so they can start an anti-piracy investigation on you.
Linux is now more user friendly as ever and obviously Microsoft sees it as a high threat to their empire. Enough that they are starting to put the BB guns away and pulling out the cannons. But the question I have is how will they fight against something that is free and doesn't belong to any company? Well what they might try to do is what they did to Apple. In other words..."steal" features and put it into Windows; therefore eliminating the reason to explore other OS's. If you compare XP and Apple OS X; there are striking simularities which I think couldn't possibly be by coincidence.
Maybe everyone is right...Bill earned his billions off everyone elses ideas. Although I think it may be more difficult to copy Linux that way since some things that Linux does; Windows can never do or do the way you want it. Linux is a very customizable OS and is moving more towards that freedom...Microsoft seems to be going in the direct opposite direction. Forcing users to do things their way or the highway.
Linux and Microsoft is like Oil and water and the fight between the OS's will only get more intense as this decade rolls on.
GuruWannabe
05-03-2001, 08:52 PM
Originally posted by Sweede:
<STRONG>Part of the reason why our economy is such a drag is the sudden rise of .com's and the crappy OSS model'd businesses (RedHat,VA linux, etc) that CANNOT make money because the GPL forbids the sale of their software.
</STRONG>
To which GPL are you referring? The GPL I know about doesn't forbid selling software.
What you can't do is include GPL source code in a proprietary program. There's a difference.
mrkennie
05-03-2001, 09:01 PM
all i can say to m$ is:
itbring it on boys!! tux can handle it
aah screw em, M$ are like spoilt little school boys who cant get their own way. :rolleyes:
Jerry557
05-03-2001, 09:46 PM
Comming up tonite on Pay Per View!!
Bill Gates vs. Tux
***Free to watch from Linux machines but you must pay a $50 a minute subscription to watch it on Windows!
bwkaz
05-03-2001, 10:52 PM
Originally posted by larryliberty:
<STRONG>To which GPL are you referring? The GPL I know about doesn't forbid selling software.
What you can't do is include GPL source code in a proprietary program. There's a difference.</STRONG>
Exactly how I read it, too. If you use GPL'ed code, you have to release all your source, too. There is nothing stopping you from charging for your product (if there was, how on earth could every Linux distro be sold in stores for those people that don't have T1's to the Internet to download ISO's?).
The "free" in the GPL does not refer to price, but freedom -- freedom to take someone else's code and improve it.
If you need any more clarification, I suggest the actual text of the GPL (http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/gpl.html#SEC3), and also GNU's definition of free software (http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html).
Bryan
Tyr-7BE
05-04-2001, 01:07 AM
Yeah I'd pay money to see a giant penguin beat the crap out of Gates.
Linux will always be free and will always be a viable alternative, but its numbers will dwindle and dwindle with the more FUD that MS spreads. What Linux and open source in general needs is an anti-MS-FUD device of some sort. Something that can be shown to the general public that completely discredits MS's FUD. I'm ashamed to say, but before I went to University, I didn't even know what UNIX was...I just knew that MS was far superior to UNIX because of all the stuff they've been claiming :rolleyes:. Now I know better and having been in that situation, I'd like to see MS's claims about linux being "unstable" and "inferior" and "a toy" completely turned upside down and thrown back in their face. The problem is that you can't do it on something like slashdot. It's gotta hit the general public so that Joe Blow who owns a few offices downtown will decide "hey wait...it's free, and according to this article it's good...how can I lose?". It's gotta appear on something like MSNBC or even ZdNet. Anyone know of how this might be accomplished?
Sensei
05-04-2001, 01:16 AM
Well I agree completely with the first part of sweede's comments.
vvx:
That's mostly who's using it.
Well thats not exactly the intent of the Linux community anymore. Most people are hoping Redhat, VA, Mandrake, and the rest of the survivor linux companies don't go under. For them not to go under they need to sell!
I mean the major push with Linux and IBM's investment blah blah blah was not intended to be for:
For you and i, small semi-small people, coders, groups, the GPL is perfect. it allows us to share code and build better projects.
The dynamics and goals for where people want (note NEED) Linux to go do not depend on the semi small people, but depend on the same Fortune 500 companies that Oracle, Sun, etc sell too.
The linux sector (business wise) is very weak right now, but the Linux community has never been stronger (well maybe 8 months ago it was).
In the past, if there was a better product out there, MS could buy it. That's what they fear I think, and that is my opinion, not fact, take it as such.
Can't agree with you more here. They spread their FUD non stop pushing down a weak Linux machine and trying to capitalize on its weakness. This is why I say they can never fully blow out the candle, but whos to say they can't knock linux down to a situation where slackware is in right now? Pushing Linux into a backyard OS project once again?
Its definitely reaching to say that, but look very long term stretch. I mean Eazel and smaller players are done any day now, Caldera is probably going to be the first major co. on the chopping block, Corel is not going to die, but they are definitely held back, and then VA.
Redhat has enough cash to survive especially with their partners etc. All these Linux companies were so bad at running their businesses its gross and I do blame them for bringing down the sentiment in the Linux world. Linux could have still been very hot right now. Regular people have already forgotten about Linux because of stock prices. They attribute hype to what Linux is or can do and thats not congruent. What is congruent is how businesses are run and the stock prices of them. This is where they fscked up!
Side note:
I just never got what the fsck VA really did. they wanted to snatch the hardware sector that is already over saturated and HIGHLY competitive and slap their modified version of redhat and debian on board?
I mean they had enough talent to do some really big things. Of course I may be oblivious to their past accomplishments (Excuse me if they did some incredible things I overlooked), but it looks like Slashdot.org is the only thing holding them up right now. Linux.com? What a flop.
Sensei
05-04-2001, 01:23 AM
re-reading some posts really is showing me the light that apple could really work its way back up the chain for the desktop market.
I mean Linux is definitely last on the list for desktop and first for server right now.
Apple really has neither, but aims for the desktop. If MS' XP flops which to all of us seems like it will (I can't imagine it doing well), then Apple could really slide right in. Maybe its destiny speaking out loud? ;)
tnordloh
05-04-2001, 02:02 AM
"That creates many problems downstream, many of which haven't come home to roost yet."
I hate it when they mix their metaphors. Makes em sound dopey.
Tyr-7BE
05-04-2001, 02:17 AM
Originally posted by Sensei:
<STRONG>Side note:
I just never got what the fsck VA really did. they wanted to snatch the hardware sector that is already over saturated and HIGHLY competitive and slap their modified version of redhat and debian on board?
I mean they had enough talent to do some really big things. Of course I may be oblivious to their past accomplishments (Excuse me if they did some incredible things I overlooked), but it looks like Slashdot.org is the only thing holding them up right now. Linux.com? What a flop.</STRONG>
Seems to me that VA is and was just another server manufacturer, but they capitalized on the linux hype. A few months back when linux was plastered all over the news for some reason or another (that's why I decided to try it), that's when VA was trading at $200 per share. Now that the hype has died, they're just another player in a grossly oversaturated market as you said. Combine that with the steady decline of dot-coms leading to fewer server sales, and you have one sadly ailing company, closing at closer to $2 per share. I have a friend who's convinced that they'll shoot back up to their original level, but I seriously doubt it. The hype is over, and unless something seriously new and incredible comes along and takes the world by storm and is related to linux, it will continue to grow the same way it always has.
Major Geek
05-04-2001, 11:07 AM
Originally posted by Sweede:
<STRONG>Part of the reason why our economy is such a drag is the sudden rise of .com's and the crappy OSS model'd businesses (RedHat,VA linux, etc) that CANNOT make money because the GPL forbids the sale of their software.</STRONG>
What evidence do you have to support this claim?
<STRONG>Nothing stops you from removing Microsoft Software and installing linux does it? NO, oh damn, your freedom is being taken away.</STRONG>
No, but when a company like MS forces OEM's to only sell machines with Windows on them,(Something they were convicted of in a court of law) then that limits consumer choice. Consumers are forced to absorb the cost of software they may not want. Oh, but I forgot. Your legal knowledge FAR EXCEEDS those of the Justice Department and the Attorneys who tried the case, right?
<STRONG>If i spend 1000's of hours working thousands and thousands of lines of code, and i use 20 lines of GPL code, the GPL SAYS i MUST RELEASE my 1000's of hours of work for free. That is not freedom, that is a socialist idea.</STRONG>
No, that is stupidity and bad engineering. If you want to sell it, then don't use GPL code. You have a choice on what type of code to use.
<STRONG>I wrote an economic paper about OSS, the GPL and Socialistic Market styles. My professor, who has a PH.D. in economics, loved it and thought it was one of the most accurate descriptions of the OSS MARKET/Business styles.</STRONG>
My bet is that I could easily find a PH.D. in Economics that thinks your paper is full of nonsense. Probably take me about an hour.
I say that mainly because you consistenly are bragging about yourself. More than a few times I've seen you mention in your posts that you "wrote a paper" about something and your Professor (and you always mention the Ph.D.) thought you were a genius. If you're such a genius, then why don't you recognize your consistent fallacy of appealing to authority?
Get over yourself.
[ 04 May 2001: Message edited by: Major Geek ]
thor4linux
05-04-2001, 12:32 PM
Can someone explain or post a link about Microsoft tring to track computers w/o OS's and who is buying them?
Thanks
[ 04 May 2001: Message edited by: thor4linux ]
AlphaGeek
05-04-2001, 03:43 PM
Assorted article quotes & thoughts follow.
In a speech defending Microsoft's business model, (...)
Which, historically speaking, is to buy the competition thereby rendering the term `competition' quite moot. Simply put, this tactic can't work with Linux - it's like trying to fight fog with a sword.
"This viral aspect of the G.P.L. poses a threat to the intellectual property of any organization making use of it," Mr. Mundie said in a telephone interview this week.
This brings to mind a tired old joke.. perhaps a familiar one;
Patient: "Doctor," he says, "it hurts when I lift my arm like this. Whatever shall I do?"
Doctor: "Quite simple, really. Don't lift your arm like that."
He said Microsoft was particularly concerned about the inroads that the open-source idea was making in other countries.
"It's happening very, very broadly in a way that is troubling to us," he said. "I could highlight a dozen countries around the world who have open-source initiatives."
Before folks beat this particular horse to death, my singular thought:
Stability isn't the issue. Cost isn't the issue. Granted, these two points are icing on the proverbial cake, but (keeping with the metaphor) the icing doesn't make the cake.
Then what is the issue? The very fact that he can quote a dozen countries with such initiatives. Pandora's Box has been opened, folks. Now that the suits are discovering non-Microsoft solutions to their IT needs (& more seem to be cluing in daily), I forcast some truly interesting times ahead.
Jerry557
05-04-2001, 03:48 PM
I don't remember the link but I think it was off the TechTV website. They said that Microsoft is trying to bribe computer OEM's and manufactures for names and addresses of people or companies that order computers without Windows installed.
Microsoft will give them:
A. A BBQ (No Joke!)
B. Tons of free software
C. Discounts on Microsoft products and free subscriptions to Office XP.
Microsoft will then check and start investigating to make sure you arn't stealing.
There was also a rumor circulating that one Microsoft Programmer was wanting to put something in XP so that it will filter out LILO or Grub and not allow any write access to the MBR so that it can't run Linux and XP on the same machine and impossible to network the two OS's and bans Samba. I am not sure if that was ever confirmed or not. I just heard it off TV once.
But Microsoft would never do that! They arn't a monopoly right? They care about us!
They have publically committed themselves to Linux and are developing applications and solutions on and for lin in most divisions of their global business. I know several developers that work for IBM at a somewhat high-level in the organization and they all use Linux (NOTE: NOT AIX in all of thier server farms for compilers and various application services... It just makes good sense.
BTW: Sensei: Any special reason you used the term "Survivor Linux Companies..."
;p ;p ;p
heh.
RobMc
05-05-2001, 01:12 AM
Indeed, if w2k sales/upgrades aren't so hot(I'd love to get UNBIASED sales figures on this)..they (Msoft)hope to ca$h in with this XP system?If they were a rock group, it's like their last big album, W2000, sold only
soo--much, and now this one?
If they want to kleen up they should sell it for a third of their usual pricing. If w2k were going for that, I'dve bought it by now(along with my Ldistro collection).
A sick subtext to this story is a New York Times cover story just this last April about how a whole bunch of Microsoft employees who invested in stock options or such in lieu of timely raises or bonuses got shafted;some are,I think the article said, even facing penury.
UNIX people--join together with the Linux band! Organize: Agree how your *nix Airline
is to fly! :D
Jerry557
05-05-2001, 01:43 AM
Do you want a real COOL statistic?
Did you know the average computer user "contributes" $300 per year to Bill Gates' bank account? Because of the new XP Subscription Software...that average per person will go up to $325 per year.
Of course his puppets like VP Craig Mundie will practically say anything to make you stay and fight with the Dark Side. If you resist; Bill will terminate you by sending the terrible, awful, unholy, dreaded, BLUE SCREEN OF DEATH!!!! And noone has lived to tell the tale!
[ 05 May 2001: Message edited by: Jerry557 ]
GrassMunk
05-05-2001, 02:38 AM
You know whats got MS Scared ****less? Thirdworld nations that are slowly building up economic power. Why? Because they all beleive in the power of the penguin. Schools can barely afford A computer. But take those computers and then add the cost of Win95 and thats about the pay for a family of five for a year. Noe admitedly its the hardware that costs most of the money. But on one machine who care right? On a few dozen the ammount of money spent on MS licenses is astronomical. They dont even have to pay for Linux. No courses, no license fees nothing, just learn how to use it and go about your mary way. That why MS is scared. Its got America and Canada in its Palm [and some of Europe]. But elsewhere they either Pirate it or give M$ the old FU Salute.
-GM
Jerry557
05-05-2001, 02:53 AM
Have any of you read Linus's reply to Mundie's statements? It's good!
http://web.siliconvalley.com/content/sv/2001/05/03/opinion/dgillmor/weblog/torvalds.htm
ASCI Blue
05-05-2001, 10:43 AM
Here's a corner for you.
Thirteenth Amendment:
Section 1. Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.
Main Entry: slav·ery
Function: noun
2 : submission to a dominating influence
Now according to the law and the defination Microsoft IS encouraging slavery by forcing Winblows upon us. If any of you know about their past they've threatened to remove licensing from Micron, Gateway, and iirc Compaq for wanting to put a differant browser on their computers.
In the new program, outlined in a memo issued by Microsoft's Western Region OEM group, Microsoft trumpets: "You may be eligible to win prizes! Here's how... By submitting bids that request PC systems without an Operating System due to a Microsoft site license, you can earn points and win! ... If you are the first to identify the bid you will be awarded one point for each PC specified on the bid."
The program memo subhead, however, is: "Identifying PC Bids that do not include an Operating System for each PC." And, the document's first lines are: "Microsoft OEM Western Region introduces a pilot program that rewards you for notifying us about Bids that do not include operating systems and helps you help your customers to be compliant."
Is it just me or are they STILL trying to *cough* FORCE US to use their products? In a country where the Twinkie Defense works I think this could work too.
Jerry557
05-05-2001, 10:53 AM
Microsoft not only wants to FORCE us to use their software but they want to FORCE us to use it their way or in a way they think is right. That is the beauty of Open Source. That you arn't trapped with a product you don't like. If you don't like something about Linux...change it!
Look at it this way. You buy a car and the salesman tells you "sorry, but you arn't allowed to look under the hood." That is what Microsoft tells you. When consumers buy something. They like to feel ownership that they own this because they bought it and worked for the money to buy it. Microsoft doesn't want the consumer to feel that way. Microsoft still wants to own Windows even after you buy it.
Mudie declared war on Open Source and everyone knew Microsoft would. I'm just surprised it took them this long to do it. And they might be too late. Linux is already being accepted as a real OS throught the country and throughout the world.
I can't wait to see what the average (or beginner) home computer user thinks about Microsoft's subscription software. They won't know untill the final reviews of XP come out a month before its release.
[ 05 May 2001: Message edited by: Jerry557 ]
ASCI Blue
05-05-2001, 12:36 PM
In reguards to their subscription software it seems they're tring to force that down our throats too. I think of it like this: The average computer user won't know any better for one reason, they're not adventerous enough to learn and they don't want to take any risks. I remember the old days of DOS when I had a seperate boot disk for three or four games. I really think the slavery thing just might be crazy enough to work, they're forcing us to buy their software just to have working computers (I'm talking about the AVERAGE user) and now they're gonna try to make people pay for that use..isn't this EXACTLY what we did to blacks before they got their rights? I'm thinking the poll tax. I won't deny it's a long shot but I REALLY think that MS can be brought to their knees in a very short time if someone brings up the slavery issue. We've got it in the constitution, we've got a definition for it, why not go for it!!!
JBrian
05-05-2001, 01:47 PM
Yeah I'd pay money to see a giant penguin beat the crap out of Gates.
http://www.kmfms.com/main-logo.jpg
[ 05 May 2001: Message edited by: JBrian ]
Jerry557
05-05-2001, 02:50 PM
Subscription software is stupid. If Microsoft wants that much money...Why not just charge $500 for a version of Windows. Since that is pretty much the longest a user will use 1 version of windows before Microsoft puts out "XP2" which will cost another fortune and do nothing different than XP1 but fix the (currently undiscovered) major security problem that will force users to upgrade.
I can't wait till the new Office XP comes out with their subscription software. I want to see if Microsoft is going to make sure the public understands it and puts it on the box or if they just put it in the final lines of the fine print.
It's amazing how the computer industy tries to trick the average Joe and the general public. Manufacturers will call their Pentium 4 system, "Top of the line." When in fact they have a cheap motherboard and a crappy video card in there and end up with a price like $2,000+!
Buying a computer is getting just as bad as buying a car! If you know nothing about them; you are probably going to be ripped off.
[ 05 May 2001: Message edited by: Jerry557 ]
ASCI Blue
05-06-2001, 12:26 AM
The P4 is just crap. *ntel has made a farce of themselves since the 1.13 P3 not working and have gone downhill since. P4's run slower than P3's at less Mhz..interesting no?
hmmm... I just realized that inadvertantly, I am contributing to the whole 'schools for tux' thing... I sponsor a student organization at a US college, and because we have such a limited budget, I made the decision to move most of our computers to several flavors of linux. We are also working on getting MacOSX, NT4, 2K, Netware, and FBSD... The first 4 mentioned there are actually proving harder to find (staying legit here) than anything GPL, of course, and GNU/Hurd OS's are what my students are demanding ANYWAY, since there is no formal course(s) available for them to learn linux. They WANT to learn it through the club. I never thought about it, but I think I've been pretty much herding the club to linux, without knowing it (it was not really a concious thing--it just made sense).
Ergo, I can see the point about educators leaning toward it. I also teach here, and try to include *x OS's in my curriculum wherever applicable.
Guess this is kinda what Apple was trying to do, but like with Lin, it's happening on it's own.
:confused: :D
justlinux.com
Copyright Internet.com Inc. All Rights Reserved.