Slashdot Mirror

You don't need to answer, it's a rhetorical question, I already know the answer.

Hello owski... we meet again.

remember me?

Just making a small, albeit offtopic and belated troll here.

What are you talking about, NetWare isn't even remotely related to Unix.

Observe the truth... and not just the truth that you're an ignoramus!

Novell could not write an original network operating system from scratch so they licensed a Unix kernel and based Netware on that

wiki

Not having the skills or time to write a network operating [system], Novell bought a license to a Unix kernel and based NetWare on that foundation.

source

You don't know everything, owski, but not infrequently you speak as though you do, even confabulating while spreading misinformation. Leave your geek card on your way out, kthxbai.

Clearly businesses are not moving to Macs, and deeply distrust Apple equipment. Oh wait... http://news.cnet.com/8301-13579_3-57355159-37/look-out-microsoft-apple-is-grabbing-more-it-dollars/

Nobody's using Linux either. http://www.aaxnet.com/design/linux2.html

Here's a history of the lawsuits Microsoft has lost through 2003: http://www.aaxnet.com/topics/msinc.html .
Many of these were MS ripping off competitors. These are just the cases where the victims could stick it out financially for long enough to see the lawsuits through.

Haskell (the language) and GHC (the compiler) were both already going before MS joined, yes. But since when do you have to start a project to innovate in it?

I did not say MS does not innovate at all, what I did say was "Almost nothing that is innovative comes from MS." I then went further and said MS either "bought, or like Steve Jobs, copied or stole then brought to the masses."

Other than new methods of limiting competition and spreading FUD, MS has not innovated much in-house.

More broadly, just go to Google Scholar and search for "Microsoft Research".

I did and got about 598,000 results. I next googled Google Research and got 3,120,000 results. To make it more balanced I'll try another search engine too.. Wow, Blekko returned 89M for Microsoft Research and 145M for Google Research. Ah, go ahead and try MS's Bing: Microsoft Research returns 73,100,000 whereas Google Research returns 70,800,000 results. On 2 on out of 3 search engines "Google Research", without the double quotes, returns more results than "Microsoft Research".

Now I'm not sure if searching for "X Research" means much. It's actually start-ups that do most of the innovating. Established incumbents then either try to buy them out or copies them. Just look at web browsers. After Internet Explorer (IE), licensed by Microsoft from Spyglass Inc (which is another story), won the browser war in the '90s MS stopped improving IE. Internet Explorer 6 was released on 27 August 2001. It wasn't until 18 October 2006, more than 5 years later, when Internet Explorer 7 was released. So it wasn't until open source Firefox started gaining marketshare before MS released a new browser itself.

Oh and about Spyglass Inc. MS licensed the source code to Mosaic and agreed to pay them a quarterly fee plus a royalty from Microsoft's Internet Explorer revenue. By including it free with Windows though MS thought "they did not have to pay royalties to Spyglass Inc". So Spyglass sued Microsoft before MS finally agreed in a deal to pay Spyglass $20 Million.

Falcon

well you could use google but I'm sure that's to complicated, so go here; http://aaxnet.com/topics/msinc.html#law

MS has been such a problem by making unrefusable offers, that it's part of common culture. Making fun of it was probably a factor in a former political cartoon itself getting an offer it couldn't refuse and ending up under the control of MS' own competitor to Salon. A Gates-style "buy out" is a concept of its own.

... Their owners sell them because there's a chance their company will fail and they'll go under...

That's exactly the point repeated throughout this topic by many people. But you left off the reason: the small company will likely go under because it has been targeted by Megacorp, for a small business Microsoft is the kiss of death. Besides, advocating use of MS products at this late date is to knowingly advocate bleeding money from US workers. How many have to be fired to pay for the "upgrades", which in turn pay for the "buyouts"?

Get the facts, people.

... For certain values of "fact".

http://www.aaxnet.com/editor/edit033.html

Have you a stake in Microsoft, then? Or just an application that requires Windows? I'll certainly agree that *nix isn't for everybody -- anybody who claims otherwise is just as bad as any Microsoft apologist. But you give the impression that you feel that Windows is better for everybody, without qualification.

Sure do. How about seven years old?

• http://www.aaxnet.com/news/M010823.html

And just so we don't get into some sort of infinite recursion here, no, I don't have any evidence newer than five minutes. I'm sure the instances where Microsoft has been caught have taught them how to be more covert.

Yaz.

These people disagree with you:

AAXNet

Slashdot

About.com

But then you've proved yourself to be a shill for Quickbooks. Why should anyone listen to you?

> replacing IE, Outlook, MS Office, and MSN messenger [on Windows] does some differences

Actually, you're right, it makes a lot of difference, by cutting off attack paths for viruses and ad/spyware. Good point!

> things I miss and/or have not found good free/opensouce solutions for:

> antivirus (never liked AVG)

It wouldn't surprise me if the Open Source antivirus products are weak. It's a question of motivation -- most developers would choose to be improving good software, to make it more virus-proof, rather than creating band-aids for Microsoft's mess.

> book-keeping(small company, products,prices,inventory,payroll normal stuff)...

There is a growing number of small business accounting solutions for Linux:

See: Linux - Accounting Software

The list includes some known names, such as Accpac, and Appgen.

I've also heard good things about the Open Source project SQL-Ledger. Because it stores its data in an SQL database (such as PostgreSQL), you can create your own reports, using, for example, the OpenOffice Database tool. Or, because it's Open Source, you can get even more adventurous, and customize it for your business.

> software for doing labels and stickers (haven't really looked)

There is support in this area. See Printing Avery labels with Linux.

Um, no. Crackers invade, hackers code.

http://www.aaxnet.com/topics/hacker.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hacker
http://onlinedictionary.datasegment.com/word/cracker
http://www.definethat.com/define/7357.htm

Seems like they're tricking the news services into running free scare-tactics PR for them.

Unfortunately for them, it is getting businesses into compliance. High risk high cost software is discontinued as a possible business buster as low risk software becomes good enough.

Missing reciepts for MS Office and Photoshop are high risk liabilities. Missing reciepts for The Gimp and Open Office is no problem.

There are several high profile companies using open source.
http://www.aaxnet.com/design/linux2.html
http://mtechit.com/linux-biz/ Click on each catagory for the list of companies.
As of 2003-03-18, there are 557 entries in this list.

• Gates buys stake in aircraft carrier builder
• New Aircraft Carrier to use Windows

"Surely you jest!" you say. And how I wish it were so:

http://www.aaxnet.com/news/M010512.html#rights

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2001/03/30/all_your_data_and_biz/

http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=01/04/03/1535244

"Convicted monopolist". You guys crack me up. That phrase has 0 legal meaning.

The Court of Appeals judged the case on merit rather than on prejudice. Microsoft lost on every single point. The court held that:

        * Microsoft does indeed poses a monopoly.
        * Microsoft has leveraged their monopoly in clear violation of the law.
        * The guilty verdict is completely sound and there is no reason to reconsider it.
        * Breaking up Microsoft is not an overly harsh penalty and could be re-imposed.

And what is the cost of an audit by companies who push proprietary stuff? Even failing to document properly the acquisition of a few licenses makes people felons these days. Can you *prove* you own every piece of proprietary software in your school? Really *prove* you own even *discounted* software? If a few certification documents are missing, it could mean jail time for someone these days. Personally, I think the laws which have been recently changed to make copyright violation criminal instead of civil are wrong, and will likely end up with as many people behind bars as for marijuana possession but that is the way it is, and an attitude like yours helps contribute to it -- in part by not considering the total cost of ownership when licensing compliance is considered.

Think it can't happen to you? Consider:
    "Microsoft vs. Northwest Schools Part III"
    http://slashdot.org/articles/02/05/21/196252.shtml ?tid=146
Or:
    "Microsoft Screws Schools: The Redmond Giant applies "extortion marketing" to the 24 largest school districts in Washington and Oregon."
    http://www.aaxnet.com/news/M020422.html
"Microsoft has given the school districts 60 days to inventory their huge number of computers and match them all to paperwork proving they have valid licenses for all Microsoft software. This would be impossible at the best of times, but Microsoft has pulled this stunt at the busiest time of year. Should a school district fail to complete the audit in time, Microsoft will "help" by sending in their own audit team, but if just one computer is found non-compliant, the schools have to pay for the audit - and it ain't gonna be cheap. Given the way schools acquire computers (many are donated), it is absolutely certain some will be declared noncompliant. But Microsoft has a solution! The district can just sign the Microsoft School Agreement. Just count all the computers and pay Microsoft $42 per computer every year. The Microsoft agreement says you count ALL computers that could conceivably ever run any Microsoft software. That includes Apple Macintoshes and apparently any computers running Linux, Unix and other non-Microsoft operating systems. Meanwhile, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation makes a big PR stink over donating software (which costs them about nothing, but gets written off for millions against taxes) to schools. Hypocrisy rules the day. Update: 04-30-02 - Microsoft has a Guide to Accepting Donated Comptuers which states that you cannot accept donations that do not include the original disks and certificates for Windows and all other software on them. The guidlines imply that you cannot accept computers without a Windows license even if you intend to reformat them and put Linux on them. The implication is absurd, but if you've been swindled into accepting the Microsoft School Agreement, you can't put Windows on them (because you don't have the original license), but you still have to include them in the total count and pay for Microsoft licensing on them anyway. ..."

What values are you teaching kids when you participate in such extortions?

How the hell is this insightful? It's even a blatant lie. Microsoft WAS convicted, even if they weren't punished: http://www.aaxnet.com/editor/edit019.html

That's about all one could ever say in favor of a Microsoft product. They will always asymptotically approach useability.

That's true if you consider "dumb" usable. The trend I've noticed is less control, less flexibility, fewer 3rd party vendors (aka choice) and more annoyance and auto-wrong features. Security and stability have remained poor and have trended down.

They have pulled out the stops in their breakage of XP though. Today I watched someone try to rebuild an XP laptop. He'd done it manytimes before because someone stuck him with admin responsibility for 15 of them. The process had changed on him this time and it failed. The usual tedious process of manually downloading "updates" fell apart and the automatic process took over and could not be stopped. A couple hours later, I stuck my head in to see how it was going and he was reading a M$ support page about "silent failures". Better him than me.

This "upgrade" cycle has the feeling 95 to 98 did but worse. Eerything fell apart at once and the answer was to buy a new one. This time the "new one" is a computer with about 4 times the hardware. BadVista's got the scoop on this one, Vista - Arrogance & Stupidity, "No sane person wants Vista, so Microsoft is making sure they have no choice."

>Going by your stats Bill Gates has given to charity around 50% of the money he's EARNED. What proportion of the money YOU have EARNED have you given to charity?

That's where the issue is. Ethically, he stole the money. Legally, he defrauded others of it. Remember the various court cases Microsoft was involved in when Bill Gates was owner and operator of Microsoft? Yeah, the ones they either lost or settled out of court (or bought out other companies to settle). The ones that actually made The Simpson's do a parody of Bill Gates "buying out" Homer by busting up the place.

Giving back 50% of what's not yours is a really good start, though. Once he's finished giving out the rest of his ill-gotten gains, well, then I'll consider his debt getting closer to being paid. He still needs to pay for lying to a judge under oath. He should have received jail time for that, and the lack of punishment means he needs to make it up to society in another way. Perhaps if the millions he stole manage to create a cure for HIV (supposedly that's something his foundation is working on) that'll make up for that one.

Until then, the man ran a criminal enterprise and was (I wouldn't be surprised if he still is, he's shown no attempts at reformation) an incredible scofflaw. He deserves every ounce of suspicion we give him.

For the fallen comrades, shouts to: Digital Research, Stac, Intuit, Syn'x, Spyglass, 3Com, Temps, SCO (ok, not really), Borland, Bristol Technologies, AT&T (oh well), Caldera, Sun, Java, Ed Curry, Goldtouch, Netscape, Palm, Blue Mountain Arts, Eolas, Hyperphrase, Intertrust, Eastman Kodak, Daum Communications, Be, AOL (heh), Network Commerce, Burst.com, SPX, E-Data, Real Networks, Mythic, and all Israeli; American; Japanese; EU; and Brazilian citizens.

Yes, Bill Gates has indeed "touched" a lot of lives. As the other poster commented, "touched" like Rockefeller "touched" American (heck, indeed worldwide) lives.

There are others. See http://www.aaxnet.com/design/linuxacct.html. I am not an accountant, so I don't know what is good and what is not, but accounting is often brought up a reason for needing Windows, though there seem to be several options on Linux.

Just wondering since it was a personal investment by Bill Gates into Newport News Shipbuilding that was quickly followed by a statement that Newport News Shipbuilding DoD contract to build aircraft carriers would use Microsoft Windows on these ships.

http://www.aaxnet.com/news/M000714.html
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2000/02/22/gates_buys _stake_in_aircraft/

Or maybe the reply by the Brits when asked was something like, "nobody ever got fired for choosing Microsoft" and pointed to the press release from Newport News and the DoD...

Actually, just because their previous system was from the stone age, it does not justify picking something more modern but well known for catastrophic systems failures( nachi, nimbda, blaster, etc ). That just makes them look more screwed up than they already look for keeping their systems so out of date in the first place. IMO.

So, is there a connection between Newport News Shipbuilding and BAE or is this just a follow the payed-off/purchased leader?

LoB

Have you taken a look at NOLA? It looks (from the outside) like something you could work with.
http://www.nolapro.com/
Also check out this site it has alot of options listed http://www.aaxnet.com/design/linuxacct.html

I wouldn't want to switch to windows either.

Microsoft always has a stance against something. For example, Microsoft considers free and open software to be their enemy. Not their competition, not just an alternative. However, suppose I called some of the other top software companies in the world. Do you think that Intuit considers GNUCash to be the enemy or that Symantec thinks that free virus scanners, firewalls, and disk partitioning tools should be unconstitutional because they are viral and will destroy the industry? Does Adobe send secret emails chiding the makers of the GIMP? Do they embrace and extend standards like PNG the way Microsoft did with HTML? Does Autodesk make PR statements about Blender in an attempt to spead FUD about it?

When Microsoft talks about open-source they sound like George Bush talking about terrorism. They have a lot of bright people, and can make some damn good software. But the company would do better if they stopped declaring competitors to be an axis-of-evil, and just made software.

On the flip side, Team OS/2's lack of structure meant that it was vulnerable. Various journalists have documented a "dirty tricks" campaign by Microsoft.[citation needed] Online, numerous individuals (nicknamed "Microsoft Munchkins" by John C. Dvorak[citation needed]) used pseudonyms to attack OS/2 and manipulate online discussions. Whittle was the target of a vicious character assassination campaign, and anyone friendly to OS/2 faced numerous vociferous attacks as well.[citation needed] Some journalists who were less than enthusiastic about OS/2 received death threats and other nasty e-mail from numerous sources, always identified in taglines as "Team OS/2".[citation needed] Ultimately, at least some of Microsoft's efforts were exposed on Will Zachmann's Canopus forum on CompuServe, where the owner of one particular account, ostensibly belonging to "Steve Barkto", (who had been attacking OS/2, David Barnes, Whittle, and other OS/2 fans) was discovered to be funded by the credit card of a high-level Microsoft employee / evangelist who had also been active in the forums.[citation needed] James Fallows, a nationally-renowned journalist, even weighed in to state that the stylistic fingerprint found in the Barkto posts were almost certainly a match with the stylistic fingerprints in the Microsoft evangelist's postings.[citation needed] Will Zachmann sent an open letter to Steve Ballmer, futilely demanding a public investigation into the business practices of the publicly traded Microsoft.[citation needed] What is clear is that Microsoft was taking seriously the threat posed by Team OS/2 and their online and real-world activities.

A summary with several links to more info can be found here. And another report on it here. Don't know if that's the "proof" you want, but it sure looks like MS was/is astroturfing to me.

I didn't 'grade' your paper. I just pointed out some errors that might make you seem illiterate. By all means write and spell however you want. People often judge your intelligence, and wether its worth listening to (or reading) you by how well you do.

For one, no matter what you 'feel', MS *IS* a monopolist. They *HAVE* been convicted: http://www.aaxnet.com/editor/edit019.html

For another, I was merely replying to you. I wasn't commenting on the original issue (as you correctly noted, the thread has gone somewhat offtopic)

And I really do hope that you don't really think that it would be ok for Bill Gates to murder or steal - this may be a free nation, but we are also a nation of laws. And while there may be some morality topics that are the subject of debate, murder and theft are fairly universally agreed to be 'wrong.'

And yes, educating people that they have a choice is good. But the monopolist has the power to make it very difficult to impossible for people to make those choices, or at least, once they have chosen, to prevent them from making a different choice in the future. So that is one reason to make the choice now, and not in the monopolist's favor.

Also educating people about why they should make certain choices is important. Some choose becuase they like to use software that isn't susceptible to the latest 'virus or trojan of the hour'. Some choose becuase they like software that doesn't crash or doesn't force you into a particular way of doing things. Some choose because they don't like their data stored in secret formats that might prevent them from making a differnt choice in the future. Some are unable to, becuase they have to exchange data with others that are too short-sighted to make the choice, and instead of using openly documented file formats and communications protocols, the MS software they use can only communicate with other MS software. Can you imagine if in order to make a phone call to someone you had to have the exact same brand of telephone? In the real world it would never fly - there are many different brands of phone, and one that didnt work with other brands would be DOA. It flies in the 'Word Processor' and 'Spreadsheet' worlds, ONLY becuase MS has an illegal monopoly. The end of the monopoly will mean open formats, and open formats will mean the end of the monopoly. Not today, not in the next year or two. But eventually it will, unless MS manages to get Palladium (or whatever they are calling it today) slipped into every commodity PC or motherboard made that lets them restrict what software can run. Then we will all be stuck and it will be too late to do anything about it.

Some do it for Software Freedom (RMS' kind). Some because they lament the sorry state that computer software and technology is in under MS control, and wait for the day that industry will be a healthy, competitive market. And quite frankly, MS in its current state couldn't compete in that kind of market. They are FAR better at marketeering and 'FUD' than they are at actually making useful reliable software.

You have no idea what the case was about, do you? They were convicted of abusing their monopoly, and there were far more complaints than just the integrated (not just simply included) browser.

Whatever

Do some research into OS/2 to find out why Windows 3.1 was also bundled. So you mean to tell me that applications and drivers written for another operating system don't run well under OS/2! How enlightening. The reasons for this will become clear when you dig a little more into the origins of OS/2.

I'm sure that's exactly how it happened

Microsoft has been harping on this for ages. Doesn't anyone remember when they were bribing system builders to report clients who put in bids for OS-less pcs?

http://www.aaxnet.com/news/M010425.html

Why doesn't MS port their non-OS apps to .Net? MS wants their customers to always port software to the latest and greatest MS language/environment of the year, so why doesn't MS do the same?

Well... They're currently implementing Office using .NET...

I've also seen a MSDN .NET show where one of the developers confirmed this. Office has been and will be for some time to come their #1 cash cow... I'd say that's commitment enough.

As it looks to me, .Net is the "soup of the day" at MS. .Net will be replaced in 3-5 years with something else that will require MS customers to re-purchase their development tool chain.

As for .NET being replaced in a few years... I really doubt that, a few years from now .NET 3.0 is going to be released, I know this as I was in a meeting where they were presenting the new features that are going to be added to it. I can also say as a MS.NET developer, that Microsoft .NET is hugely popular and well liked by anyone who has spent time on it. I've yet to meet anyone who was negative on this architecture who has actually used it. There's nothing wrong with it, architecturely it's very well thought out. So I think basically you're talking totally on emotional grounds here with little or nothing to back it up.

I'm really quite amazed how highly such a stupid comment can be modded here simply because it's anti-Microsoft.

Along the same lines, back before The Register got all soft on Gates, the posted his major purchase. Actually it was made by his investment firm, such firms being almost textbook examples of group think, it was the deciding piece in realizing the US would soon enter protracted war. Such stocks are only 'undervalued' if prolonged war is planned. It's not like a shipyard can just squeeze out a carrier or two per quarter.

"That would be the friendly way in which one avoids looking at easily and publically available court documents "

I went down to the court house and they said they didn't have them.

Anyway, I can't find any internet reference to ISA bus licensing.

This link:
    http://www.ecst.csuchico.edu/~dranch/HARDWARE/pc-b uses.txt

Suggests that IBM developed the MCA bus because nobody paid licensing fees for ISA.

This link:
    http://www.aaxnet.com/info/glocomp.html

Matches my recollection with this quote:

"Not only did IBM demand stiff royalties for its use [MCA], they also demanded back royalties for all computers built using the ISA bus before they would license it. NCR suckered for this deal but nobody else did."

This link from IBM:
    http://www-128.ibm.com/developerworks/library/pa-s pec5.html

Makes no mention of ISA licensing. Maybe IBM was ashamed.

Now seriously, you might be right. But I can't find a reference on the Internet, which suggests it's not so easily available. Perhaps you could send a link?

By using Linux, that's how.

Yeah, I'm a Linux fanboy. Sue me.

Yeah, damn Microsoft running around paying visually impaired people to claim that they want to be able to read government documents. The nerve, like accessability is more important than switching from one office suite to another because some people dislike the licensing of the XML format of the current one!

Why not, they got dead people to engage in letter writing campaigns.

*blinks*

You DID know charitable contributions count towards tax breaks in the US, didn't you? Out of all Gates' billions stolen from you and me and every poor person on the planet, he donates a penny (to him) to get himself some extra tax-dodging ammo, and everybody fawns all over him like he was a Saint. PS, I installed a rootkit with this post, which writes the word "gullible" in your Windows system registry. Go look.

Americans for Technology Leadership was founded by Jonathan Zuck in 1999 as a "grassroots" organisations for concerned consumers who want less regulation in the technology sector. It also campaigns on general tech issues such as spam.

It has been frequently described as a Microsoft front group. [1] (http://weblog.siliconvalley.com/column/dangillmor /archives/000421.shtml) [2] (http://www.aaxnet.com/news/M010823.html) [3] (http://www.cse.unsw.edu.au/~lambert/blog/computer s/tanks.html)

ATL's domain name, techleadership.org, is registered to the Association for Competitive Technology. The site is hosted by Thomas E. Stock and Thomas J. Synhorst's LLC, TSE Enterprises. Synhorst is a founding member of the DCI Group, a Washington DC-based strategic consulting and lobbying firm which has counted Microsoft as a prime client for a number of years.

Joshua Micah Marshall reports in the July 17, 2000 American Prospect: "[W]hile Microsoft did confirm that Synhorst's DCI had been retained as a consultant, it insisted that another DCI employee, Tim Hyde, and not Synhorst, was handling the company's account. In any event, the web of connections among DCI, ATL, and Microsoft is striking. While working for Microsoft, DCI has also provided consulting services to ATL. And Josh Mathis, the man [ACT president Jonathan] Zuck installed as ATL's executive director, is also an employee of DCI, who still works out of the same Washington, D.C., office as Synhorst and Hyde."
[edit]
Pro-Microsoft letter campaign discovered

In August 2001 the Los Angeles Times reported that a ATL was behind a "carefully orchestrated nationwide campaign to create the impression of a surging grass-roots movement" behind Microsoft. "The campaign, orchestrated by a group partly funded by Microsoft, goes to great lengths so that the letters appear to be spontaneous expressions from ordinary citizens. Letters sent in the last month are printed on personalized stationery using different wording, color and typefaces--details that distinguish those efforts from common lobbying tactics that go on in politics every day. Experts said there's little precedent for such an effort supported by a company defending itself against government accusations of illegal behavior."

According to the Times, the campaign was discovered when Utah's Attorney General at the time Mark Shurtleff received letters "purportedly written by at least two dead people ... imploring him to go easy on Microsoft Corp. for its conduct as a monopoly."

Eighteen state's attorneys general were joining with the Justice Department in its anti-trust suit against Microsoft. Iowa's Attorney General Tom Miller reported receiving more than 50 letters in support of Microsoft during the summer of 2001. "No two letters are identical, but the giveaway lies in the phrasing," the Times wrote. "Four Iowa letters included this sentence: 'Strong competition and innovation have been the twin hallmarks of the technology industry.' Three others use exactly these words: "If the future is going to be as successful as the recent past, the technology sector must remain free from excess regulation."

Dewey Square Group and DCI Group sibling firm DCI/New Media are credited with assisting Microsoft with its "grass-roots" campaign, according to the Times.
[edit]

From http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=America ns_for_Technology_Leadership

<SNIP>
Americans for Technology Leadership was founded by Jonathan Zuck in 1999 as a "grassroots" organisations for concerned consumers who want less regulation in the technology sector. It also campaigns on general tech issues such as spam.

It has been frequently described as a Microsoft front group. [1] (http://weblog.siliconvalley.com/column/dangillmor /archives/000421.shtml)
[2] (http://www.aaxnet.com/news/M010823.html)
[3] http://www.cse.unsw.edu.au/~lambert/blog/computers /tanks.html

In August 2001 the Los Angeles Times reported that a ATL was behind a "carefully orchestrated nationwide campaign to create the impression of a surging grass-roots movement" behind Microsoft. "The campaign, orchestrated by a group partly funded by Microsoft, goes to great lengths so that the letters appear to be spontaneous expressions from ordinary citizens. Letters sent in the last month are printed on personalized stationery using different wording, color and typefaces--details that distinguish those efforts from common lobbying tactics that go on in politics every day. Experts said there's little precedent for such an effort supported by a company defending itself against government accusations of illegal behavior."

According to the Times, the campaign was discovered when Utah's Attorney General at the time Mark Shurtleff received letters "purportedly written by at least two dead people ... imploring him to go easy on Microsoft Corp. for its conduct as a monopoly."

Eighteen state's attorneys general were joining with the Justice Department in its anti-trust suit against Microsoft. Iowa's Attorney General Tom Miller reported receiving more than 50 letters in support of Microsoft during the summer of 2001. "No two letters are identical, but the giveaway lies in the phrasing," the Times wrote. "Four Iowa letters included this sentence: 'Strong competition and innovation have been the twin hallmarks of the technology industry.' Three others use exactly these words: "If the future is going to be as successful as the recent past, the technology sector must remain free from excess regulation."

Dewey Square Group and DCI Group sibling firm DCI/New Media are credited with assisting Microsoft with its "grass-roots" campaign, according to the Times.
</SNIP>

I wrote an e-mail to Foxnews using my gmail account. Besides answering some of Pendergast's claims, I quoted sourcewatch and said a couple of things to them. Let's see how they answer.

I've been using qhacc for a while, and it's a cute hack, but not really useful. I'm just using it until I find something better. There's a few java ones that look promising, but I'm not a fan of java software. Getting lucky with google for "accounting linux" turned this up: http://www.aaxnet.com/design/linuxacct.html There's also the popular GnuCash (http://www.gnucash.org/).

Of course. When you have more money than anyone else in the world, and you're in trouble with Uncle Sam, you can just buy BOTH major party candidates. You wait for the election, and then, voila... you own a president!

In 2000, I suspected Bill probably had deals with both Al and George. In August 2001, that suspicion was reinforced by this Seattle Times article. Also see: http://www.aaxnet.com/news/M010823.html.

Sorry, I only named a few off the top of my head and I tend to think of IT related sites first because I use IT most of the time. I could care less about Tommy.com or any other online retailer. I did however find this interesting site: http://www.aaxnet.com/design/linux2.html

Some other companies using linux (from the site above) Oh, I took out Google and Cisco because they are tech companies and I took out Tommy Hilfiger because well, I guess they aren't using it any more.

Amerada Hess Corporation, BART (Bay Area Rapid Transit), Boscov's Department Stores, Burlington Coat Factory, Conoco, Digital Domain, Ernie Ball Inc., City of Garden Grove California, Just Sports USA, Kaiser Aluminum, City of Largo Florida, Lawson Inc. (Japan), Mexico City - government of, Mobil Travel Guide, Omaha Steaks, Panasonic, Raymour & Flanigan, Royal Dutch/Shell, Toyota Motor Sales, U.S.A., Travelocity, U.S. Army, U.S. Federal Courts, U.S. Postal Service.

To see what capacity each of the companies use linux, visit the previously mentioned site.

Wonder why Spyglass or its successor doesn't take that deal plus Microsoft's "IE is intergrated too tightly to the OS to be removed" argument and ask for an adjusted percentage of the price of Windows?

They did.

http://www.aaxnet.com/topics/msinc.html#spy
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spyglass#The_Browser_ Wars

After seeing your posting I did find several links saying that in 1982 DRI successfully sued Microsoft and IBM for copyright infringement. They allege that Gary Kildall was able pop up a DRI copyright notice with a few keystrokes on an IBM PC in front of a judge. Apparently Microsoft and IBM settled, but a gag order was part of the settlement. See for example here. None of the links I found seemed definitive, but then they wouldn't if there was a gag order in place.

On the other hand Tim Patterson is suing an author for defamation for claiming that QDOS was a "rip-off" of CPM.

Can anybody point me to solid information on the DRI suit?

I just Googled to see what I could come up with:

http://www.eschoolnews.org/news/showStory.cfm?Arti cleID=3028
http://www.eschoolnews.org/news/showStory.cfm?Arti cleID=1050
http://www.wmich.edu/facultysenate/FSminutes2002/a pril.htm
http://www.it.utah.edu/leadership/committees/uWebA dvisory/minutes/uWeb_minutes_2002_05.pdf

Interesting:

http://archives.tcm.ie/businesspost/2003/08/24/sto ry101270136.asp
http://www.aaxnet.com/topics/slicense.html

But:

http://www.wired.com/news/story/0,1240,10654,00.ht ml

Which does not put the problem in a good light.

I also see references to SPA audits, which does not Google well. :) It also looks like the SPA might now be the SIIA (Si-I-A?).

What, did they really stop cooking their books after the government told them to stop? (That would certainly be a first!)

My theory is they just didn't cook them quite long enough this quarter.

Linux - Accounting Software

Find Accounting Software as well as several sponsored links, so Linux doesn't seem lacking in this category.

A Slashdot comment is too short to be a full discussion of a complex issue. I don't think that being a billionaire necessarily makes someone arrogant. I've never thought Warren Buffett is arrogant, for example.

Here is some Microsoft history. Microsoft is much worse than anyone says, simply because recording all the abuses would take a lifetime of writing:

1994 October: IBM released OS/2 version 3.0, an operating system far superior to anything Microsoft had, or would have for years. IBM launched a major campaign to get software developed for it. Many major software houses signed up to port their applications, but nearly all had to drop OS/2 development when they read the NDA (Non-Disclosure Agreement) for the Windows 95 development kit. If you were developing anything for OS/2, you could not participate in the Windows 95 program. The NDA itself required total secrecy, so the reason everyone dropped OS/2 development was only rumored for years.

1995 August: Microsoft and Department of Justice finalize the antitrust Consent Decree. Judge Thomas Penfield Jackson is ordered to sign it, since Judge Stanley Sporkin refused, indicating it was too easy on Microsoft. Microsoft immediately starts publicly ridiculing the Department of Justice, changes the names of the practices forbidden by the Concent Decree, and continues business as usual.

1995 November: Intel released the Pentium Pro chip. Microsoft was livid because Pentium Pro was optimized for 32-bit code. Windows 95 runs like a dog on the Pentium Pro, exposing Microsoft's "32-bit" claims to be lies. OS/2 and Unix run just fine.

1998 June: Microsoft releases Windows 98. While it contained bug fixes for Windows 95 the real reason for its release was to bury Internet Explorer in Windows so the Justice Department couldn't make them take it out.

1998 October: Novell introduces NetWare 5.0. NetWare gets great reviews, and Microsoft feels the heat, especially from comparisons between NetWare 5.0 (shipping, works great) and Windows NT 5.0 (very, very late; very, very buggy, not shipping yet), so renames Windows NT 5.0 to Windows 2000 to stop the 5.0 vs 5.0 comparisons.

1998 November: AOL purchases Netscape for $4.2 billion. Netscape has been crushed by Microsoft's monopolist business proactices, but Microsoft spin doctors say it proves the vitality of the market.

1999 April: the Melissa virus is released, bringing down Windows-based networks worldwide.

1999 November: Guilty! Judge Jackson's Finding Of Fact in the Justice Department suit was released, declaring that Microsoft has a monopoly and has knowingly abused its monopoly position.

2000 February: Microsoft can't take the heat - buys off Caldera evil business practices lawsuit. Microsoft demands a gag order as always to keep the truth from getting out. Microsoft announces a charge of $150 million and implies that was the total price (so Caldera position must have been weak). Experts estimate the actual buy-out was between $350 million and $500 million based on $150 million added to pre-existing reserves.

2000 April: Guilty! Judge Jackson's Finding of Law is released immediately after DOJ / Microsoft settlement negotiations break down. Microsoft guilty on nearly all counts, "not proven" on a couple, and innocent on none.

2000 November: George W. Bush is elected president of the U.S. under suspicious circumstances. The business world presumes this means Microsoft will be let off on anti-trust charges.

2001 June: A pro-business, Libertarian leaning Court of Appeals unanimously upholds all 8 counts of Microsoft's conviction for abusing its monopoly. The court then set aside the penalty for retrial due to an "appearance" of bias on the part of judge Thomas Jackson.

2001 September

1983: Novell introduces NetWare X and NetWare S
1985: Novell introduces Advanced NetWare 2.0
1987 Apr: Microsoft introduces OS/2 Lan Manager, an network operating system to compete with Novell's NetWare. It's a patched up rehash of IBM's old PCNet.
1988: Novell introduces Advanced NetWare 2.15.
1988 Oct: 3Com introduces the 3+Open network, based on Microsoft's Lan Manager (based on IBM's old PCNet). In 1990 a famous "shoot out" was held between 3+ and Novell NetWare. 3Com dropped out of the network software business in Dec 1990.
1992: Novell purchases Unix from AT&T
1993: Novell introduces NetWare 3.12 and NetWare 4.0. 4.0 introduces Novell Directory Services in place of the Bindery.
1994 February: Microsoft released Windows for Workgroups 3.11, adding networking to the product. The network, derived from IBM's primitive PCNet, is so totally piss poor people continue to buy Lantastic instead.
1994 October: IBM released OS/2 version 3.0, an operating system far superior to anything Microsoft had, or would have for years. IBM launched a major campaign to get software developed for it. Many major software houses signed up to port their applications, but nearly all had to drop OS/2 development when they read the NDA (Non-Disclosure Agreement) for the Windows95 development kit. If you were developing anything for OS/2, you could not participate in the Windows95 program. The NDA itself required total secrecy, so the reason everyone dropped OS/2 development was only rumored for years.
1994: Novell purchases WordPerfect and Quatro Pro.
1998 October: Novell introduces NetWare 5.0. NetWare gets great reviews, and Microsoft feels the heat, especially from comparisons between NetWare 5.0 (shipping, works great) and Windows NT 5.0 (very, very late; very, very buggy, not shipping yet), so renames Windows NT 5.0 to Windows 2000 to stop the 5.0 vs 5.0 comparisons.
2000 Jan: Novell introduces NetWare 5.1. Windows NT 5.0 still not shipping.

"Network Basic Input/Output System was designed for IBM by an organization named Sytek, Inc. It was created to provide an easy-to-use programming interface for connections between computers over a network. Microsoft began developing products for the MS-Net and LAN Manager (the predecessor to Windows NT) using the NetBIOS interface, anticipating the popularity of the standard. Ironically, the standard is only popular today because of Microsoft's implementation of it."

And, do we want people like BG owning tanks?

Why would he need a tank?

He has major ownership* in one of the only companies that makes nuclear aircraft carriers and submarines... and... he is making sure that they run Windows also.

* At least at one time... he may have divested by now, but the point remains... this ban means nothing if you have serious money. Guns? We don't need no stinkin' guns!

That's only true in a free market. Ask Steve Ballmer how motivating bullshit like this is. That pales in comparison to memos about "accountability", which are big dumb company speak for, "we're going to fire people, work harder." When you are using government IP laws to squash your competition and purchases to prop up your bottom line, you might get big headed. The market, however, is much freer than M$ suspects.

RTFA and see if Longhorn has legacy support. Unless they added it in since that article was written, I doubt it.

This was demonstrated when an engineer caused a copy of MS-DOS to pop up a DR-DOS copyright.

I recently noticed this mentioned here.