Slashdot Mirror

If Target is any indication, smart chips are still a bit off in the future for Visa.

Its already confirmed to be a fake

can hardly wait for the Microsoft Sparkle version for Linux...

and while I miss Photoshop

Disney paid to have it work very well under wine. I used it under CrossOver Office with no problems. It seems like it is working well for Walt Disney Co.'s feature animation unit. Though to be honest, I am a programmer and not a graphic artist and Gimp meets all my humble needs : )

Too late, they have already confessed:

Blake Stowell, SCO's director of communications, acknowledged that the leaked memo is real.

Perhaps it's time you rethink Mr. Raymond's credibility...

Blake Stowell of SCO just confirmed it was real in an eWeek story.

Looks like you're a dumbass, huh?

Even if it *is a document tracking system, firing the snitch would be on par with fessing up to that document being authentic.

"We believe the e-mail was simply a misunderstanding of the facts by an outside consultant who was working on a specific unrelated project to the BayStar transaction and he was told at the time of his misunderstanding. Contrary to the speculation of Eric Raymond, Microsoft did not orchestrate or participate in the BayStar transaction."

Eweek are running a story which includes quotes from Blake Stowell such as "We believe the e-mail was simply a misunderstanding of the facts by an outside consultant". "Hello, is that the Department of Justice? Have I got some news for you..."

=======

The EV1 deal is interesting.

SCO is claiming the deal with EV1 was worth more than a million dollars. EV1 is disputing the 7 figures and the confusion seems to be the weasel word "worth".

In other words, SCO is claiming that $1million+ "worth" of licenses were sold. So that's $1mill/$699 = 1400+ licenses, or $1mill/$1399 = 700+ licenses. SCO's own quarterly says only $20k income from licensing this quarter. It's possible the EV1 payments are in stages, or won't appear on SCO's financials until next quarter, but it's also possible that EV1 only paid $20k for their licenses.

But SCO is spinning this to sound much more impressive. EV1 was the patsy here; they thought they were getting a great deal, but they were just another pawn in SCO's (Microsoft's?) smear campaign against Linux.

"Blake Stowell, SCO's director of communications, acknowledged that the leaked memo is real." -- eweek

EV1 paid over a million dollars to license the IP. I call that real money.

The other thing I wonder about is the fact that SCO has only been suing SCO UNIX customers and former customers. F'rinstance, does anyone know if CA has a SCO UNIX license? If so, is the license for that bundled into the new license? It would make a big difference to the bottom line if CA already had to pay $4.9mil for a SCO UNIX license and $5mil for the new "plus Linux" one.

Of course, maybe I just haven't been wearing my tinfoil hat enough lately. Still, I'd love to see the actual contracts.

Well, let's see...

• DaimlerChrysler is testing the Nokia Communicator, which "runs on an operating system from Nokia-controlled Symbian, a rival to Microsoft's Windows Mobile" ... " also promoting it as an alternative for companies that do not want to use only Microsoft software."
• DaimlerChrysler Corp. is working on a Linux-based management and navigation system for its cars.
• Related company: DaimlerChrysler Services used Unix and IBM software to merge its financial systems.
• Reporters say that DaimlerChrysler did not like Microsoft's annuity licensing plan and was examining Linux.
• DC using IBM Linux for car crash simulations.
• DC is a German/US merger, as is Novell/SuSe. Affecting DC may affect SuSe in its home market
• "IBM and the German government are getting together to implement Linux as the government's computing platform of choice."
• June 17, 1999, the Financial Post, Canada, Business Group Makes Push for Software Competition (pdf)

  The Canada Europe Round Table, launched yesterday, wants governments to take the lead in using operating systems such as Linux instead of Microsoft's proprietary Windows. The group of 28 companies -- which includes Bombardier Inc., Nortel Networks Corp., Corel Corp., DaimlerChrysler AG and Ericsson AG of Sweden -- suggests "competitive systems" such as Linux should be endorsed at the next round of World Trade Organization (WTO) talks. ... "CERT member Corel" ...

• "Ferrari, Volvo and DaimlerChrysler's Chrysler Group are among the companies that have turned to IBM for systems built around Linux."
• DaimlerChrysler Services Management Awarded 'Best Service' for Progress-Based Application With SonicMQ Integration: Award-winner Uses Progress(R) OpenEdge(TM) (Both Progress and SonicMQ can run on Unix/Linux)
• MySQL has acquired full commercial rights to develop and market future releases of SAP DB, of which there are roughly 5,000 customer installations. SAP DB users include Intel, DaimlerChrysler, Braun, Bayer, Colgate, Yamaha and Toyota South Africa. MySQL and SAP are also developing a future MySQL enterprise database that uses both MySQL and MaxDB.
• DC has been a user of MS products (2003)

AutoZone...

• SCO had claimed that IBM interfered with a contract (which SCO has not provided) and helped AutoZone migrate from SCO software to Linux. But there already is evidence that AutoZone used no SCO software after the change and its own employees did the change. The same statement also indicates that SCO drove AutoZone away, not that IBM interfered. The Red Hat distribution and support was chosen.
• AutoZone is using Wincor Nixdorf Linux store/POS tools.
  Wincor Nixdorf customers:

  * AutoZone * Books-

Maybe they can paint it Ferarri red and have it go "Vrooom Vrooom" when you turn it on. Then this tool will surely buy one.

But... but... what about Rob Enderle's FERRARI laptop. VROOM VROOM.

If what you said is true then HP and IBM must be piling on some staggering loses given that they reported $2.5B and $1B of Linux revenue respectively in 2003 and 2002. Also, RedHat *never* stated they dropped their non-enterprise product line because it was losing money (revenue - expenses), they did it to focus on the enterprise market with subscription based support. Besides, RedHat still pushes it's Linux Enterprise Workstation as "ideal for all desktop deployments" right here.

If the Linux desktop is unviable, why did Novell just purchase SuSE and why did Sun roll out the Linux based JDS? To spite MS? It seems ironic that in these days of cost cutting and doing anything possible to boost stock prices that struggling companies like Novell and Sun would squander resources trying to "put some hurt" on MS. So, I'll take your wager on them "hemmoraging" cash, post detailed evidence in support please.

In response to an open letter from IBM asking Sun Microsystems Inc. to join the company in developing an open-source version of Java, Sun plans to meet with IBM to discuss the issue, Sun sources said.

Sun officials planned to meet with IBM as early as Thursday to discuss the merits of whether the company should work with IBM on an independent project to create an open-source implementation of Java.

According to Sun, the company is in agreement with IBM's letter in many ways, and over the last two years Sun has made "significant" Java contributions to open source through The Apache Group; portions of the XML processing engine, through the Web Pack contribution last year; and the Java 2 Enterprise Edition processing engine known as Tomcat. "Sun is closely evaluating the effectiveness of the process," a Sun spokesperson said.

Sun said it will make an official statement about IBM's offer later on Thursday.

Meanwhile, Bob Sutor, IBM's director of WebSphere Infrastructure Software, in an interview with eWEEK, said, "We need an absolutely official open-source implementation of Java."

To read the full interview, click here..

Sutor said IBM is not trying to change things right away. "We're trying to walk before we run on this," he said. "We're not looking for the world on Day One."

But what IBM is offering is "to put people on this and to donate source code."

Sutor said IBM has proven its open-source mettle with its experience with the Eclipse open-source Java-based development platform, its success with Linux, and work the company has done with Apache.

In addition, Sutor said an open-source Java implementation will spur innovation and help generate revenue for developers. "This would be a boon for Linux," he said. "If every Linux distribution had a full implementation of Java, it would spur innovation. The money is not in this base-level plumbing, it's in what you add on top."

When asked whether IBM would be as willing to create open-source versions of its OS/390 or z/OS, Sutor said: "We're not suggesting Sun open source its directory software or proprietary stuff. Java is already in the JCP [Java Community Process]. It is already a community process that many people have contributed to. It's a mistake to look at it as though Sun is the sole author, and this is not any of their proprietary products."

Moreover, on the issue of Sun ceding control of Java should an open-source implementation surface, Sutor said: "They'll have less control, but they speak very highly of Linux," noting that Linux is not controlled by any one vendor but many benefit from it. "This is the logical next step in progressing the platform."

IBM's vice president of emerging Internet technologies, Rod Smith, sent the letter Wednesday night to Rob Gingell, Sun's chief engineer, vice president and fellow.

Citing an eWEEK article as inspiration (see "Sun: 'Secret Negotiations' on Eclipse Continue"), Smith said IBM is ready to work together with Sun on an open-source Java.

In the article Smith cited, Simon Phipps, Sun's chief technology evangelist, asked: "Why hasn't IBM given its implementation of Java to the open-source community?"

Wrote Smith in his letter: "Simon's comment appears to be an offer to jointly work toward this common goal. IBM is a strong supporter of the open source community, and we believe that a first class open source Java implementation would further enhance Java's position in the industry by spurring growth of new applications and encouraging new innovation in the Java platform."

Moreover, "IBM has been calling on Sun for years to open up Java because it will spur innovation," said an IBM spokesperson. "Now IBM is throwing down the gauntlet."

Rick Ross, president of Javalobby Inc., of Cary, N.C., an association of Java developers with more than 100,000 members, said, "On th

In response to an open letter from IBM asking Sun Microsystems Inc. to join the company in developing an open-source version of Java, Sun plans to meet with IBM to discuss the issue, Sun sources said.

Sun officials planned to meet with IBM as early as Thursday to discuss the merits of whether the company should work with IBM on an independent project to create an open-source implementation of Java.

According to Sun, the company is in agreement with IBM's letter in many ways, and over the last two years Sun has made "significant" Java contributions to open source through The Apache Group; portions of the XML processing engine, through the Web Pack contribution last year; and the Java 2 Enterprise Edition processing engine known as Tomcat. "Sun is closely evaluating the effectiveness of the process," a Sun spokesperson said.

Sun said it will make an official statement about IBM's offer later on Thursday.

Meanwhile, Bob Sutor, IBM's director of WebSphere Infrastructure Software, in an interview with eWEEK, said, "We need an absolutely official open-source implementation of Java."

To read the full interview, click here..

Sutor said IBM is not trying to change things right away. "We're trying to walk before we run on this," he said. "We're not looking for the world on Day One."

But what IBM is offering is "to put people on this and to donate source code."

Sutor said IBM has proven its open-source mettle with its experience with the Eclipse open-source Java-based development platform, its success with Linux, and work the company has done with Apache.

In addition, Sutor said an open-source Java implementation will spur innovation and help generate revenue for developers. "This would be a boon for Linux," he said. "If every Linux distribution had a full implementation of Java, it would spur innovation. The money is not in this base-level plumbing, it's in what you add on top."

When asked whether IBM would be as willing to create open-source versions of its OS/390 or z/OS, Sutor said: "We're not suggesting Sun open source its directory software or proprietary stuff. Java is already in the JCP [Java Community Process]. It is already a community process that many people have contributed to. It's a mistake to look at it as though Sun is the sole author, and this is not any of their proprietary products."

Moreover, on the issue of Sun ceding control of Java should an open-source implementation surface, Sutor said: "They'll have less control, but they speak very highly of Linux," noting that Linux is not controlled by any one vendor but many benefit from it. "This is the logical next step in progressing the platform."

IBM's vice president of emerging Internet technologies, Rod Smith, sent the letter Wednesday night to Rob Gingell, Sun's chief engineer, vice president and fellow.

Citing an eWEEK article as inspiration (see "Sun: 'Secret Negotiations' on Eclipse Continue"), Smith said IBM is ready to work together with Sun on an open-source Java.

In the article Smith cited, Simon Phipps, Sun's chief technology evangelist, asked: "Why hasn't IBM given its implementation of Java to the open-source community?"

Wrote Smith in his letter: "Simon's comment appears to be an offer to jointly work toward this common goal. IBM is a strong supporter of the open source community, and we believe that a first class open source Java implementation would further enhance Java's position in the industry by spurring growth of new applications and encouraging new innovation in the Java platform."

Moreover, "IBM has been calling on Sun for years to open up Java because it will spur innovation," said an IBM spokesperson. "Now IBM is throwing down the gauntlet."

Rick Ross, president of Javalobby Inc., of Cary, N.C., an association of Java developers with more than 100,000 members, said, "On th

I didn't realize BEA was a player in the applications market. I thought they sold tools and infrastructure, not ERP applications. (Newegg might use BEA to run their web server, but wouldn't go to BEA for, say, warehouse and order management software.)

Regarding why the DoJ didn't have a problem with PeopleSoft buying JD Edwards, perhaps its because that merger was arguably beneficial to the customers. PeopleSoft is weakest in areas like hard core distribution and direct sales (like what newegg does), and that's where JD Edwards really shines. JD Edwards, on the other hand, is weaker in some areas where PeopleSoft is stronger, such as with their technology infrastructure (PeopleSoft is all web based) and their HR package.

Another aspect of this is that maybe the DoJ could see this was perhaps Justice was legitimately conviced that this deal was bad for competition. More information available here, and here (Is Oracle the New Neighborhood Bully).

It'll be interesting to see if this has any affect on the wait listing service monopoly...

"ICANN's board of directors is scheduled to consider approving the WLS during its March
6 meeting" in Rome.

<grrr>

If your cell phone provider is Cingular or T-Mobile, then your location services are being provided by TruePosition. Since Cingular is now going to gobble up AT&T Wireless, there will probably be a huge growth in TruePosition services in the US as a result. There is some information available online but the location system is quite proprietary and not simply GPS. Since the location is actually determined from equipment in a telecom rack somewhere, don't expect to be able to hack your phone much to make use of this.

Hack: Rob Enderle

As you say this is already supported by an appropriately compiled Linux kernel or XP-64 on the A64 & Opteron. The wider benefit for all of us is that this is to be included in XP SP-2 which will hopefully become endemic sometime this year. See this eWeek article . At that point this becomes an excellent marketing tactic for AMD. I haven't examined the IA32e documents for myself yet but those who have seem to think Intel have left out support of the NX flag - see sandpile.org. If this is true then Intel are handing AMD a real advantage as far as consumer marketing is concerned. Even I could spin that so that that it looked like more of an advantage than 64bit capability which to be honest is a real hard sell as far as your average consumer is concerned.

looks like they decided to block any incoming traffic to the sco.com website, to circumvent the MyDoom effect.

Do they have the right to tamper with the namespaces that way?

From Rob's Ferrari gush: Part of me wishes this notebook was fueled by the Athlon64 rather than the Athlon XP-M chip.

Heh.

Heh heh.

Heh heh ha ha hee hee ho!

My brand-new Yugo can punk his Ferrari.

Maybe.

"There will be a transition back to Solaris," he said

The "fad will wear off, and big business will come back to solaris".

Agreed, perhaps no proof (yet?), but I was commenting on the eWeek article which states "The leaked code includes 30,915 files and was apparently removed from a Linux computer used by Mainsoft for development purposes." Perhaps it comes down to their definitions of "apparently" and "removed".

It's true, I saw a posting on our news server for this article that blames a partner, Mainsoft, for the leak.

sangreal66 desperately proposed " Or... Perhaps they've improved their code.". I hardly think thats the case.
See Shattering Windows: Is a Disaster Lurking?

The expanded contents of the zip file is around the size of a single CD. This points to the contents being originally distributed from Microsoft on CD-rom.

Microsoft has made so much fuss about retaining control of the source code. In May 2002, under oath at the antitrust hearing Jim Allchin, group vice president for platforms at Microsoft, stated that, because the Windows operating systems contained inherent flaws, disclosing the Windows operating system source code could damage national security and even threaten the U.S. war effort.

It's going to be interesting if it is subsequently found that Microsoft itself has been distributing said source code over the internet in zip format.

By the way, In February 2003, Microsoft signed a pact with Chinese officials to reveal the Windows operating system source code. Bill Gates even hinted that China will be privy to all, not just part, of the source code its government wished to inspect.

Dispite gaining more favored trading status with the USA, there remains many embargos over technology transfers which could put the US at future risk.

Either Jim Allchin lied under oath, to prevent code revelation being any part of the settlement, OR the Microsoft corporation is behaving traitorously, by exposing national security issues to foreign governments.

The exposure of Microsoft source code put users at risk because of the inherent design and implimentation flaws built into the source code.

In comparison open source development practices enables open source distributions and users to evaluate the source code from the start. This forces developers to build in security from the early outset of each project or risk abandonment for more secure alternate solutions. End users can particpate in the development process.

EWeek is reporting that Mainsoft, a partner with Microsoft, is the source of the source code leak.

"The rumor regarding the availability of Windows source code is based on the speculation of an individual who saw a small section of un-identified code and thought it looked like Windows code. Microsoft is looking into this as a matter of due diligence," a company spokesman said. "If a small section of Windows source code were to be available, it would be a matter of intellectual property rights rather than security." - from Eweek.

Also see ZDNet, InternetNews and Google News

I don't think that's much an advantage, when that single vendor is SCO. Like, how much longer are they going to be around?

And "lower[ing] the dependency on single software vendors" , as the German government is attempting to do in moving to Linux, is surely a good thing, anyway.

The difference with MS is that while using SuSE, due to the nature of Open Source they are not tied to and reliant on a single vendor. This is just the latest town to so convert, albeit with interesting staff-persuasion tactics!

Requiring an Oracle license is one thing ..., not working properly with Mozilla is another (you need IE to use it fully in HTML mode). What other options are there?

If you use Oracle Applications, you might be interested in Oracle's announcement that they're going to be supporting Mozilla.

That takes care of half of the problem.

-ez

Karma: Whore (you look at your article scores after posting)

Story also posted on C-Net (no account required, yada yada).

What hapened to Yahoo's (as yet unveiled) scheme-to-end-all-schemes for authenticating mail? IMHO, I think that SPF:Sender will make great strides towards combatting spam, combined with new laws that make spoofing illegal. And AOL is backing it, so I think there is a good chance for success, as they are both one of the largest sources of e-mail as well as one of the most commonly spoofed domains.

Umm.. no.. it was sarcasm.. in relation to this eweek article which decided to take this comment on slashdot out of context.

On a side note, what happened to all the sites I saw three days ago that said the payload wouldn't work properly?

And what about the variant that was supposed to target Microsoft?

> Please. What interest do corporations have in removing our liberties? That doesn't even make sense.

If one of our liberties is the freedom to give someone software we have written without charging money, and a corporation insists that doing so "deprives" said corporation their "right" to charge you for similar software, and says about your act of charity that "It undermines our basic system of intellectual property rights, and it destroys the economic reason for innovation"...well, I'd say that corporation was trying to remove your liberties in order to eliminate competition and declare de facto ownership of a market. Does THAT make sense?

Their insistence on control has left them in an increasingly isolated position." "Without IBM, Sun could never have built the success Java has enjoyed. Without Sun, however, the IBM-led Eclipse group has been making great strides.

The new Sun is smarter than that. You can trust them

"There will be a transition back to Solaris," he said

The "fad will wear off, and big business will come back to solaris".

Microsoft could probably do this if they wanted to. But there are many reasons why they are unlikely to do so. First there is IBM, Linux almost certainly infringes some Microsoft patent, Windows almost certainly infringes some IBM patent. It is a zero sum game.

Yes, it is zero sum. That's why most of the large companies cross license. Microsoft and IBM are cross licensed to ALL of each other's patents. So if Linux infringed, IBM would have freedom of action, but Red Hat would not. And arguably if IBM does not own at least 51% (or whatever the cross license specifies) of Linux, they might not even be licensed. Since that's a legal grey area (who owns Linux?), I don't know how that would shake out.

The other reason is anti-trust. If Microsoft tried that type of thing they would probably be ordered to license.

Yes, it can be an antitrust issue. IBM covered this a while ago, as has the MPEG Licensing Authority (which has most of the MPEG-related patents), QUALCOMM (which has most of the CDMA patents), and many others. The only thing you have to do to avoid antitrust is to license to everybody "fairly", i.e. without discrimination.

So, for example, Microsoft could offer to license the relevant patents to Red Hat in return for 5% of their revenue (revenue, not profit). And if Red Hat declined to pay, they could sue Red Hat to stop them from distributing Linux.

Now the interesting thing for the "tin hat" crowd: Microsoft has just started ramping up a licensing group, using the guy who started that business for IBM, Marshall Phelps.

Industry Leader to Join Microsoft's Legal Team as Head of Intellectual Property Group

Microsoft Plays Intellectual Property Licensing Catch-Up

So the Eolas patent might be valid after all. What a disconcerting prospect.

At least this report from eWEEK gives some hope that Linux users won't have to worry about it.

"Quick, disable your AV software, and get some Windows boxes on the internet!"

So is this what qualifies as a good journalistic article? Bitching about what people say on a message forum? What's his next article going to be? Bitching about ricer's on automotive forums because they support loud exhauts, which makes them there own enemy? Maybe everyone here should apply for this guys job, because it seems that we can all do just as good of a job.

There is an Aqua port (if you count running on native Qt/Mac), and the Dot reported on it. There is an article about it in eWeek. You can even get the binaries on the kde.opendarwin.org page.

Sure, it's a bit rough around the edges, but it is certainly coming along nicely!

I'd be loath to say such things so openly in here. Have you checked the article linked at the bottom of the story? There are some quotes which were taken directly from the comments page in yesterday's story. You may remember "Quick, disable your AV software, and get some Windows boxes on the internet!"

Let's try to be careful about what we write. No one knows what may be grabbed by the regular media and taken out of context, so let's cover our bases.

Given that a windows desktop server can cost several thousands of dollars to buy software for, before you pay someone to actually install and configure it, are they saying it cost them several thousanddollars to get the linux server working?

Takes me less than a day to get a working, configured server linux server... (two if I download all the software).

Ongoing costs? Yes, they did have to read the manual for the linux software... But i'd have to read the manual for the Windows software if I wanted a non-default config.

As for the "case studies" I wonder how much it cost M$ to send someone out to walk them through the changeover? Might not have cost that customer, but It sure didn't come out of Bill's pocket!

Interesting Facts: Giga Research is a wholly owned subsidiary of Forrester Research, who changed their policy on paid-for product comparisons as a result of at least a similar study, if not the one touted in the advert.

In their defence (or perhaps not), Forrester did find that MP3s are good for the music industry...

Meta Group will say anything: (not that I don't like the idea, but wouldn't you try to "correct" a firm saying this about you?)
By 2006 or 2007 Linux will be running on 45% of new server
again on eeek (I notice that has a HP ad on it) er, eWeek - but I like the typo better :-)

IDC - well.... IDC: Microsoft breakup would benefit the industry and a quote from here
"IDC has also published research in the past that shows some companies replacing Unix systems with Linux can save twice as much as those that move from Unix to Windows".

From the article at eweek ...

Editor's note: A word in this column has been modified to emphasize that a connection between anti-SCO sentiment by the Linux community and the MyDoom attack has not been proved.

Hoorah for editorial conscience. Take notes, Slashdot.

We crossed the point where posts from Slashdot are news themselves! Pretty soon cnn will be nothing but a filter on Slashdot stories.