Slashdot Mirror

Robert Scoble writes "Microsoft is unveiling a major reorganization today to help get Vista out the door. Some of the major changes include the appointing of three new officers to the three major divisions. The Microsoft Platform Products & Services Division will be led by Kevin Johnson and Jim Allchin as co-presidents; Jeff Raikes has been named president of the Microsoft Business Division; and Robbie Bach has been named as president of Microsoft Entertainment & Devices Division. In addition, the company said Ray Ozzie will expand his role as chief technical officer by assuming responsibility for helping drive its software-based services strategy and execution across all three divisions."

spongman writes "Channel9 has a video of Anders Hejlsberg demoing C# 3.0. The new language enhancements include implicitly typed locals, extension methods, strongly-typed lambda expressions, anonymous types, and LINQ - a builtin SQL-like syntax for data access. The spec, samples and a working compiler can be found on MSDN."

spongman writes "Channel9 has a video of Anders Hejlsberg demoing C# 3.0. The new language enhancements include implicitly typed locals, extension methods, strongly-typed lambda expressions, anonymous types, and LINQ - a builtin SQL-like syntax for data access. The spec, samples and a working compiler can be found on MSDN."

spongman writes "Channel9 has a video of Anders Hejlsberg demoing C# 3.0. The new language enhancements include implicitly typed locals, extension methods, strongly-typed lambda expressions, anonymous types, and LINQ - a builtin SQL-like syntax for data access. The spec, samples and a working compiler can be found on MSDN."

maotx writes "According to their recently released security bulletin, Microsoft will skip this month's Patch Tuesday. Patch Tuesday, also known as Black Tuesday amongst Administrators, is the second Tuesday of every month, in which Microsoft releases a series of patches and critical updates for its various operating systems and applications."

belmolis asks: "For many years I've done almost all of my writing in TeX. This has increasingly caused problems with publishing in journals. For a long time, many journals reset what you sent them, so they didn't care what program you used. More and more, I find, they do, and in most cases, what they want is MS Word. Is there any good way to convert TeX to Word?" "I've seen some advertised. Some only work with LaTeX, which doesn't help. One claims to use a full-scale TeX interpreter, but my queries as to whether it can handle home-brew Metafont fonts, PIC graphics etc. have gone unanswered. These products also all seem to be plugins for MS Word. I don't use MS Windows or any other MS products, and hate WYSIWYG word processors (I hated Bravo before it was reincarnated as Word) so a Word plugin is not a great solution, even if it works.

Furthermore, I wonder what exactly these programs do. If they interpret the TeX and then generate very low level Word, that may result in a document that looks similar, but a journal editor probably won't be able to edit it the way he wants to. In some cases the editor can be persuaded to accept a camera-ready PDF, since it turns out that the publishers often want PDF and the reason the editor wants Word is so he can edit the text, but when the editor can't or won't budge, is there any alternative to reformatting the document entirely in Word or a clone?

The larger question this raises is, where are we going? Even if formats are open, translation is difficult if they are only commensurable at a very low level. Is the solution to write in something very abstract like DocBook? And if so, will the market go this way?"

We've had many submissions about the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina. It doesn't come easy writes "From 'the end justifies the means department', the BBC is reporting that bogus emails about the current situation in New Orlean contain links to websites that promptly infect the concerned reader's computer. From the article: 'The separate virus and fake donations bogus e-mails have been discovered by computer security firms SophosLabs and Websense Security Labs. They are similar to previous fraudulent e-mails connected to last year's Indian Ocean Tsunami.'" Less cynically, an anonymous reader writes "A Linux developer is organizing volunteers for a public 'web station' project to assist Hurricane Katrina victims. The plan is to create numerous Linux-based public kiosks that boot directly into the Firefox browser and display a special home page with links to various services. In addition to offering disaster relief information and news, the kiosks will provide basic email capabilities via Yahoo!, Gmail, Earthlink, MS Hotmail, and other web-mail services. They're looking for donations of time and money. If you're looking to donate more directly, tech companies across the country are maintaining pages with ties to respected charities. Yahoo is maintaining the Red Cross donation page, and everyone from Microsoft to IBM has a message on their frontpage."

Mouldy Punk writes "Infoworld is reporting that WinFS Beta 1 has been released. The new relational file system for Windows is posted on MSDN Subscriber Downloads. This release is designed to offer developers a preview of WinFS capabilities. WinFS will be in beta when Windows Vista ships and will RTM afterwords. WinFS, when it ships, will be available for download for Windows Vista and possible support for Windows XP is being considered. The distribution mechanism for WinFS will be through an add-on download much like the .NET framework is today. Tom Rizzo also notes that there is a new blog dedicated to Win FS."

Simon P. Chappell writes "I don't know about you, but I hardly bother with browser bookmarks any more. I used to have so many bookmarks, back in the early days of Netscape's 4 series, that I would have to regularly trim and edit my bookmark file to prevent my browser from crashing on startup -- that's a lot of bookmarks, folks! Now, I go to my favourite web search engine, enter a couple of appropriate search terms and voila, there's my page! Search engines are so ubiquitous that we rarely give much thought to the technology that powers them. Lucene in Action by Otis Gospodnetic and Erik Hatcher , both committers on the Lucene project, goes behind the HTML and takes you on a guided tour of Lucene, one of a generation of powerful Free and Open-Source search engines now available." Read on for the rest of Chappell's review. Lucene in Action author Gospodnetic and Hatcher pages 421 (7 pages of index) publisher Manning rating 9 reviewer Simon P. Chappell ISBN 1932394281 summary Solid introduction to Lucene Who's it for? Lucene is a library and framework, rather than a complete application. It truly is an engine, around which you are expected to build and extend your own application. Like Lucene, the book is targeted at those who are looking for a tool to build their own search facility application rather than just "download and go." The book does include a number of case studies of Lucene usage (including at least one download and go search engine) but those are included to show how to use and adapt Lucene to fit differing environments rather than as ends in themselves. The Structure The book is sensibly divided into two parts. The first part looks at "Core Lucene" functionality, while the second part addresses "Applied Lucene".

Part one has six chapters, covering the central components and inner workings of Lucene. It's here that the book starts with a tutorial introduction, familiarising the reader with the concepts of Lucene as a search engine around which you wrap your own code. The other five chapters move steadily through good search engine fare, with indexing getting the whole of chapter two to itself The discussion of how to retrieve text from the documents being indexed is mentioned here but postponed until chapter seven, where it is dealt with exhaustively. Chapter three covers searching, and especially how Lucene ranks documents.

Chapter four examines analysis. In it's chapter introduction, the book explains that "Analysis, in Lucene, is the process of converting field text into it's most fundamental indexed representation, terms." This process is performed by an analyser, which tokenises text according to it's own built in rules; each analyser will have a different emphasis, some want only dictionary words, others might explicitly include acronyms and sometimes you'll want an analyser that will block stop words (those words in languages that are part of the structure, but that add nothing to the information being conveyed by the text; classic examples of stop words in English include "a", "and" and "the").

Chapter five looks at advanced search techniques; everything from sorting search results, searching on multiple fields to filtering searches. Many free or open source software tools are extensible, and Lucene is no exception. Chapter six addresses creating and using custom components within Lucene, everything from custom sort methods to custom filters.

Part two, the final four chapters, cover Applied Lucene. It is dedicated to practical uses of Lucene and answers the question "So, what can I do with a search engine?" Chapter seven covers ways and means to parse common, non-plain text document formats. The primary formats covered are RTF, XML, PDF, HTML and Microsoft Word. The ability to parse and index these file formats will cover the search engine needs of the majority of Lucene users. Chapter eight looks at a number of Lucene tools and extensions that are available; many of them being free and open source software. Chapter nine covers ports of Lucene. While for many users, Lucene being a Java library is not a problem, some users want its functionality in environments that do not have Java. The chapter looks at ports written in C++, C#, Perl and Python. Lastly, chapter ten takes a thorough look at seven Lucene case studies. Perhaps the "star" case study is the one about Nutch, a download and go search engine written by Doug Cutting , the original author of Lucene.

There are three appendices. The first offers installation advice for Lucene; a useful addition that those newer to working with Java libraries will surely appreciate. The second appendix has a very well explained description of the Lucene index format. This is the kind of information that can be hard to find, so it is welcome in a book of this sort. The last appendix contains a number of categorised resource references. The number and breadth of the resources provided could provide quite an incredible education in information retrieval theory if the reader was inclined to read them all. What's to Like? There are several things to like about this book. Let's start with the fact that the authors are part of the core development team of Lucene. This gives them both credibility and an excellent understanding of the internal workings of Lucene. Co-author Erik Hatcher is a fantastic writer, having previously been a co-author of the only Ant book worth bothering with, Manning's Java Development with Ant . (Full disclosure: I do know Erik personally.)

The structure of the book is well thought out and each chapter does seem to move your understanding forward when combined with what you learned from the proceeding ones. The division into core and applied Lucene is also helpful. While you'd hope that this was the case, it often isn't; hence I note it as a positive.

I especially appreciate that this book does not fill up page after page with API documentation. The authors appear to have grasped that if you have Internet access to download the software, you might just be able to access the documentation online; rather, they concentrate on the way to use the software. What a concept!

As a part of Manning's "in Action" series, the book has excellent layout and has obviously been thoroughly edited by both technical evaluators and copyeditors. This might seem to be a small thing to some, but a well-edited book stands out clearly from the crowd. What's to consider? If you are looking for a book on using and configuring a download and go style of search engine, this book would be less suitable. While the case study on Nutch is of good length, it would be too short to useful as a configuration guide. Conclusion I enjoyed reading this book. If you have any text searching needs, this book will be more than sufficient equipment to guide you to successful completion. Even, if you are just looking to download a pre-written search engine, then this book will provide a good background to the nature of information retrieval in general and text indexing and searching specifically.

You can purchase Lucene in Action from bn.com. Slashdot welcomes readers' book reviews -- to see your own review here, read the book review guidelines, then visit the submission page.

donniejones18 asks: "I've been trying to find note-taking software for my university classes, work, etc. but all I can seem to discover is Windows-based software, such as OneNote or GoBinder. I would like to know what software Slashdot readers use for note-taking in Linux? If not, would anyone be interested in working together on this project? Ideally the software would support the insertion of PDFs, images, and other documents for handwritten annotation from a tablet PC, PDA or by mouse from a PC."

securitas writes "The Zotob MS05-039 worm mentioned on Slashdot last Sunday may be the most recent virus that has gone global, hitting Windows 2000 desktops at CNN, ABC, the New York Times, and many others. The virus is spreading around the world rapidly as compromised systems become bots and propagate the worm, with reported outbreaks in Germany and China. InformationWeek has a decent article titled Zotob Proves Patching "Window" Non-Existent. Microsoft calls it a "low impact" threat and tells you What you should know about Zotob. Symantec has W32.Zotob.D removal instructions. Trend Micro thinks that this is a new, different worm altogether and says it is one of the fastest-spreading infections in history."

Shalendra Chhabra writes "Jonathan Zdziarski has been fighting spam since before the first MIT spam conference in 2003, and has now released a full-on technical book, Ending Spam, on spam filtering. Ending Spam covers how the current and near-future crop of heuristic and statistical filters actually work under the hood, and how you can most effectively use such filters to protect your inbox." Read on for the rest of Chhabra's review. Ending Spam: Bayesian Content Filtering and the Art of Statistical Language Classification author Jonathan A. Zdziarski pages 312 publisher No Starch Press rating 8 reviewer Shalendra Chhabra ISBN 1593270526 summary Very Good Book Covering Statistical Models and Techniques Implemented in Current Spam Filters

Spam (unsolicited commercial email) and phishing (fraudulent emails) are causing losses of billions of dollars to businesses. Many initiatives are currently underway for fighting this challenge. On the legal front, a Virginia court recently sentenced a prolific spammer, Jeremy Jaynes, to nine years in prison, and a Nigerian court sentenced a woman to two and a half years for phishing. Michigan and Utah have both passed laws creating "do-not-contact" registries in July/August 2005, covering e-mail addresses, instant messaging addresses and telephone numbers. Technical initiatives to fight spam include server- or client-side spam filtering, using Lists (Blacklists, Whitelists, Greylists), Email Authentication Standards (IIM, DK, DKIM, SPF, SenderID), and emerging sender reputation and accreditation services.

Ending Spam is the first book explaining the fine details of the theoretical models and machine-learning algorithms implemented in these filters. The book is divided into three parts: introduction to spam filtering, fundamentals of statistical filtering, and advanced concepts of statistical filtering.

The first section of the book discusses the history of spam, spam kings, different approaches for fighting spam such as blacklisting, whitelisting, heuristic filtering, challenge response, throttling, collaborative filtering, Authenticated SMTP, Sender Policy Framework and SenderID, spammer fingerprinting, etc. However, the author omitted any mention of locally-sensitive hash functions (such as Nilsimsa Hash) to counter spammers' random insertion of words, the use of CAPTCHA (Completely Automated Public Turing Test to Tell Computers and Humans Apart), Greylisting, Identified Internet Mail, and Domain Keys (now Domain Keys Identified Mail).

In the next chapter, the author clearly explains various components of a Language Classifier Pipeline, including the Historical Dataset (aka wordlist, database, dictionary, filter memory), Tokenizer, and the Analysis Engine with its feedback loop. However, the process flow of a language classifier could have been more generalized, e.g. incorporating an initial text-to-text transformer. This chapter also covers the advantages and disadvantages of various training modes for filters, such as Train Everything (TEFT), Train-on-Error (TOE), and Train Until No Errors (TUNE). This part concludes with the description of Paul Graham's famous spam-filtering technique using Bayesian classification (as described in "A Plan for Spam"), Gary Robinson's Geometric Mean Test, Fisher-Robinsons Inverse Chi Square (including the source code for the inversion function), and some other tricks for optimizing spam- filtering accuracy.

The second part of this book deals with the fundamentals of statistical filtering. The author explains HTML and Base64 encoding, followed by a detailed description of tokenization techniques (e.g. Sparse Binary Polynomial Hashing). Then there's a discussion of the various tricks that spammers use for penetrating filters. Although these tactics are mentioned in John Graham-Cumming's "Spammers Compendium," Jonathan has very elegantly explained why some tricks work for spammers and some don't. This part concludes by addressing some of the resource, storage and scaling concerns raised by the large number of features generated from tokenization techniques.

The third part of this book deals with advanced concepts of statistical filtering. This includes the testing criteria for measuring accuracy of an email filter, and some advanced tokenization concepts, e.g. chained tokens (taking word-pairs and phrases into account, instead of individual words) generated using a sliding 5-byte window as mentioned in Sparse Binary Polynomial Hashing. The next chapter describes the Markovian Model implemented in the CRM114 Discriminator, but the author fails to describe different weighting schemes for features implemented in the Markovian-based version of CRM114. The author then describes the Bayesian Noise Reduction Technique for purging "out of context" data from the mail text. This chapter concludes with a very nice summary of collaborative algorithms and techniques, such as Message Innoculation, Streamlined Blackhole List, Fingerprinting, Automatic Whitelisting, URL Blacklisting, and Honeypot email addresses for snaring spammers' address harvesting bots.

The most interesting part of this book is the appendix, where the author presents interviews with John Graham-Cumming of POPFile, Brian Burton of SpamProbe, Marty Lamb of TarProxy, Bill Yerazunis of CRM114 Discriminator, and Jonathan Zdziarski of DSPAM (himself). I loved this section.

The salient points of the book: it's very easy to read; each chapter begins with a very thought-provoking introduction, and concludes with a crisp "final thoughts" section. The number of technical errors are very few in this print, and the illustrations are of good quality. Since the book is geared more toward the Bayesian and statistical generation of spam filters, the absence of certain spam-busting technologies is acceptable. However, a noticeable omission is the lack of discussion about measuring spam-filter accuracy, and what impact this has on setting filtration thresholds. A section on the economics of tradeoffs, and the use of a Receiver Operating Characteristic curve (ROC) would have been very helpful.

Overall, by putting together Ending Spam, Jonathan Zdziarski has made another significant contribution (after DSPAM) to the anti-spam community. Whether you are a system administrator, anti-spam researcher, engineer or a newbie interested in fighting spam, this book is a great reference.

William S Yerazunis and Richard Jowsey also contributed to this review. Shalendra Chhabra is a Graduate Student in Department of Computer Science and Engineering at University of California, Riverside. He is on the development team of CRM114 Discriminator and has presented his work at MIT Spam Conference 2005, Cisco Systems, and Stanford University. You can purchase Ending Spam: Bayesian Content Filtering and the Art of Statistical Language Classification from bn.com. Slashdot welcomes readers' book reviews -- to see your own review here, read the book review guidelines, then visit the submission page.

Shalendra Chhabra writes "Jonathan Zdziarski has been fighting spam since before the first MIT spam conference in 2003, and has now released a full-on technical book, Ending Spam, on spam filtering. Ending Spam covers how the current and near-future crop of heuristic and statistical filters actually work under the hood, and how you can most effectively use such filters to protect your inbox." Read on for the rest of Chhabra's review. Ending Spam: Bayesian Content Filtering and the Art of Statistical Language Classification author Jonathan A. Zdziarski pages 312 publisher No Starch Press rating 8 reviewer Shalendra Chhabra ISBN 1593270526 summary Very Good Book Covering Statistical Models and Techniques Implemented in Current Spam Filters

Spam (unsolicited commercial email) and phishing (fraudulent emails) are causing losses of billions of dollars to businesses. Many initiatives are currently underway for fighting this challenge. On the legal front, a Virginia court recently sentenced a prolific spammer, Jeremy Jaynes, to nine years in prison, and a Nigerian court sentenced a woman to two and a half years for phishing. Michigan and Utah have both passed laws creating "do-not-contact" registries in July/August 2005, covering e-mail addresses, instant messaging addresses and telephone numbers. Technical initiatives to fight spam include server- or client-side spam filtering, using Lists (Blacklists, Whitelists, Greylists), Email Authentication Standards (IIM, DK, DKIM, SPF, SenderID), and emerging sender reputation and accreditation services.

Ending Spam is the first book explaining the fine details of the theoretical models and machine-learning algorithms implemented in these filters. The book is divided into three parts: introduction to spam filtering, fundamentals of statistical filtering, and advanced concepts of statistical filtering.

The first section of the book discusses the history of spam, spam kings, different approaches for fighting spam such as blacklisting, whitelisting, heuristic filtering, challenge response, throttling, collaborative filtering, Authenticated SMTP, Sender Policy Framework and SenderID, spammer fingerprinting, etc. However, the author omitted any mention of locally-sensitive hash functions (such as Nilsimsa Hash) to counter spammers' random insertion of words, the use of CAPTCHA (Completely Automated Public Turing Test to Tell Computers and Humans Apart), Greylisting, Identified Internet Mail, and Domain Keys (now Domain Keys Identified Mail).

In the next chapter, the author clearly explains various components of a Language Classifier Pipeline, including the Historical Dataset (aka wordlist, database, dictionary, filter memory), Tokenizer, and the Analysis Engine with its feedback loop. However, the process flow of a language classifier could have been more generalized, e.g. incorporating an initial text-to-text transformer. This chapter also covers the advantages and disadvantages of various training modes for filters, such as Train Everything (TEFT), Train-on-Error (TOE), and Train Until No Errors (TUNE). This part concludes with the description of Paul Graham's famous spam-filtering technique using Bayesian classification (as described in "A Plan for Spam"), Gary Robinson's Geometric Mean Test, Fisher-Robinsons Inverse Chi Square (including the source code for the inversion function), and some other tricks for optimizing spam- filtering accuracy.

The second part of this book deals with the fundamentals of statistical filtering. The author explains HTML and Base64 encoding, followed by a detailed description of tokenization techniques (e.g. Sparse Binary Polynomial Hashing). Then there's a discussion of the various tricks that spammers use for penetrating filters. Although these tactics are mentioned in John Graham-Cumming's "Spammers Compendium," Jonathan has very elegantly explained why some tricks work for spammers and some don't. This part concludes by addressing some of the resource, storage and scaling concerns raised by the large number of features generated from tokenization techniques.

The third part of this book deals with advanced concepts of statistical filtering. This includes the testing criteria for measuring accuracy of an email filter, and some advanced tokenization concepts, e.g. chained tokens (taking word-pairs and phrases into account, instead of individual words) generated using a sliding 5-byte window as mentioned in Sparse Binary Polynomial Hashing. The next chapter describes the Markovian Model implemented in the CRM114 Discriminator, but the author fails to describe different weighting schemes for features implemented in the Markovian-based version of CRM114. The author then describes the Bayesian Noise Reduction Technique for purging "out of context" data from the mail text. This chapter concludes with a very nice summary of collaborative algorithms and techniques, such as Message Innoculation, Streamlined Blackhole List, Fingerprinting, Automatic Whitelisting, URL Blacklisting, and Honeypot email addresses for snaring spammers' address harvesting bots.

The most interesting part of this book is the appendix, where the author presents interviews with John Graham-Cumming of POPFile, Brian Burton of SpamProbe, Marty Lamb of TarProxy, Bill Yerazunis of CRM114 Discriminator, and Jonathan Zdziarski of DSPAM (himself). I loved this section.

The salient points of the book: it's very easy to read; each chapter begins with a very thought-provoking introduction, and concludes with a crisp "final thoughts" section. The number of technical errors are very few in this print, and the illustrations are of good quality. Since the book is geared more toward the Bayesian and statistical generation of spam filters, the absence of certain spam-busting technologies is acceptable. However, a noticeable omission is the lack of discussion about measuring spam-filter accuracy, and what impact this has on setting filtration thresholds. A section on the economics of tradeoffs, and the use of a Receiver Operating Characteristic curve (ROC) would have been very helpful.

Overall, by putting together Ending Spam, Jonathan Zdziarski has made another significant contribution (after DSPAM) to the anti-spam community. Whether you are a system administrator, anti-spam researcher, engineer or a newbie interested in fighting spam, this book is a great reference.

William S Yerazunis and Richard Jowsey also contributed to this review. Shalendra Chhabra is a Graduate Student in Department of Computer Science and Engineering at University of California, Riverside. He is on the development team of CRM114 Discriminator and has presented his work at MIT Spam Conference 2005, Cisco Systems, and Stanford University. You can purchase Ending Spam: Bayesian Content Filtering and the Art of Statistical Language Classification from bn.com. Slashdot welcomes readers' book reviews -- to see your own review here, read the book review guidelines, then visit the submission page.

Juha-Matti Laurio writes "Internet Storm Center's Diary reported today: Due to a number of very well working Windows exploits for this weeks patch set, and the zero-day Veritas exploit, we decided to turn the Infocon to yellow. The following Internet Threat Level meters are at level 2/4 because of Windows Plug and Play vulnerability's several exploit codes too: Symantec ThreatCon as a part of global DeepSight Threat Management System saying Increased alertness and Internet Security Systems X-Force with Increased vigilance at AlertCon."

1sockchuck writes "Exploits are already circulating for at least two (and possibly four) of the Windows security holes addressed in Microsoft's updates on Tuesday. Several working exploits have been released for a new vulnerability in Windows Plug and Play technology, which could be used to spread a worm targeting Windows 2000 machines, according to eEye security, which has released a free scanner to help network admins identify vulnerable computers."

spafbnerf writes "Securityfocus is running an article on Microsoft's honeymonkey project, previously covered on Slashdot. In early July 2005, this project discovered its first exploit for a vulnerability that had not been publicly disclosed, the JView profiler vulnerability which Microsoft announced later that month. "

BjB asks: "We've talked about platform neutral frameworks for years, but with the recent story about AJAX threatening the desktop, it made me think about the hype around two frameworks that were supposed to bring applications to the browser: Microsoft .NET and the Java competitor Echo framework. Both technologies boast that you can write a desktop application that can also easily be exported as an identical web-based application. I know a lot of developers hailed the .NET framework as a major innovation and jumped on board. The Echo framework was the counter-attack that leveled the field. Now, over two years later, I don't think I've ever seen anything that leverages either one? Was this a short lived battle with nobody reaping the rewards, or has it actually made some in-roads?"

Bill Hilf, Microsoft's Linux Lab Manager, got his answers to your questions back to us in time to publish them just before the San Francisco LinuxWorld, where he is speaking. Before you ask: Yes, Microsoft PR had a look at his answers before he sent them. So if you have any follow-up questions for Mr. Hilf, please post them below and I'll try to ask at least a few of them in person at LinuxWorld. 1) Start with the obvious
by Raul654

Dear Mr. Hilf - Surely by now you have to have been accused of helping Microsoft try to exterminate Linux. How do you respond to such accusations?

Bill:

I get that occasionally, you bet. But usually after I explain what I'm actually doing, it helps clear up the conspiracy theories (of which, there are quite a few). The truth is my job is to help Microsoft have a clear, unbiased and knowledgeable understanding of Open Source Software (OSS): the technology, the development models, how the community works, the pros and cons, and the mechanics of the overall process. So, no, Microsoft is not out to exterminate Linux or Open Source, Linux and Open Source Software will continue to be part of the software industry. My job is to help Microsoft have an understanding of the Open Source technology world.

In fact, Microsoft has benefited from OSS, has participated in OSS projects, and feels that OSS will continue to have an important role in the ecosystem. Both commercial and open source offer specific advantages. And several development models can and should coexist in healthy competition. After many years of working in both environments, a mantra I've seen pay off numerous times is "choose technology to fit the need" not based on a belief or religion: in other words, if the software doesn't solve the problem in a cost effective way, belief and religion won't stop the IT guys' cell phones and pagers from ringing at 2 AM, and that goes for *any* technology, regardless of the development model.

2) Open Standards
by Oriumpor

How does Microsoft internally deal with Open Standards and Open Document Formats?

I suppose more generally: In your testing is it solely relegated to Linux in the Server role, or do you address End-User issues as well?

Bill:

We are interested in all sorts of distributions, commercial and non-commercial, of Linux and we test many types of Open Source software overall.

We are very active in helping our product teams test out their open standards implementations. For example, we are currently doing this with Windows Server R2 (a release of Windows Server due out later this year) and its support for NFS and NIS. In a broader answer to this question, Microsoft strongly supports the promotion of open standards. Microsoft's participation in standards bodies such as IETF, W3C and OASIS, and our royalty-free contributions of technology to Web Services standards supports this commitment.

That said, Open Source does not equal Open Standards. It surprises me that this is an issue that(some) people still don't really comprehend. Let's break it down:
* The term "open standards" describes the results of a process for establishing uniform technical specifications (when used in the broader sense);
* While the term "open source," by contrast, refers to a software development and licensing model.
* Open standards may be implemented by software developed under any development and licensing model - non-OSS and OSS alike.

The VCR is a good example of a standards-based product that allowed any video tape* to play on any player - providing a marketplace of competitive VCR implementations, competitive tape media suppliers, and commercial opportunities.

*go ahead, someone say "Hey, but what about Betamax?" - but you get my point.

3) Penguin Aid?
by deathcloset

No doubt one of the activities of microsoft's linux lab is testing the security of linux.

My question is this: if you find a security vulnerability in linux, do you inform the linux community about it?

Bill:

We definitely look at security technologies in OSS in general, including Linux, but we do not actively do security code audits on Linux/OSS. We do occasionally stumble on bugs by accident in various products, and we always email the parties concerned, and it's up to them to do the right thing from that point on.

Let me give you some examples. Michael Howard, one of our security gurus here at Microsoft, has come across some issues in some projects, such as Apache.

As a company, we strongly believe in and encourage responsible disclosure of vulnerabilities. The practice of reporting vulnerabilities directly to a vendor is beneficial to everyone. It helps to ensure that customers receive high-quality software updates for security vulnerabilities, without exposure to malicious attackers while the update is being developed.

In my team's day to day work, we have discovered bugs and submitted fixes upstream. For example, the smbtorture test suite included with Samba had a bug that we identified. We provided a backtrace to the developers, and it was fixed and committed.

We also found some problems with the GAIM Instant Messaging client. GAIM's MSN via HTTP feature didn't work. The bug was noticed by our team because we had a real need for MSN via HTTP on our Linux desktops. So we fixed the issue and submitted the patch upstream.

4) Can Microsoft Ever Give Us Free As In Freedom?
by nurhussein

We've heard a lot about MS having a lower TCO etc., and who knows it may even be true in some cases, but does Microsoft realise that the reason some of us are on Linux is for the "Free as in Freedom" part? This may matter not to the PHBs, but some of the Linux users MS is trying to court such as HPC consist of engineers and scientists who operate things like particle accelerators and are unfazed by the "complexity" of Linux and appreciate the freedom to be able to customise it to their needs?

Can Microsoft ever be as liberal with their operating system as Linux developers are with Linux?

Bill:

Great question, and as someone who has spent time in the academic world as well as in the HPC world, I very much understand your point.

There's always a trade-off between modularity and integration, or said another way, there is always a balance between the ability to customize anything and everything and the ability to deliver a consistent, tested and supported software solution to a broad base of users.

This is not a Windows vs. Linux thing but more of a software design issue. The key is realizing that there's a continuum of possible trade-offs. With increased integration you have certain advantages and disadvantages, and conversely with increased modularity you have other advantages and disadvantages. As an operating system designer, you can pick where you want to be on this modularity/integration spectrum.

Microsoft has found that pursuing a balance, rather than one extreme, is a successful approach that fits the needs of our users and customers in a broad and effective way.

For the global software ecosystem, the best environment for innovation is the coexistence of OSS and commercial software. There is a good review of this successful interaction between software models here.

We try to provide the transparency and flexibility you describe through our Shared Source program. The Microsoft Shared Source Initiative is a range of programs and licenses to make Microsoft source code more broadly available to customers, partners, developers, governments, academics and other people who are interested. Shared Source now serves more than 1.5 million developers through source code access programs. What surprises most people when I tell them about our Shared Source program is that 99% of the >70 programs have full redistribution and modification rights.

5) Stranger in a strage land
by winkydink

Doesn't working at MS isolate you somewhat from the OSS community? What do you do to keep your OSS perspective and skills current?

Bill:

Believe it or not, I use more different types of OSS here at Microsoft than I've ever used before. Our team uses over 40 different flavors of Linux and BSD, plus several commercial Unix variants. Beyond this, we use an ever-growing number of OSS applications. In my spare time, I'm even learning some stuff about Windows J

I also interact with the OSS community and am in contact with many people in the OSS development community from all sorts of different projects. It's important to keep open lines of communication. We may not always agree, but the dialogue is always open and friendly.

6) Why doesn't Microsoft release Microsoft Linux?
by amper

The subject says it all (mostly).

One of the primary reasons Linux is somewhat inferior to commercial offerings when considered as a general-purpose desktop operating system is that there is a lack of a single guiding human interface standard for the various groups to work toward. Companies such as Apple Computer and Microsoft have invested large amounts of money in human interface studies, and although much of this information has been made readily accessible to the public, it would appear that very little of that information has been put to good use by F/OSS developers.

With Apple using the BSD branch of software as its operating system core, do you see a future for a Microsoft-branded Linux distribution, using a Microsoft-developed HCI design?

Though there is a large amount of enmity in the F/OSS community toward Microsoft, it cannot be denied that Microsoft's development methods are demonstrably capable of producing quality software. Could Microsoft serve as a catalyst for consolidation within the community, while remaining true to the F/OSS philosophy? Could such a strategy be profitable for Microsoft?

Bill:

Without question, our strategic bet is on Windows. Windows Vista and Longhorn mark the threshold of our next wave of innovation. This might sound a bit like an 'I drank the Kool-Aid' type answer but I've seen what we've built and are in the process of building, and I've seen what we're architecting. Our developers are creating products and technologies that are redefining what is possible with software. It's an exciting time to be at Microsoft.

But you raise a good point, which is: can there be a positive reciprocal relationship between Microsoft and the OSS development community? I strongly believe the answer is "Yes" and I spend a lot of time trying to help this relationship mature. There is a great amount we can learn from one another, and we have just begun to explore the potential of this relationship.

7) Samba
by miltimj

Is one of your projects to assist in analyzing Samba source code to help coworkers better understand the SMB protocol?

Bill:

This is not something we do, but as I mentioned above, we do use the smbtorture test suite in our labs and we do test for Samba interoperability.

8) Execs trying Linux?
by unsinged int

Have you ever managed to get any of the big shots (for example, Gates) to sit down and try Linux for a few minutes? If so, what did they say? If not, why not? Did they have an allergic reaction and try to run away from you, or have you not asked?

I think it would be interesting to hear the opinions of people at Microsoft who actually have tried Linux (with KDE, OpenOffice, Firefox, etc.), versus the standard "Linux is evil" public relations line.

Bill:

All of our executives see and occasionally use non-Microsoft technologies. This is certainly going to get me flamed, but the Microsoft executives I have worked with are typically very technical, sometimes extraordinarily so. They grasp new technologies very quickly. Sometimes they say "Hey, that problem was solved five years ago - is that it?" -- other times they say "We've got some work to do". I personally have not had an experience here where someone said 'Linux is evil!' Microsoft is a company with deep roots in technology, so most people here approach technology - our own or others - with a technologist's curiosity and interest. Easily one of my favorite things about Microsoft is its culture of curiosity about technology and its potential.

9) Windows Services for Unix
by dtfinch

Microsoft has long offered Services for Unix free for download to provide a unix-like environment on Windows. I've seen rumors and speculation that SFU will be included by default in Windows Vista, with some GPL'd portions replaced or rewritten to maintain compliance. If it's true, what level of functionality and compatibility can we expect?

Bill:

You should attend my LinuxWorld session this week J

I can't confirm what functionality will be in what version of Windows Vista. However, I can confirm that the next-generation of several components of Services for UNIX are being integrated into Windows Server 2003 R2. The NFS client, NFS Server, User/Name Mapping, Telnet Server & Client, Password Sync and NIS Server components of Services for UNIX are all present in the Windows Server 2003 R2 builds. In addition, a revamped POSIX subsystem, the "Subsystem for UNIX-based Applications" or "SUA" is also available as an optional install in R2.

Integrating this functionality in Windows Server 2003 R2 provides native support of cross-platform management tools, Windows/UNIX interoperability and UNIX to Windows application portability. This is a big help for many of the customers I talk to and something I will demonstrate at my LinuxWorld session this week.

10) Beat em or Join em?
by jdehnert

Having been in IT a looong time, I'm pretty familiar with all of the major players.

All of them have their +'s and -'s, but one of my biggest gripes about Microsoft is that instead of trying to leverage OSS, they continually try to crush or marginalize it. Over time I find myself less and less likely to consider a Microsoft solution because I know that over time Microsoft will try and make that solution less interoperable with all of my other solutions.

Microsoft would sell more software to me if I could be sure that they are NOT going to try and lock out all of my other platforms going forward.

Given your current position, does it look as if Microsoft will continue to try and marginalize OSS, or will they do an about face and work to try and ensure ongoing interoperability?

Bill:

If there's one thing that I'd like people to take away from this interview, it's that we can, and should, cooperate and learn from one another.

We love to write great software. One thing Microsoft knows well is the art of 'co-opetition' - competing and also cooperating. Both Microsoft and OSS technologies will continue to be around. We can compete - and competition is healthy - but just as important, we also need to cooperate and make sure that we pursue interoperability as a common goal. We need to be comfortable doing both, simultaneously. We need to have an open, mature relationship.

The key to making this happen is to have open lines of communication. If someone in the OSS community runs into a technical interoperability problem with Microsoft products, I want to know about it. In many cases, we'll be able to do something to resolve the issue. There may be a solution that already exists. Or the problem could be related to an issue that might need to be addressed by one of our product teams. But at the very least, I'll try my best to help and give you a straight answer.

One of my first demos to a high-level executive involved showing some standards-based Linux/Windows interoperability scenarios. I expected to receive an "If it's not built here, then I don't care" kind of response.

To my surprise, his reaction was the opposite: "This is good--we should do more of this type of thing." And I've seen this commitment from many others here at Microsoft, in a variety of roles. At the end of the day, we want software to "just work" too. That's what great software is all about.
If you'd like to contact me directly, I can be reached at billhilf at microsoft dot com.

------

Microsoft Linux Lab Manager Bill Hilf has been mentioned on Slashdot before, not to mention (as you might expect) on Microsoft Watch. His latest high profile coworker, Daniel Robbins, has also gotten a bit of Slashdot attention. Got any questions for Bill he hasn't already answered elsewhere? Post them below (one per post, please). We'll send him 10 - 12 of the highest-moderated ones and post his answers next Monday.

dvdsmith asks: "Say are dealing with a Windows network that for internet access must pass through a firewall that you have no control over. Said firewall apparently blocks the known time protocols (NTP,daytime,etc) and you know from experience that those who control it will not allow any exceptions. If one sets up an internal NTP server (Windows XP or 2000 workstation) for all others to sync from, is there another reliable method for updating time on the server, like pulling from a Java website? See the time.gov website as an example. Any ideas?"

dvdsmith asks: "Say are dealing with a Windows network that for internet access must pass through a firewall that you have no control over. Said firewall apparently blocks the known time protocols (NTP,daytime,etc) and you know from experience that those who control it will not allow any exceptions. If one sets up an internal NTP server (Windows XP or 2000 workstation) for all others to sync from, is there another reliable method for updating time on the server, like pulling from a Java website? See the time.gov website as an example. Any ideas?"

gdsotirov writes "Today on the IE blog the availability of two new beta tests - Windows Vista Beta 1 and Internet Explorer 7 Beta 1 - was announced. These tests are mainly targeted to developers and IT professionals. Thus the betas are only available to MSDN subscribers. Tom's Hardware has details as well." From the article: "While the code also includes an early look at the new user-interface design, the majority of end-user features in Windows Vista will not be included until Beta 2. In addition to these fundamentals, Windows Vista Beta 1 also includes the Internet Explorer 7 Beta 1 built into the platform. The technical Beta of Internet Explorer 7 for Windows XP SP2 also is available today." Any early thoughts, MSDN subscribers?

gdsotirov writes "Today on the IE blog the availability of two new beta tests - Windows Vista Beta 1 and Internet Explorer 7 Beta 1 - was announced. These tests are mainly targeted to developers and IT professionals. Thus the betas are only available to MSDN subscribers. Tom's Hardware has details as well." From the article: "While the code also includes an early look at the new user-interface design, the majority of end-user features in Windows Vista will not be included until Beta 2. In addition to these fundamentals, Windows Vista Beta 1 also includes the Internet Explorer 7 Beta 1 built into the platform. The technical Beta of Internet Explorer 7 for Windows XP SP2 also is available today." Any early thoughts, MSDN subscribers?

CubicStar writes "Sixty years ago, Vannnevar Bush published on 'Atlantic Monthly' his seminal article on the Memex, that computer-like device which would provide access to a huge amount of interlinked information. At the time computers were experimental and secret but a visionary (with a shadowy edge) proposed something which even today looks at least influential."

Mr_Silver writes "Engadget has an interesting article regarding a new feature in Longhorn entitled PVP-OPM (Protected Video Path - Output Protection Management) which detects the capabilities of the display devices you are using and manages how (and if at all) content is sent to it. In short, this means that if Longhorn detects that your monitor is not "secure" enough, then your premium video content won't play on it until you buy one that is. Who gets to decide? The content providers of course." From the article: "So what will happen when you try to play premium content on your incompatible monitor? If you're "lucky", the content will go through a resolution constrictor. The purpose of this constrictor is to down-sample high-resolution content to below a certain number of pixels. The newly down-sampled content is then blown back up to match the resolution of your monitor. This is much like when you shrink a JPEG and then zoom into it. Much of the clarity is lost. The result is a picture far fuzzier than it need be."

An anonymous reader writes "A few screenshots of Windows Longhorn Beta 1 have surfaced on the net showing off many of the new transparency features, Internet Explorer 7 and Avalon or WinFX."

gcnaddict writes "Microsoft has officially sent invitations to their best beta testers and to WinHEC participants for their Windows Code Name Longhorn beta program. They also unveiled a new Beta Client which promises to be better than the current beta management systems, and will replace other means of beta distribution, including WindowsBeta and BetaPlace all in one fell swoop. While the new, highly anticipated operating system is not up for download, Beta 1 is expected to be up for grabs later this month. Unfortunately, it seems that the preliminary invitation codes are unique per user. Microsoft is expected to allow the public to apply for the beta program later this summer, and as usual, Longhorn will be a part of the Community Technology Preview program."

gcnaddict writes "Microsoft has officially sent invitations to their best beta testers and to WinHEC participants for their Windows Code Name Longhorn beta program. They also unveiled a new Beta Client which promises to be better than the current beta management systems, and will replace other means of beta distribution, including WindowsBeta and BetaPlace all in one fell swoop. While the new, highly anticipated operating system is not up for download, Beta 1 is expected to be up for grabs later this month. Unfortunately, it seems that the preliminary invitation codes are unique per user. Microsoft is expected to allow the public to apply for the beta program later this summer, and as usual, Longhorn will be a part of the Community Technology Preview program."

gcnaddict writes "Microsoft has officially sent invitations to their best beta testers and to WinHEC participants for their Windows Code Name Longhorn beta program. They also unveiled a new Beta Client which promises to be better than the current beta management systems, and will replace other means of beta distribution, including WindowsBeta and BetaPlace all in one fell swoop. While the new, highly anticipated operating system is not up for download, Beta 1 is expected to be up for grabs later this month. Unfortunately, it seems that the preliminary invitation codes are unique per user. Microsoft is expected to allow the public to apply for the beta program later this summer, and as usual, Longhorn will be a part of the Community Technology Preview program."

gcnaddict writes "Microsoft has officially sent invitations to their best beta testers and to WinHEC participants for their Windows Code Name Longhorn beta program. They also unveiled a new Beta Client which promises to be better than the current beta management systems, and will replace other means of beta distribution, including WindowsBeta and BetaPlace all in one fell swoop. While the new, highly anticipated operating system is not up for download, Beta 1 is expected to be up for grabs later this month. Unfortunately, it seems that the preliminary invitation codes are unique per user. Microsoft is expected to allow the public to apply for the beta program later this summer, and as usual, Longhorn will be a part of the Community Technology Preview program."

Qa32 writes "For those chomping at the bit for more Office 12 details, Microsoft offered a tiny peek at the upcoming offering, or offerings, due next year. In what he termed the first public viewing of Office 12, Chris Caposella, corporate vice president of Microsoft's Information Worker Product Management Group, showed off a distributed forms capability that would enable customers to fill in and submit XML forms easily via a browser, without having to run Microsoft InfoPath on their PC."

VoIPluvr writes "Microsoft, is quietly turning into a voice-over-IP powerhouse. It all started with the launch of its Microsoft Live Communication Server. Bill Gates says, 'Communicating in a better way has a huge impact for business,' and he states that he wants Microsoft to marry the PC, the cell phone and the desk phone. Recently, Microsoft teamed up with VoIP companies like Sylantro to offer hosted IP-PBX services, and now is rumored to have bought Teleo, a small VoIP company based in San Francisco. Microsoft's dominance on the desktop is helping the company extend its reach into the fast growing VoIP business, thus putting it in direct competition with the likes of Cisco. Teleo, for instance could help the company compete more effectively with the likes of Yahoo and Skype."

VoIPluvr writes "Microsoft, is quietly turning into a voice-over-IP powerhouse. It all started with the launch of its Microsoft Live Communication Server. Bill Gates says, 'Communicating in a better way has a huge impact for business,' and he states that he wants Microsoft to marry the PC, the cell phone and the desk phone. Recently, Microsoft teamed up with VoIP companies like Sylantro to offer hosted IP-PBX services, and now is rumored to have bought Teleo, a small VoIP company based in San Francisco. Microsoft's dominance on the desktop is helping the company extend its reach into the fast growing VoIP business, thus putting it in direct competition with the likes of Cisco. Teleo, for instance could help the company compete more effectively with the likes of Yahoo and Skype."

Pankaj Arora writes "A settlement has been reached in IBM's private antitrust case against Microsoft. According to the terms of the settlement, Microsoft will pay IBM $775 million cash in addition to $75 million in credit. From the article, 'The settlement resolves all discriminatory pricing and overcharging claims stemming from the U.S. government's mid-1990s antitrust case against Microsoft, the companies said in a statement. The settlement also resolves most other IBM antitrust claims, including those related to its OS/2 operating system and SmartSuite products. IBM's claims of harm to its server hardware and server software businesses are not covered by the settlement, however.'"

cygnusx writes "Microsoft Monitor and Ars Technica are reporting that Microsoft has released an administrative toolkit (beta) to help secure Windows machines that are shared by a number of people. Features include protecting the Windows partition from non-administrative changes and Group Policy-like access restrictions. This should be good news because Microsoft seems to be recognizing that not everyone can go down the Active Directory path to manage their Windows machines better."

Kwirl asks: "While the computer and console gaming industry is growing at a remarkable pace, the focus is usually on better graphics as opposed to stronger gameplay and plot development/story arc. I personally have several titles (Sims2, Half-Life2, Doom 3, MSFS2004, Unreal 2004) sitting on my shelf that were amazing games, but just couldn't hold my interest for long enough to really be considered a worthwhile investment. In the last couple of years I had thought that the answer to my gaming needs would come in the form of MMORPG's. I have purchased and played many of them, but all seem to come to a stagnant point where I recognize that only addiction would drive me deeper into the game, and not better gameplay (Dark Age of Camelot, World of Warcraft, City of Heroes, Everquest II). In truth, I have found myself spending more time playing old MUD's (TorilMud, Medievia) again, or even amusing web-based games ( KingdomofLoathing, PimpWar, NeoPets). I am curious to know how many other people here find themselves walking intentionally backwards along the technological timeline of games for your personal expenditure of free time? What games/sites do you feel give you the best return of satisfaction versus time spent playing the game over the long haul?"

NW writes "According to the records in the IETF's database (here and here), both the SPF and Sender-ID anti-spam proposals were tentatively approved by the IESG (the approval board of the IETF) as experimental standards. It remains to be seen whether any of them will actually put a dent into spam." At the same time, the FTC has opened a central site about email authentication.

William Robinson writes "If your e-mail does not have a Sender ID, Microsoft wants to junk your message. Somewhere after November, MSN and Hotmail will consider it as spam. Sender ID is a specification for verifying the authenticity of e-mail by ensuring the validity of the server from which the e-mail came. Some experts feel that 'Sender ID' is not an accepted standard and has many shortcomings. Some also feel that Microsoft is trying to strong-arm the industry into the adoption of an incomplete and not accepted standard."

Software Illustrated asks: "When publishing books on how to use Linux desktop software, the legal/IP review process to make sure we aren't infringing on the property rights of 3rd party sources should be easier than for books about proprietary/closed source software, right? Microsoft makes it easy as long as you comply with their guideline. I didn't think it would be necessary to get permission to publish a screenshot of, for instance, the GNOME gconf-editor. But that is just what our legal/IP review team is pursuing. Is this necessary?" "If not, then how do you explain to a by-the-book contract administrator that the rules are different with GNOME? I find myself dealing with exactly this problem right now, resulting in a book ready for publication being put on hold. Is the solution here to get GNOME (and KDE for that matter) to publish their own permission guidelines ala Microsoft? Seems counterintuitive to the spirit of the F/OSS movement. But doing this sure would grease the skids for publishers. Has anyone else dealt with this issue?"

Software Illustrated asks: "When publishing books on how to use Linux desktop software, the legal/IP review process to make sure we aren't infringing on the property rights of 3rd party sources should be easier than for books about proprietary/closed source software, right? Microsoft makes it easy as long as you comply with their guideline. I didn't think it would be necessary to get permission to publish a screenshot of, for instance, the GNOME gconf-editor. But that is just what our legal/IP review team is pursuing. Is this necessary?" "If not, then how do you explain to a by-the-book contract administrator that the rules are different with GNOME? I find myself dealing with exactly this problem right now, resulting in a book ready for publication being put on hold. Is the solution here to get GNOME (and KDE for that matter) to publish their own permission guidelines ala Microsoft? Seems counterintuitive to the spirit of the F/OSS movement. But doing this sure would grease the skids for publishers. Has anyone else dealt with this issue?"

nmb3000 writes "MSDN recently put up a case study of Bungie.Net (much more detailed than a previous one), the homepage for the creators of the Halo series, and its transition from Perl to .NET and ASP. From the study: 'The Bungie.net site is the online companion to the wildly successful Halo 2 video game for Xbox, released in November 2004 by Microsoft. The site also acts as the community hub for all things related to Bungie games. Built with the Microsoft .NET Framework, Bungie.net serves up more than 4 million pages per day, accumulating 300 gigabytes of online game statistics per month from more than 1 million games played daily.' This is an interesting look into the creation and integration of the very large and interactive website which was voted 'Most Innovative Design' by IGN Entertainment in 2004."

nmb3000 writes "MSDN recently put up a case study of Bungie.Net (much more detailed than a previous one), the homepage for the creators of the Halo series, and its transition from Perl to .NET and ASP. From the study: 'The Bungie.net site is the online companion to the wildly successful Halo 2 video game for Xbox, released in November 2004 by Microsoft. The site also acts as the community hub for all things related to Bungie games. Built with the Microsoft .NET Framework, Bungie.net serves up more than 4 million pages per day, accumulating 300 gigabytes of online game statistics per month from more than 1 million games played daily.' This is an interesting look into the creation and integration of the very large and interactive website which was voted 'Most Innovative Design' by IGN Entertainment in 2004."

A reader writes: "While Cisco is still runs the world of routers, apparently they have ended up on the short end of the stick when it comes to WiFi. Aruba Wireless Networks announced today that Microsoft has selected them over Cisco and would be "integrating Windows wireless clients" software with the Aruba gear. This could impact everyone that uses wireless with Windows. Aruba's Access Points aren't your traditional AP since they offload most of the functionality to a back end controller thus making for very low cost APs. They have even released their AP boot code on Source Forge so that anyone with a controller can convert their APs to Aruba APs. It also should be noted that Cisco, after realizing their wireless equipment wasn't up to par, tried to buy the deal by first by first approaching Aruba and then after being rebuffed bought their competitor Airespace for $450M in desperation and still lost."

Geuis writes "I'll admit, I'm not a big Microsoft fan. I'm an old-time user of Adobe Photoshop, and I love nearly everything it can do. However, in the interest of science, I decided to try out the new beta for Microsoft's answer to Photoshop, Acrylic. My review is posted on my blog. Final recommendation: Stay as far away from Acrylic as you can. It needs so much development work done, it shouldn't be out of Alpha testing. If this is anywhere close to the final product they are planning to release, then Microsoft should be prepared to eat another few million in lost development funds. There's no reason you should have to eat it too."

Rollie Hawk writes "Microsoft's latest attempt to reconcile with the European Commission's antitrust rulings against the company may result in another victim. It seems their offer, if accepted, will strike a considerable blow at a leading competitor in the realm of file and printer sharing. The popular open source suite Samba stands to be the recipient of a backhanded slap from Redmond if the offer stands and the European branch of the Free Software Foundation is taking it personally. Though Microsoft is offering to make some information regarding interoperability available to competitors, it's only under the condition that implementations are not open source. According to FSFE president Georg Greve, "the proposal specifically precludes the information from being used in a free software implementation, such as the Samba workgroup server software." How is Samba being specifically targeted? Greve argues this is because "Samba is the only remaining major competitor of Microsoft in this market.""

pallmall1 writes "The Inquirer has an official statement from Intel claiming the Computerworld Today Australia story from May 27th was incorrect, and the Pentium D and the 945 chipsets do not have unannounced DRM technology embedded in them. The statement says Intel products support or will support several copy protection schemes such as Macrovision, DTCP-IP, COPP, HDCP, CGMS-A, and others. The statement concludes: 'While Intel continues to work with the industry to support other content protection technologies, we have not added any unannounced DRM technologies in either the Pentium D processor or the Intel 945 Express Chipset family.' The Intel Chip with DRM story has been previously reported on Slashdot. Update: 06/05 20:12 GMT by Z : Fixed the Macrovision link.

Novus writes "The Register reports that many of the features of Windows XP Pro, such as Remote Desktop and user management, can be enabled in Windows XP Home simply by changing two bytes in an installation data file. Another explanation can be found here."

Novus writes "The Register reports that many of the features of Windows XP Pro, such as Remote Desktop and user management, can be enabled in Windows XP Home simply by changing two bytes in an installation data file. Another explanation can be found here."

Yankovic writes "Looks like MS will not support IE7 on Windows 2000. 'It should be no surprise that we do not plan on releasing IE7 for Windows 2000... [S]ome of the security work in IE7 relies on operating system functionality in XPSP2 that is non-trivial to port back to Windows 2000.' While security fixes will still be available until 2010, I guess that means the only browsers with tabs for W2k will be Opera and Firefox." All the details about an MS product's fall into senility available at the lifecycle page.

Nomad128 writes "Mozilla's Deer Park 1 Alpha RC appears to have extended the Javascript spec for the first time in quite some time. New features include Array object methods "every" (logical AND), "some" (logical OR), "map" (function mapping), and "forEach" (iteration). They also appear to have added native XML support. Will this speed up the development of AJAX applications and give Moz a leg-up over IE7?"