Slashdot Mirror

feeder sent us a recent Techweb story purporting to talk about the Open Source community reaction to the announcement from Microsoft and ActiveState about ActiveState being funded to extend Perl support under Windows. The story is indicative of some of the standard concerns-but how much do we have fear - what does everyone think?

Wonko42 writes "Microsoft and AOL have put aside their bickering for a moment and teamed up to fund a research project that will examine the effects of the Internet on modern society. " The results of will be quite interesting-they are looking at not only the effects of usage, but also non-usage, which is equally important, IMHO. It looks like UCLA will be the key institution, and the time span is "at least a generation".

Anonymous Coward writes "According to this Press Release, Microsoft has signed an aggreement with Active State to add missing functionality to the Windows version of Perl. But the FAQ states that they also want Perl to "take advantage of platform features on Windows". "

Adam Cody wrote in to note that this job on Microsoft's web site. It's a marketing position and the responsibilities include a competitive analysis of Linux. Should I apply?

Everyone, their mother, Uncle Henry and Aunt Maude wrote in about Microsoft considering using Open Source. While they've talked about it before, Steve Balmer, MS President, said in remarks that Microsoft is thinking about - Note:thinking about the Open Source model. But, hey, lotsa people think about lotsa things. I'm not holding my breath

netstat sent us the story about the big networking companies and Linux. Much the same story as elsewhere, they already support NT and Solaris, and don't see the user base for Linux there yet. Much of the comments are candids taken from Networld Interop. As you would expect, most of them want to see more users before rolling out support.

AmirS writes "Microsoft are really pushing for the Mindcraft benchmark to be re-run, so much that they've put up a page about it. They say they've met all the requests of the community (seems like most have been met) and just require linux people to step forward for it. "

An anonymous reader wrote in to say "Microsoft has announced that NT was awarded this security classification, equivalent to the US C2 security classification, under the ITSEC, the UK's IT Security Evalutaion Criteria. As with the NT 3.5 C2 rating, this doesn't include being connected to a network. This is interesting, given that any local user on NT 3.5 or above server or workstation can become a member of the administrators group, which is not a Good Thing for a secure system... "

Quite a number of people wrote in to alert everyone to Microsoft's joining of the Internet2 Consortium. They becoming a corporate partner, meaning they will contribute at least 1 million in goods and services to universities involved in the I2 project.

Quite a number of people wrote in to alert us to the Salon story about the Mindcraft survey. Andrew Leonard, does a great job of tracing the trail, including the information about how Mindcraft is asking for help from Linus, but is not apparently giving him the information that he needs. Ah, the joys of industry. Mindcraft has agred to re-do the tests, with Linus' help, as aforementioned, but is continuing to be...less then forthcoming about the tests. Meanwhile, Microsoft is trumpeting the original study.

i0n wrote in to send us a Chicago Tribune article about Linus and Bill at Comdex. Has anyone rummaged up transcripts of either speech? I've seen several articles on each, but no transcripts. Update: 04/20 02:07 by CT : Knish sent us a PC Week Story on the keynotes. Update: 04/20 03:17 by CT : Ign0rance sent us Bill's Speech. Update: 04/20 03:34 by CT : BitMan sent us an MSNBC article.

Unknwn writes "Microsoft announced today their new optical mouse, the Intellimouse Explorer. For some reason, they think that optical mice or something new. I have some Sun 3s and Sun 4s lying around which make that a joke... =) " I happen to have an optical mouse at my feet right now. Looks nice, but is it worth $75? I have had the worst luck with MS peripherals (they were gifts!), but I have friends who swear by them...Update: 04/20 03:16 by J : A "concerned" reader wrote us to say that the mouse will not require a special pad like the older opitcal mice. He also said he had a chance to play with it, and that it was quite nice. Anyone else care to share?

st. augustine writes "This editorial on the front page of PC Magazine UK cites the old "programmers will starve" argument and claims that open source and cheap hardware are driving people out of business, thereby reducing consumer choice." The article is mostly about declining costs of hardware, the little FUD blurb is at the end, although it seems strangely familiar to an article sent in by toolz: this little gem appears on Microsoft.com so it doesn't have to try to be impartial. Read both, were going to see a lot more of this stuff.

crow writes "The Boston Globe columnist who started the rumor that Microsoft is porting Office to Linux now has a column where he reports that Microsoft claims it has no efforts underway to port Office to Linux. In fact, Microsoft claims that there has been no interest from customers about Office for Linux. However, Microsoft now has an email address where people can comment about Microsoft applications in regards to Linux: linuxq@microsoft.com " Quite frankly, I'll be happy man if I never have to see that little paper clip again. Ever.

Erik has written in with a nice little commentary on the personalities behind the free software movement. Mostly about RMS and Linus, but its worth reading.

The following was written by Slashdot Reader Erik

The Personalities Behind Linux

The varied personalities of Linux definitely show the many facets that make up our favorite OS. I was reading the Wired article that had an interview with RMS, and I've seen quite a few interviews with Linus. IMHO, Stallman represents quite a bit of what Linux and it's users is all about, but Torvalds is more a way to market it.

Obviously both Torvalds and Stallman were and are central to the OS. As we all know, the kernel mainly the product of Linus, but most of the tools, and the very license under which Linux was placed is the result of Stallman's GNU. But, these two men don't seem to get along quite as well as the software they wrote. Linux is a coder, but RMS is a zealot.

Stallman's fire, passion, and concern for politics are essential for Linux users. Many people criticize Richard for being overly paranoid, but that paranoia is necessary, especially in the upcoming months and years. As Linux gains mainstream support, there will undoubtedly be blatant violations of the GPL. Slashdot has recently posted at least one story of a new distro that violates the GPL. It's a huge asset to have RMS and similar enthusiasts to vigorously defend the freedom that our "rebel" OS has come to represent.

As a result, I love having RMS go everywhere he can, reminding people of the free nature of Linux. Excuse me, GNU/Linux.

Remind people that Linus didn't write the whole kernel, and owns a very small percentage of the code in any Linux distro. Torvalds will be the first to admit that. And Stallman reminds us that Linux is more about hackers and free code than about the OS itself. It's about making decisions for ourselves, not having to accept a crappy OS.

But as much credit as RMS deserves, he shouldn't necessarily be the spokesman for Linux. While

Stallman looks like a fanatic, Linus is like the penguins; cute, maybe a little plump, but over all, someone who's very likeable. Plus he has a "normal" job, and is making money from Linux (not directly, but through his Transmeta job, speaking, etc.)

As a result, though Stallman deserves tons of credit, he shouldn't necessarily be on the cover of the magazines. He's done a great job, as has Linus, but as Linux gets marketed to a more mainstream audience, we need to look at our figurehead. Stallman ranting to Wired is great, it gets everyone to stop, think, and be more aware of the politics. But let's think twice before flaming CNN/Fortune if their latest Newstand didn't mention RMS. We all know of his contribution, and all geeks appreciate it. We need him to help lead the movement, but not necessarily to be our public leader. Let CNN snub him, and let the other mags ignore him. He has a great product to be proud of. But as great as he is, he's often inflammatory, nearly always an extremist, and not necessarily who the business community wants to put it's trust in.

A name that all the book reviewers know SEGV has sent in a review of Scott Meyers' CD work Effective C++ CD. This is a stray from our normal book reviews, but figured people would appreciate seeing Scott Meyers' newest effort. Effective C++ CD author Scott Meyers pages publisher Addison Wesley rating 10 reviewer SEGV ISBN 0-201-60615-1 summary More than the sum of its hardcopy contents, this electronic resource earns a place on the programmer's bookshelf.

What to Expect?

I wasn't sure exactly what to expect. Subtitled "85 Specific Ways to Improve Your Programs and Designs," I knew this CD was an electronic version of Scott Meyers' already-published books, which I had previously reviewed for Slashdot:

• Effective C++ Second Edition
• More Effective C++

So I knew a priori that the content was excellent, but how would it be packaged and presented? Would it be Windows-only, forcing me to use it only at work as I run Linux at home? Would it be awkward to read onscreen? Would it be easily searchable? Could I annotate and print portions of it?

A Pleasant Surprise

I was pleasantly surprised when the package contained only a CDROM with these instructions printed on it:

To start, open INDEX.HTM
System requirements: Netscape Navigator 4.0+ (on Unix, Mac, or Win32) or Microsoft Internet Explorer 4.0+ (on Win32 only).

So far so good! I had no problems using the CD with Communicator 4.5 on NT 4.0, and Communicator 4.04 on Debian GNU/Linux 2.0. Pretty much any modern browser with Java and JavaScript support should work. If you experience browser problems, the publisher provides helpful advice.

Initial Impressions

The CD has a nice look and feel to it. A navigation area is always present, acting as a control and providing a colour indication of where you are in the CD.

The text is decent to read and is true HTML, not merely raw text. It seems Meyers is conscious of the fact that an electronic version must add value to complement a printed version, otherwise it is not useful for its target audience.

Overall, I'd say this offering is a well though out and put together product, and not just a cheap knock-off.

Content

The CD (which itself has a printing number) contains the latest printings of the two books. It also boasts five magazine articles chosen by Meyers to augment the material in the books:

• "Exception Handling: A False Sense of Security" by Tom Cargill, from C++ Report Nov-Dec 1994.
• "Coping With Exceptions" by Jack W. Reeves, from C++ Report Mar 1996.
• "Exception-Safe Generic Containers" by Herb Sutter, from C++ Report Sep 1997, Nov-Dec 1997.
• "Counting Objects in C++" by Scott Meyers, from C/C++ Users Journal Apr 1998.
• "A First Look at C++ Program Analyzers" by Scott Meyers and Martin Klaus, from Dr. Dobb's Journal Feb 1997.

The first three are highly recommended for anyone dealing with exceptions. And of course, since any function may throw an exception, that means anyone writing C++! The object counting article elaborates on an idea from Effective C++ Item 14, illustrating some subtle language issues along the way. The final article outlines the state of the art in commercial static C++ analysis tools in September 1996.

Hyperlinks

The CD has links everywhere. Let me repeat: everywhere. In addition to hyperlinking existing references, Meyers added many cross references to the books and articles to further solidify the material.

Links to the internet at large are redirected through Addison Wesley Longman's online site so that they may stay current. And every single paragraph on the CD is anchored and hyperlinked, to facilitate electronic referencing and bookmarking.

Search Facilities

The CD provides two alternatives to your browser's "find in page" search facility. The first is a comprehensive merged index of the two books. The second is a search applet, modified from the Design Patterns CD search applet. It displays the resulting hits, with their enclosing paragraph for context if you select it. I found it easy to scan through hits until I found an interesting paragraph, then to jump to that document.

Although the search applet is aware of the entire CD, it appears that it can search only for one keyword. I'd really prefer more sophisticated search string options, such as multiple keywords, boolean operations, and perhaps even full regular expressions.

Configuration Facilities

For a set of web pages, the CD is impressively configurable. You can choose between five navigation area sizes, and five image sizes. You can view the books by item, by chapter, or in their entirety. And of course you can change text size in your browser.

Performance and Licensing

To implement the configurability options, there are actually five copies of each image and three copies of each book on the CD. Still, the total data size is a mere 16MB, which easily fits on a hard drive for greater performance and frees a CDROM drive for other use. This is also important because, given technology, actually altering the HTML files is really the only viable way of annotating the CD.

The CD comes with a single user license. You must contact the publisher for additional network license options. The short story is: you can make the CD available on a non-internet-accessible server to as many users as you have licenses, and you can purchase additional network licenses more cheaply the more you buy.

Summary

I've been using the CD both at work and at home for a couple of weeks, and I continue to find it a valuable resource. It easily subs in for my absent printed books, although of course I can't use it without a computer. The articles are useful, and the index and search applet allow me to quickly find what I am looking for.

Really, I have only three complaints:

• the search applet is somewhat limited
• there could be more magazine articles
• Scott's author photo is starting to look less like Eddie Van Halen and more like Gene Simmons

However, I don't think any of those detracts from the CD enough to reduce its 10/10 rating. In the worst case, since the CD is composed of text HTML files, you could apply other search utilities (eg, grep) to it.

The CD's online site has a demo, which I recommend trying if you want to get a feel for the CD before you purchase it. In addition to the general look and feel, navigation area, and search applet, it includes all of the magazine articles and a few of the books' items.

I'm happy with the CD, and recommend it as a professional resource.

To pick this up and help Slashdot, head over to Computer Literacy.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Introduction
Effective C++ Second Edition
More Effective C++
Magazine Articles
Search the CD

Case Roole writes "Reading trial transcripts can be great fun. Here is Microsoft's senior vice-president of platforms and applications Paul Maritz on the kspread component of KOffice: "this is quite a sophisticated spreadsheet". Maritz also stated: "[AbiSource] started developing ... a very high-quality word processor for the Linux environment."" . Search on KOFFICE and ABI in the above transcript. In a related story, sh writes "Microsoft demonstrates why OpenLinux is "powerful and easy to use". Check out the article and video! (but you'll need MS Media Player - hmm...) Free advertising for a rival's product to prove competition - what will they resort to next? "

Ed Silva writes "It seems Microsoft knows something we don't about Gateway according to their press page: it seems that Hitachi isn't the only PC maker bundling BeOS... Funny, 'cause most of us Be geeks thought Dell would be the one... " The table is quite interesting showing Dell and Toshiba will be or are shipping Linux according to Microsoft, in line with previous reports. update Apparently, Microsoft did not get it right about Gateway and BeOS. Michael Alderete of Be Inc. posted both in the comment section and on BeNews that at this time the only OEM comitted to ship BeOS is Hitachi. Thanks to Elwood. Interestingly... Microsoft seems to have removed the Gateway entry from the table. Hmm, do not seem to have changed the date though.

An interesting financial perspective on Microsoft is being highlighted over at the Motley Fool. The article itself is a good analysis of Microsoft's financial practices, with excellent comparisions to past companies in similar positions.

florin writes "In this story a Microsoft programmer details the issues that showed up when they wrote the Solaris port of Internet Explorer. They used existing Win32-to-Unix porting tools from other vendors to get most of it running. The 3 page article talks about dealing with matters like click to focus, fonts, COM and using the registry on a Unix machine."

Jon Abbott writes "I know, this isn't the most *exciting* thing in the world, but hey it's cool. over at wombat.doc.ic.ac.uk, where they have the "Free On-line Dictionary of Computing", I've convinced them to add "slashdot effect" to the dictionary! They even bash IIS! :^) The definition can be found at: link " In humour of a somewhat different kind go here to see Microsoft's response to the Halloween documents ("The existence of these documents demonstrates the vigorous competition that exists in the OS industry.") and a gob-shot of that omnipresent Ed Muth. Thanks to Javier Alvarado for the link.

Adam Balevic sent us a link to an interesting response to the Halloween documents on CNN. This one talks specifically about comments in the documents relating to the comments in the docs about patents and lawsuits. Its worth a read unless your aready sick of the Halloween Hoopla. You also might be interested in a link sent in by R.C. Pavlicek to Microsoft's Official Response to the Halloween Documents.

Microsoft is not going to wait for the outcome of its trial with the DOJ before attacking Linux. The battle scene is France, where Microsoft's new (expendable?) regional director Marc Chardon has just issued an open letter to his clients. Click below to read the translation of the Linux-section (it's in French) and some commentary. The new director of Microsoft France (MF) has just issued an open letter to his clients. Most of the letter says essentially "We're right. Critics aren't. Millions of people use our products." and other fascinating insights. However it does contain two interesting revelations: Microsoft's OS is an integral part of your PC, and Linux is of very limited interest to anyone but fringe groups (students and researchers).

As previously reported, it is illegal in the EU to tie the sale of a product with another in the EU. However Microsoft France (MF) argues that because a computer can be argued non-functional without an operating system (or a hard-drive), what is being sold is a single product, not two. A little later, MF's director contradicts himself by stating that "assemblers" (basically small computing shops that will assemble a computer from standard components according to your desires) will sell you a computer without an OS -- is that a broken computer? Indeed, since the same letter claims there are more OS's for PCs than any other computer, we must be dealing with a product tied to another precisely because no other OS is sold (according to the letter) with a computer.

Further down, you'll see a whole section devoted to Linux. While today Microsoft's lawyers declared Linux to be developed by a single person, MF's director claims it to be a movement. I've translated the rest of what he had to say about Linux since it's interesting...

"It would seem that Linux does not satisfy the requirements of most companies, let alone the general public.

Linux presents limits that will slow down its widespread distribution, particularly in companies and the general public

In terms of the system's stability, Linux has problems of general coordination, and one feels strongly the lack of a project leader. Linus Torvald ( S: Microsoft can't spell!) left university last year to join a Californian company. The development of Linux has since considerably slowed down. Similarly, the maintenance of Linux' functionality depends on the mobilization of its teams. Thus, certain of its functions have not been updated in the last two years.

The installation of Linux is delicate. For optimal system performance, each version must be tuned on each computer at each installation, by a competent computer-technician. Setting it up and its administration are therefore not within the reach of a computer-technician used to more friendly operating systems, let alone basic users. Using Linux is complex, its programs generally take text commands.

Finally most Linux application software has limited functionality. Word processors rarely have functionality common on today's PC or Macintosh: dynamic spelling correction, graphic input of tables, integration of imported graphics. Most Linux word processors bear more resemblance to Microsoft Write written in 1985.

Linux' advantages of zero-cost and open source are not relevant criteria for most users.

The zero-cost of Linux is a non decisive advantage: the cost of an OS is minor in comparison to the other costs of a company. The price of the OS is only one of the elements of computers in companies. Putting a traditional OS into place costs many times the price of the OS itself, and the same goes for the creation of an application program and its maintenance. So, by installing Linux, one saves the cost of the OS, but one increases the cost of installation, and one takes risks for the maintenance of the applications and the system itself.

If certain people consider the permanent availability of source code to be an absolute guaranty of independence from software editors, we fail to see the benefit for a company or a person to have access to the source of his OS.

However, the distribution of the OS source code is very useful for students and researchers, to understand the inner-workings of the OS and eventually to change it. Linux will therefore probably stay for a long time a good subject of study for computer-scientist, rather than an OS destined for widespread distribution. "

I must apologize for any mistakes in my translation. Use babelfish to get an alternative translation. I'm open to any corrections. update! Linux Weekly News has just published a de-babelfished translation of the whole letter.

S: This letter obviously contains many "inaccuracies":

If I buy a car, is the fuel a separate product or not? What about electricity? Computers are non-functional without it. I hope the EU lawyers will notice this wriggling.

His attacks on Linus stating that Linux development has slowed down are not credible with the inflow of new developers and the number of ports now in the standard kernel. The letter very much ignores the fact that Transmeta lets Linus hack on Linux during office hours and has other employees that contribute, underplays Red Hat employing kernel developers, and completely ignores the current tidal surge of major corporations towards Linux: Intel, Compaq, Oracle, Sun, to name but a few.

Anyone who has had to install Windows from scratch, as I do every 3-6 months when it has corrupted its hard-drive beyond repair at work, knows that installing Windows is a royal pain. It takes over an hour, requires minding (yes... I'm just here to click OK)... Linux takes me 20 minutes on an 100 Mhz system. The only argument here is: when Windows is pre-installed (i.e. when you buy your machine) it's easier than it is to install Linux. Duh!

I, and many others don't view GUI's as necessarily friendly. Until they are a substitute for true understanding, I prefer to have control over my system and to be able to repair it. The usual answer for Windows to reinstall everything, and then try eliminating various components until you've found the "culprit". The same applies for source code. Funny that the latest C'T has devoted 19 pages to "Hacks & Bugs & Workarounds: Large Projects with Word, and how one survives them". To me, and many others, this is an unacceptable hit on my productivity.

Indeed, the whole notion that Linux is too hard for the average user is nonsense to me. I gave my mother a Linux box -- I'm living 8 timezones away so I cannot help her fix an unreliable OS. She cannot rely on computer-savvy neighbours either, since she's in a very rural area. But, with Linux as her first computer, she is happy using it laying ridicule on Microsoft's claims about the difficulties that the average layman will experience.

Complaints about Word processors are unfair since most Windows word-processors are also not very advanced. Percentage-wise (if you count all the free, shareware, and old ones), I expect Windows/DOS have a worse ratio. Only a few products provide the features Marc discusses. Similarly, on Linux, we have WordPerfect 7 (hey Corel, port WordPerfect 8!), Applixware, and StarOffice (which I sometimes use), Angoss, Dtop, and Axene's Xclamation, On the free front we have Emacs which is also used by a very large number of people under NT and which will soon have a WYSIWYG interface, Thot, EZ, Papyrus, Cicero, Doc, Maxwell, and new promising upstarts such as Glue. And let's not forget TeX: I and my fellow PhD students wrote their theses in it because it copes well with 700 page documents. Most academic papers must be written, and many books are written in it. It also accepts any graphics as encapsulated postscript. TeX is still the only format which is guaranteed to come out looking the same on any computer, and still looks better to me and many others than the output of any other product. As to dynamic spell-checking, I turn it off: I think, I write, I reread, I spell-check. Dynamic spell-checking just breaks the flow of my thoughts.

The attack on zero-cost software is a pretty obvious diversion, and tries to draw the reader's attention away from the fact people use Linux because of its stability and features rather than its cost.

Finally, Microsoft's attempt to make academics and students irrelevant is interesting, since they are the ones pushing Linux, but also very dangerous. France values intelligence and high education more than most other societies, as Marc Chardon's own CV shows.

So what do you think of all this?

I'd like to thank A Dark Elf, Jacky Liu, and Linux Weekly News Daily for some of the material I used here.

Our favorite company has been having difficulties remembering what they innovated (ever) lately. So much so, that on the one hand they claim Linux is a competitor (built by a single individual...) and on the other don't see Linux as a threat because no company owns it. (This last statement was not made by Microsoft itself, but probably reflects what they believe. However, even if Linux were to dominate the PC market, they would still be a dominant force: webTV and Dreamcast are two very effective means of dominating the market of those who would like to access the internet (and want to play games) while not having the money to buy a complete PC. WinCE targets both the above and many PDAs, while Embedded NT will attack markets such as hospital equipment (adding new meaning to the phrase "Oh my God!") and network routers. True, Linux ports may be attempted to some of these platforms, but if they cannot run the games, who will use them?) Now we need only wait until Monday for the fun and games to begin. However students at the Auburn University have already started to have their fun. Read on below. shaldannon writes "Mark showed up a Microsoft recruiting agent tonight in front of an audience of 200+. The Auburn University chapter of the Association for Computing Machinery hosted a meeting for its membership at which Microsoft recruiters spoke on the subject of 'why Microsoft is the place to work.'

Mark, an easy-going guy who also runs the Linux Support Services site, showed up in his green penguin shirt. As the meeting progressed, the recruiter, named Colleen, asked eight volunteers to come forward to help her demonstrate the composition and duties of a Microsoft product team.

I nudged Mark, and we both headed to the front to participate. A half dozen Linux users in the room began to nudge each other and grin when they saw Mark's shirt, which has a quote by the great Linus on the back. The recruiter asked for someone with vision to step forward, to represent the "Project Leader." Mark was the natural choice--because his vision is Linux--but she was totally oblivious to this.

The meeting progressed, with the recruiter going through the various positions in a software team while some of the Linux users in the back (John, in particular) passed notes around explaining the irony of the situation to the rest of the audience.

Towards the end, she asked where we thought Microsoft got ideas for its products. From on stage, behind her, Mark piped up with "from other companies!" She turned and observed, "Someone in here is a smartass," not realizing that Mark was flaunting the greatest challenge to Microsoft, right on his chest--the happy penguin."

Thanks also to Cowering In Fear, ColonelPanic, and Dan Kegel for some of the material used here.

jeff writes "ms will have a copy of its media player for linux link ", complementing its existing Netshow product.

Lisa wrote in to tell us about a report in Wired that Microsoft has been denied the use of tapes of Netscape executives used as book research by two professors. You can also read another report about it at news.com as well.

Jabbo posted this rather interesting website about how Bill Gates made it rich: his mother knew the chief executive officer of IBM who approved the inclusion of MS/DOS with the original IBM PC... Interesting what happened in pre-computer times (like the first version of Unix in 1970 on a DEC PDP-7), unofficially of course. And did you know that Bill's house needs 50 NT servers to run?

Intrepid reader Alex Buell sent this story over our way. Yes, the news is true: Microsoft has surpassed General Electric, and is the biggest company on the planet. Granted, it's mostly because their stock trades at astronomically high prices, but still 261,000,000,000$USD is a whole lotta zeros. Of course, good luck getting it out of the bear market.

Well, ladies and gentlemen, it's official. Sun and Microsoft will be facing in court over Java. It all ties back to the 1996 licensing change that Sun says MS violated. Details are sketchy right now, but this will be an interesting one to watch.

A virtual flood of people wrote in about the Microsoft-Intel incident with Tsk being the first in the gate, by a nose. A new report has come out that Microsoft allegedly told Intel to stay out of the Internet software business. This may come in the Sept 23 trial, but it that trial is focusing more on the browser wars, and marketing of IE. The investigators are particularly interested in a 1995 meeting between top execs from both companies, including both Grove and Gates. In it, Gates is supposed to have talked about how Intel's multimedia efforts and Internet software development were counter to what Microsoft's plan was, and made vague statements about supporting Intel rivals. Whew-now there's a way to start my day.

Access, Microsoft's database, has a really nice bug in it: it can scramble records. Yet another reason to write to your bank and make sure they do not run Windows NT as their server.

Greg Perkins has written in with a nice paper on Open Source and Capitalism. A lot of people say that these ideas are oil and water, but click the link below and read what Greg has to say about it. Update Greg sent in response to the many comments. It's appended to the end of his original piece. The following was written by Slashdot reader Greg Perkins Open Source and Capitalism

Greg Perkins

Many people associate the idea of Open Source software with collectivism (socialism, communitarianism, or communism). This is understandable given the language and ideas of some of the movement's founders and prominent participants, and given the average political tendencies of college students (at least here in the US), who seem to form the core of the Open Source movement. That is of course no cause for concern. What troubles me is that I keep noticing an undercurrent of mistrust and even open hostility toward capitalism among Open Source fans. There is really no good reason for this, and I worry that it may grow into something truly dangerous to the movement.

I have seen it asked: how can capitalists enjoy and even embrace the Open Source ideal? Hidden in this question is the notion that capitalism is fundamentally incompatible with Open Source, and that collectivism is not. While this is sure to be a touchy subject, I would like to try sharing the principled perspective of the Other Side.

In contrast to the above, I think that it is capitalism which is harmonious with Open Source, and that collectivism is incompatible; principled and thoughtful Open Source advocates should want to fully embrace capitalism for exactly the same reasons they love the idea of Open Source.

The (Societal) Elements of Open Source

I know that most people here have studied the meaning and mechanism of Open Source pretty carefully (consider the popularity of Raymond's The Cathedral and the Bazaar, for example). Let's focus briefly on the crucial societal elements which Open Source depends on for its success:

First, Open Source depends on the idea that cooperation is the preferred mode for dealing with one another, that cooperation and voluntary association to mutual benefit is the most effective, most productive, and, well, simply the Right Way for people to live in society, as contrasted against the use of fraud or physical force. Individual Open Source authors have the right to choose what code they will write and with whom they might like to work -- nobody is allowed to make them do it. When someone else makes that choice for you it is called slavery, and Open Source couldn't be as successful as it is on those terms; peoples' active, willing participation is required.

Second, Open Source depends on the idea of the individual human right to private property. Code wouldn't exist except by the effort of the people who build it -- it is by their choice and their sweat that their code even exists, and so they naturally have the right to decide how they will deploy their creation (otherwise, why should they bother to create it in the first place?). Linus himself expressed this spirit perfectly when he said, "he who writes the code gets to choose the license, and nobody else gets to complain." Open Source authors generously choose to apply licenses like the GPL to their code, thereby exercising their right to dictate how their effort may be used (and how it may not be used).

And finally, Open Source requires the protection of private property rights by a government. People need more than to merely feel justified in saying how they wish their code to be used (and not used) -- they must have confidence that their wishes will not be violated and the product of their best efforts taken and used at just anybody's whim. People can be secure in their cooperation with one another toward whatever ends each may choose when their right to private property is protected. Doing so essentially means barring the initiation of physical force and fraud from peoples' legitimate dealings, leaving them with nothing but cooperation and trade to mutual benefit. We can see this confidence manifest as authors willingly write Open Source code, or help someone write Open Source code: they do so because they trust that the license will be enforced, that someone else cannot take advantage of them and direct their efforts to ends they do not wish.

Another Look at Capitalism

Here's the point that might surprise some Open Source advocates: the above three crucial factors are precisely the same foundation that is required for true, unadulterated, laissez-faire capitalism.

Capitalism is a social system which respects and defends peoples' individual human rights, including the right to property. Further, capitalism is epitomized by cooperation, not by competition -- competition arises in the context of several participants trying to out-cooperate each other in a division-of-labor economy. As a tiny example, consider the handful of pencil companies competing in "cutthroat, dog-eat-dog" manner with each other for the chance to cooperate with you. Now think about how many other economic partners each of them works with in trying to bring you that pencil, from the people mining the graphite and harvesting the wood and rubber, to the transport systems which take them to the factories full of people, the manufacturing and chemical engineers who design the processes, the marketing and distribution channels, and the retailer who makes it easy for you to have that pencil with little or no effort. Thousands and thousands of people all peacefully work in concert to bring you a pencil (not to mention all those who cooperate with them, and those who cooperate with them, and so on). Multiply that by all the other economic values in your life that aren't as insignificant as a humble pencil, and you can see that fundamentally, capitalism means cooperation.

Full-blown capitalism is actually the separation of market and state. In particular, it is not the current American- or European-style mixed economy, with some people and businesses having the ability to use government to secure special advantage over others by lobbying for taxes, regulations, etc. To the extent that people and companies can use government to indirectly compel others in economic matters, capitalism and everything that makes it great is undercut. In the same way that we react to proposals to control the press or the church, in a true capitalist system everybody would simply laugh at someone trying to use the heavy hand of government to some economic advantage. We would just point to the constitutional clause banning any such interference, telling them, "Tough beans -- why don't you try to persuade the people in the marketplace that you are worth doing business with?"

Common Grounds

So if you cheer for the idea of Open Source, then please cheer for what makes Open Source work. If you do that, then you are also cheering for exactly what makes capitalism work, and everything that makes it such a powerful force for improving the human lot in the world.

As a libertarian and staunch capitalist, I get a true charge out of seeing an innovative entrepreneur or inventor serving himself by serving his fellow man in some new, clever, or powerful way. As a software engineer and rabid Open Source advocate, I get a true charge out of seeing the genius behind Stallman's GPL and the meteoric rise of Open Source and GNU/Linux. What makes these great to me is the same in both cases: people are able to be productive and peacefully reap the rewards of their hard work as they see fit.

Banning fraud and the initiation of force in our dealings with one another, and respecting people and their choices as individuals by protecting their property rights... These form a kind of systemic encouragement which brings out the very best within us -- and that is precisely what drives the raging success of both Open Source and capitalism.

Recommended Reading

Economics in One Lesson by Henry Hazlitt is a classic, widely regarded as a wonderful (perhaps the best) first introduction to economics.

Capitalism: a Treatise on Economics by Dr. George Reisman is a lucid and encyclopedic account of capitalism and all things economic.

Also see the works of scholars from the Austrian school of economics, like Ludwig Von Mises and Friedrich A. Von Hayek (1974 Nobel in economics), or scholars from the Chicago school of economics, such as Milton Friedman (1976 Nobel in economics) or James Buchanan (1986 Nobel in economics).

A Followup from Greg Perkins

250 comments in a day -- what a wonderful firestorm of discussion!

Now, surely the more harsh commentators understand that in a short piece like my editorial, no author could even try to cover every anticipated objection or outright mistake in reading and reasoning that a minority of the audience might bring. That would simply bore or distract the majority of readers, perhaps to the point of missing the original thesis! I needed to leave such issues for the ensuing discussion.

And boy, I was pleasantly surprised by what happened! A horde of nimble-fing ered Slashdotters quickly jumped in after the first wave of commentary, answering and dissecting almost all of the incoming criticism quite nicely, relieving me of a lot of work -- thanks much, guys! :^)

However, there remain a couple of important themes that my quick-response comrades didn't address, and so I'll try to cover those here -- starting with the most important and surprising one.

What the Hay??

This trend really did surprise me. Here are a handful of examples where it happened -- notice what they have in common when I put them side-by-si de?

• People, it amazes me that some one can equate Linux, a shining example of sharing and cooperation, with capitalism, a system based on hoarding and selfishness. [Rodion Raskolnikov (), "POLL!! POLL!! POLL!!"]
  
  [The] only thing i can assume is that the author had only 1 thing in mind and that was to get people to join his movement. "Well if i can show that capitalism==GNU then fellow GNUers will join my organization or whatever". [Paul (paul@waterw.com), "Propaganda" ;]

  Open source functions on a gift economy. Sure, some of the behavior could be explained with free market principles ... but it is fundamentally different than the sort of role that the original essayist is trying to force it into. When I write code and I give it away, I get nothing but the satisfaction of writing interesting code, and the satisfaction that someone else is using it. That's not capitalism. [Anonymous Coward (), "Re: Back-asswards!"]

  It's always amusing to me to see some ultra captial weenies taking an idea like Open Source, which is effectively as socialistic as you can get in today's society falling all over themselves to cry out that it isn't, that capitalism and open source are exactly the same thing, yammer yammer yammer. [adr (jbfink@nospammy.entropy.muc .muohio.edu), "amusing"]

  Sheesh. Grow up. "Open Source" ... only superficially shares some ideas with economic theory. There's more to living than just money, and there are many more models of economy than just two. [Markus Fleck (!spam-fleck@informatik.uni-bonn.de), "Bla bla bla..."]

What these and so many other lines of criticism share is a clear misundersta nding of my thesis: they somehow latched onto the idea that I am identifying capitalist free markets and the Open Source movement as being the same thing, and then they went running down the rhetorical road on that false premise. Maybe I was not quite clear enough in the original piece, but I trust that if you look back up at my editorial with a little care, you will find that I never make such a claim. I was not even hoping for such an inference. Indeed, the summary in my conclusion seems quite clear about my hopes:

• So if you cheer for the idea of Open Source, then please cheer for what makes Open Source work. If you do that, then you are also cheering for exactly what makes capitalism work... These [common underpinnings] form a kind of systemic encouragement which brings out the very best within us -- and that is precisely what drives the raging success of both Open Source and capitalism.

Of course the Open Source movement and capitalist free markets are not one and the same, and I wouldn't want anyone to think so. My point is that they share a common foundation which fuels their tremendous effectiveness; these common underpinnings are themselves neither Open Source, nor capitalism -- but they foster both, and identifying them allows us to see and better understand the strengths of both Open Source and capitalism. This point leads naturally into my argument that capitalism is not fundamentally at odds with Open Source, a system which shares the same foundational underpinnings -- and so the mistrust and hostility I have been seeing directed at capitalism by some Open Source fans seems misplaced.

Open Source in the Here and Now

An interesting complaint surfaced regarding those underpinnings: some seem to think that it isn't legitimate that I rely on the fact that licenses like the GPL use the ideas of private property and the defense of individual rights, since by some interpretations of the Open Source Founders, its current form of is only accommodating our current circumstances and is not yet the Ideal Deal:

• The GPL exists (in this form) just because we live in a more or less capitalist world. Therefore it is adopted to the needs of this capitalist world. To conclude that because the GPL shows capitalistic elements, Open Source is capitalistic is IMHO an infinite loop. [Sebastian Schaffert (wastl@woanders.de), "Re: amusing", my underline]

  Open source matches the Marxist notion far better that the libertarian-ca pitalist notion, although it matches it only imperfectly. The GPL is very much a legal means of enforcing the kind of relationship that many believe ought to be natural law. It's a loophole, not the core of the philosophy. [vlax (vlax@yahoo.com) , "Sometimes, you just have to laugh", my underline]

But my observation is resting on the actual, stunning success of Open Source in today's world, on today's GPL terms, and in today's political systems -- not in some dreamt-of, hoped-for future place that may be talked about in recommended readings at the FSF. If someone wishes to argue that some other prospective Open Source system might do as well as (or better than) what we have today, then I welcome their giving it a try. But even if someone somehow makes that argument work, it wouldn't itself do anything to disturb my thesis that the powerful and successful Open Source movement we have before us right now shares the very same foundation as capitalism.

There's Cooperation -- and then there's Cooperation

Several people expressed trouble with my saying that "fundamentally, capitalism means cooperation":

• This is one of those motherhood statements that means nothing when you think about it carefully. Consider some alternatives:

  • "fundamentally, communism means cooperation"
  • "fundamentally, anarchism means cooperation"
  • "fundamentally, fascism means cooperation"
  • "acephalous band-level hunter-gatherer groups are fundamentally dependent on cooperation"

  The truth is, human existence pretty much "means cooperation". [Danny Yee (danny@anatomy.usyd.edu.au), "capitalism means cooperation?"]

  I agree entirely with [the] gripe on the assertion "capitalism means cooperation". It is a null statement. What societal system could exist at all without some degree of cooperation. [The Famous Brett Watson (famous@nutters.org), 'Null statement: "capitalism means cooperation"' ]

Certainly there is a lot of cooperation among people in most any societal system. But capitalism, with its explicit ban on fraud and the initiation of force between people for the express purpose of leaving people with nothing but persuasion and freedom of association in their dealings with one another, is quite different. Communism, fascism, socialism, and even our mixed economy, etc., do not consistently demand that we behave as traders, acting to mutual benefit, persuading our neighbor to work with us. Non-capitalist systems legitimatimize the initiation of (often quite naked) force as a common and convenient means of dealing with one another: all you need is to get the political pull or the popular votes to have your way, and others must "cooperate&quo t; -- whether they ultimately benefit or not, and whether they want to or not.

The Slavery of Wages

Okay, one final, tiny point.

• • When someone else makes that choice for you it is called slavery,

• Interesting comment coming from a capitalist.. So when my boss says "do that" I am a slave, eh? You're basically defining capitalism as wage slavery.. not a very good start on an essay that is supposed to defend capitalism. [ir (mattc@nospam.pob ox.com), "Free Software"]

Notice that I said "someone else makes that choice", not just that "something forces your choice". Despite appearances , I was actually being pretty careful about it. When your boss says "do that", you clearly have a choice where a slave does not: you can quit. But you would starve, you say? Not to be too flip about it (well, maybe just a little :^), but it sounds as if your primary complaint of "injustice" is with reality -- not with your boss. He should have freedom of association just as you should, and you have no right to do business with him unless he wants to do business with you (othewise you are not being a trader, and he would be a slave).

I know of no capitalist who would argue that you have a right to be exempt from the laws of reality.

GrimSpring writes "Microsofts component model COM is now available for Linux. You can download Software AG's EntireX DCOM for free from here after registering with them. The package is pretty huge, expect to download 3,1 MB for the runtime environment and 6,7 MB for the SDK. "

Yes, the bazillion and one Trial of the Century, in this case the infamous anti-trust suit against Microsoft, is set for trial. The judge today denied public access to the depositions issued by the company, in doing so, by the screwy US Justice system, cleared the way for the trial to procced. For the full details read here.

Well, it's time to clear out the submissions box, so buckle down and get ready: Pilchie writes "I was watching Jeopordy tonight here in Toronto, on CFTO (BBS Network) and they have a little blurb everyday on upcoming technologies called Tomorrow Today. It said that Linux probably accounts for half of Web-servers, mentioned Linux's role in Titanic, and show a clip with someone named Crawford from Corel talking about the port of their products to Linux. All in all, very good press."
Matthias Granberry sent us a link talking about Markus Gietzen's port of GemEm to Linux using SDL.
Lastly, InThane writes "Hey, some guy's working on a free(!) Partition Manager program, and it looks like it's got source code with it as well. It's released as freeware, so someone might want to talk about having him GPL it instead; otherwise some code might end up in the next version of Partition Magic. Look here for more info."

A slew of you all wrote in saying that a year-end bug had been found in Windows 98. Well, it appears that Microsoft has confirmed the bug, stating that "a patch is being made".

Nick Moffitt writes " Industry giant Microsoft just opened their new 32-acre Silicon Valley campus one block away from Penguin Computing. We at Penguin have received intelligence that this was not accidental, and that the legacy OS manufacturer is attempting to squash our innovation. As a retaliatory measure, we plan to announce construction of our 64-acre Redmond campus, with satellite buildings in Seattle, Factoria, Bothell, and Tukwilla, effectively surrounding our competition. "

Microsoft has counterclaimed the DOJ suit, saying that the devel of IE began before Navigator, saying that the planned browser integration was begun before IE was born. Huh. The counterclaim is going to seek to force the states and DOJ to pay for the legal costs of the battle. In related news, Robert Bork, of almost-Supreme Court fame, was interviewed saying that the DOJ case is rock solid. It should be noted that Bork is a legal consultant for Netscape. But as long as I am in caveat mood, I'd like to say that he wasn't nominated to Supreme Court for being an idiot.

After Rob Glaser testified before Congress that Microsoft's Media Player "breaks" the RealNetwork's player, Micorsoft argues that there is actually a bug in the way RealNetworks' installers edits the registry that causes the problems. I have looked at the Microsoft response and it seems easy enough to verify that they are correct. Can anyone who actually runs Windows confirm their findings for us? Seems Mr. Glaser has some tasty pie on his face now. As of this post, RealNetworks hasn't posted a reply to Microsoft's report. They're stock seems to be suffering, however.

After Rob Glaser testified before Congress that Microsoft's Media Player "breaks" the RealNetwork's player, Micorsoft argues that there is actually a bug in the way RealNetworks' installers edits the registry that causes the problems. I have looked at the Microsoft response and it seems easy enough to verify that they are correct. Can anyone who actually runs Windows confirm their findings for us? Seems Mr. Glaser has some tasty pie on his face now. As of this post, RealNetworks hasn't posted a reply to Microsoft's report. They're stock seems to be suffering, however.

Colin Smith was the first person to write in to tell us that Bill Gates has handed over the presidency of Microsoft to Steve Ballmer. You can read about it at microsoft.com.

Well, after yesterday's lifting of the injunction against MS much of the media is trying to figure out what's going on. And in related news, the DOJ's Joel Klein still thinks that the Department of Justice has a strong case against Microsoft in the anti-trust area. I dunno-how do you all think this will play out?

We've had many people write in about microsoft's new Terraserver. MS claims that it's the world's largest database- over a terabyte of satellite pictures of the planet. Now I've been trying to use it now for the last 24 hours, and have yet to get it to successfully do anything. I seem to keep getting these "Server is Temporarily Unavailable" messages. Interesting...

A Federal Appeals court struck down the 1997 injunction against Microsoft that barred them from forcing PC makers to include IE on their machines. The appeals court ruled that the lower court had made sufficent amount of errors to make it necessary to break the injunction. However, another court had already ruled that this did not apply to Windows 98, basically making the injunction and the hoopla over 95 meaningless.

Sometimes bits of news can be really trival, but amaazing at the same time. MS has decided that in a break from its' normal habit of scarfing companies like pretzel rods, that it will actually sell one. MS has decided to spin-off SoftImage to Avid. However, the deal, worth 285$US million, will also give MS a share in the company.

This box has been up for a bit, but suddenly a huge flood of folks have started having interest in it. I guess I'm not surprised- there has to be a few boxes running linux inside of microsoft.com, but it's kinda interesting that they made it available from outside. Is something coming? Or are a few cool employees (I know we have plenty of MS Slashdot Readers) inside the halls of redmond just having fun?

Wired is currently carrying an interview with the Iowa AG, Tom Miller. Miller is part of the large group suing Microsoft for anti-trust violations. Interesting to read a first-hand account of the case.

Rick Franchuk has written a review of Essential System Administration. As would seem apprent, the book covers (surprise!) Administration ranging from automating activities, maintenance to essential services. Click below for more info.

This is the second book review for Slashdot in my Path To Guru series. In retrospect, I should have reviewed this book first, but I wanted to get the latest edition and read through it to see what new stuff is in.

I'm reluctant to give ANY book a 10 out of 10 rating, but if there is any book in existence that deserves such, this is it. Every major aspect of Unix administration is covered in a concise and easy-to-digest format.

REVIEW: Essential System Administration Æleen Frisch (O'Reilly & Associates ISBN 1-56592-127-5)

Nutshell
Review: The name says it all... this book should be on the shopping list, on the shelf, or in the hand of anyone maintaining Unix boxen.
Rating: 10/10 Rick Franchuk - TranSpecT Consulting What's Good?

When I started dealing with serious administration issues, this book saved my bacon more times than I care to count. Nearly every facet of administration is covered, from the lowliest maintenance task (like emptying log files) through the essential services (DNS, Telnet, FTP, etc) up to an introduction of automating tasks using shell scripts and Perl. The author takes great pains to detail parallels between OS variants (which usually falls into a BSD way vs. SVR way arrangement), so the book can be used by virtually anyone in any *nix-ish environment.

Issues beyond that of purely technical matters are discussed as well. Æleen reveals some of the basic facts about being a Systems Administrator in a often comical, sometimes brutally honest, fashion. Real Life® examples of how certain situations were handled (or could have been handled better) to achieve the best results in the Admin->User interface are liberally sprinkled throughout.

What's Bad?

It's not easy to find any MAJOR faults in this particular text (hence the 10 of 10 rating), but there are a couple of minor annoyances.

Like all computer texts, this one too suffers from becoming quickly outdated. For most of the material, age isn't much of problem (chmod does the same thing it has done for quite some time), but specialized administration tools for your OS may have undergone major revisions since the release of ESA.

While the book gives you enough information to hold your own in most normal and many unusual/problem situations, it can't provide all information about everything. It operates best as a foundation text, supporting more detailed information in tomes written to cover specific topics. For example, ESA covers the use of sendmail in a short chapter about electronic mail services which can get you up and running, get aliases and forwardings going, etc. For serious sendmail work though, you'll need to consult a more complete writing on the subject (ORA's sendmail).

There's also a bit of overlap between this book and Practical Unix and Internet Security, my first review. While I personally don't find this so much of a problem (security should be on the mind of any good administrator), some people may resent feeling like they're paying twice for the same information.

What's In It For Me?

At the risk of repeating myself, buy this book. if you plan on doing anything more interesting on a *nix box than checking your E-mail. Even SiteOp veterans can get use from it if they suddenly find themselves administering another environment... I've recently taken on some Solaris boxes, and ESA has been most helpful to me in finding Sun equivalents to BSD tools.

Æleen offers advice to the newless clewbie administrator on the subtle power games involved in maintaining machines other people rely on to get work done. It's an odd sensation having suits twice your age act nervous around you, for fear of saying something that could upset you and suddenly make their quarterly report vanish (hmmm... what does 'rm -rf /home/blake' do? Whoops!) More often than not, interpersonal communication is the most important aspect of any Admin's job. Happy co-workers and management are also more likely to 'forgive and forget' when you perform the inevitable catastrophic fuck-up.

Wishful Thinking

I strongly believe every administrator should read this book... in order to facilitate that, I wrote an e-mail to Tim O'Reilly (the OR in ORA), asking him to HTMLize it and release it under GPA. I haven't received any response yet, but it has only been a couple of days and I'd expect he has a great many things to do with his time.

At present, I'm hoping he'll agree, but I expect that nothing will come of it. ORA deserves to make money, and ESA is almost certainly bringing in a substantial profit. There's a history of ORA releasing some of their work under GPA though, so you never know... I'll do a followup when I get a definitive answer one way or the other. Please don't start mail-bombing him (or me! ;) about it.

Purchase the book over here at Amazon.

Table of Contents

Preface

1. Introduction to System Administration
2. The UNIX Way
3. Essential Administrative Tools
4. Startup and Shutdown
5. User Accounts
6. Security
7. Managing System Resources
8. Automating Tasks with Scripts and Such
9. Filesystems and Disks
10. Backup and Restore
11. Terminals and Modems
12. Printers and the Spooling Subsystem
13. TCP/IP Network Management
14. Electronic Mail
15. Configuring and Building Kernels
16. Accounting

Afterward: Don't Forget to Have Fun
Appendix A: Bourne Shell Programming
Appendix B: Selecting and Installing Linux Systems
Bibliography

Gateway is the first really major computer retailer to say that they will not featuring the Win98 opening screen, and will also be giving a choice to their customers between IE and Communicator. The downside to this is is that it is apparently being done with Microsoft's blessing, because MS is trying to cast themselves in a better light, given their recent troubles.

Analysts are saying that now is the time to buy Microsoft stock, which has dropped by around 15% recently. I find this amazing-this suit should show to the suits that Microsoft is a fundamentally troubled company. What a world.