Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft Would Settle For The Children
The news from MSNBC
is that Microsoft wants to, er, settle for the children. Take that
whichever way you want. They propose to settle civil anti-trust cases (not the DoJ suit) with a $1.1 billion (retail value) spanking (they
have $36 billion in the bank), consisting of free computer goodies to our nation's poorest schools (the first hit's free, kids). I'm sure Microsoft will upgrade those old computers to keep them current, in perpetuity, for free, out of the kindness of their hearts, but in an apparent oversight that was left out of the news report. Of that $1.1 billion, $0.9 billion will be software presumably valued at whatever Microsoft wants to charge (see "monopoly"). For hardware and (laughable) training/support costs, Microsoft will be docked three weeks' worth of interest on their cashpile; they will seek matching funds for the remainder, I am not making this up. Some lawyers opposed this but "concluded that Microsoft's monopoly already is so pervasive that students would have to learn to use these products anyway in the workplace." Update: 11/20 21:22 GMT by M : Heh. Red Hat offers an alternative to Microsoft's settlement proposal - you provide hardware, we'll provide software.
... at wired: http://www.wired.com/news/antitrust/0,1551,48543,0 0.html
The One Rule Of Chess You'll Ever Need: Don't play someone who carries a kit in their bookbag.
"You are a monopoly. As punishment, you must provide free software to the public schools, so that you can spread even further. Bad Microsoft! Now get back to replacing those foreign operating systems."
You're very right, Jamie. The double-meaning in the title *is* hilarious.
Their punishment is to help ensure that the monopoly they have continues to the next generation?
I bet they write off the whole 1.1b as a bussines expense and save on taxes this year.
A real penalty would be 1.1 Billion in hardware. If you let them include the software, credit it for it's actual value (7 cents per CD).
SD
âoeWho knew something as harmless as willful ignorance could end up having real consequences?â
<obvious>Why not hook the kids up to CocaCola and BigMac's, IV'd.</obvious>
.. don't let your kids get left behind by forcing them to think "My Documents" is where their files are, no matter which computer/OS/etc they are on.
/surely/ be stuck in places when they grow up when only Coke is available).
This is kind of backwards if you want your next generation to be tech-saavy. Windows ABSTRACTS computers, removing the need (for most people) to actually know how a computer (and software) operates. In this respect, the world will be FORCED to at least have a small understanding of the technology
At any rate, it's insane. Would we let Coke donate lots of Coke to kids as a settlement (knowing that they'll
What strikes me the most is the acceptance that Windows will be the dominant platform for the next 80 years. Fortunately, this will not be true. Very few companies even stay in business that long.
"Old man yells at systemd"
That reminds me of an old forward, the difference between drug dealers and programmers:
Drug Dealers:
-Refer to their clients as "users"
-"The first one's free!"
-Have important South-East Asian connections (to help move the stuff)
-Strange jargon: "Stick," "Rock,", "Dime bag,"
-Realize that there's tons of cash in the 14- to 25-year-old market.
-Job is assisted by the industry's producing
newer, more potent mixes.
-Often seen in the company of pushers,pimps and hustlers.
-Their product causes unhealthy addictions.
-Do your job well, and you can sleep with sexy movie stars who depend on you.
Programmers:
-Refer to their clients as "users"
-"Download a free trial version!"
-Have important South-East Asian connections (to help debug code)
-Strange jargon:"SCSI," "RTFM", "Java," "ISDN".
-Realize that there's tons of cash in the 14- to 25-year-old market.
-Job is assisted by the industry's producing newer, faster, more potent machines.
-Often seen in the company of salesman,
marketing people and venture capitalists.
-DOOM. Marathon. SimCity. Command&Conquor. 'Nuff said
-Damn! Damn! DAMN!!!
Either hell has frozen over or I missed something. Microsoft has not triumphed over the government, as MSNBC claims. AFAIK, the 18 states involved are still in discussion about the goverment settlement. Just like MS, portrarying themselves as the victim. "We won the case against the government, now we just have to work out these little suits. The big, cuddly teddy bear you as Microsoft will not give in... we will fight to stay strong". Yeah, bite me. Microsoft is not good for the consumer, yet they're parading themselves around like the consumer is on THEIR side.
There is no reasonable defense against an idiot with an agenda
:wq
I imagine MS is looking to do the same thing here. It will be a good thing for MS, a good thing for the schools, what the hell right? Wrong. I am really disapointed that they would try and do this a means to reach settlement, makes the whole thing rather hollow. If they had done this just because they felt like it I'd probably support them in it, now they just look slimy.
Errr, more slimy.
Are they kidding? This doesn't solve anything; it makes it worse! By providing software _for free_ to such a large number of people, the software now becomes the defacto standard for yet another group of people. These students will grow up in Microsoft(TM) America and like so many people before them be hooked into software that they'll be reluctant to leave in the future.
And using poorer schools... that's good. These schools would have previously been a good "target market" for OSS... can't beat the price. Now MS gets three victories for the price of none... they get the plaintiffs off of their backs, they get the PR boost that always comes with helping poor children, and they get a win against OSS. And what does it cost them? A "virtual" $1.1 billion. They're giving software to people that probably wouldn't have bought it in the first place, and they're giving away a product based on its RETAIL value; it costs MS very little to give this software away. The realized cost to MS will probably be less than $100 million. Much less.
Another Seattlement, if you ask me. I think I'm going to give up and be a rice farmer now... until Microsoft (TM) Wheat pushes me out of the staple foods market.
-- Minds are like parachutes... they work best when open.
Jamie's ignores the inconvenient fact it is not clear that any harm to consumers could be proved at all. The unanimous Appellate Court decision in US v. Miscrosoft was pretty clear that any plaitiff representing consumers would need to prove net harm according to a stiff set of tests. I'd bet on Microsoft's odds to win that test in a court of law. (In fact, I continue to do so, since I'm not only an employee of the company, but continue to hold on to the bulk of the shares I've ever bought or been granted. My money is where my mouth is.)
However, even ignoring that, the key computation lay in asking how much each consumer would collect even if the most generous award were handed down. It turns out that the total payout would be less than $10/consumer before legal costs, and negative afterwards. The court isn't willing to go forward with a class-action lawsuit that will harm the plaitiffs even if they win.
This is a solution that makes everybody with a legitimate stake in the outcome win. Consumers benefit by getting something, the lawyers benefit by getting their costs covered, and Microsoft benefits by not having to go through another trial. The only losers are the third parties that make money off the continued controversy. I don't have a lot of sympathy for Larry Ellison or Scott McNealy, though -- do you?
This is brilliant! It's too bad that the cigarette companies doled out all that cash to various parties in their settlements. What a waste. They could've just sent a years worth of cigarettes to the nations poorest schools.
Where was this Michael Hausfeld fellow when we needed him?
-Erik
Maybe I'm being cynical, but Microsoft providing the software for these institutions for free would be a very good move on their part to slow down the adoption of alternative operating systems and office suites. It's here, in schools that cannot afford the MS pricing anymore, that the erosion of MS monopoly will begin, and Microsoft has proposed a very effective counter measure to it. They slow down Linux and OSS adoption, and get DOJ off their backs. Both with one strike.
Then again, maybe they're just doing it for the goodness of their hearts...
In other words, this (i) helps Microsoft strengthen their Monopoly, (ii) costs Microsoft little more than $200 million, and (iii) probably harms children.
The only way any kind of settlement with Microsoft will accomplish anything is if the people who make up Microsoft's leadership actually alter their behavior.
This latest proposal shows that Microsoft is fundamentally incapable of changing its core DNA to suit a new paradigm. While all public businesses are driven by valuation, Microsoft doesn't realize that when a corporation reaches a certain size and power in the marketplace, it carries additional responsibilities.
Microsoft prides itself on providing boundless upward value to stockholders, but it seems to have a huge mental block when it comes to assessing its role in the larger culture.
Read the EFF's Fair Use FAQ
That way you can have a settlement with the DOJ in which you give away free copies of Linux.
-- SIGFPE
According to this idea....
-MS gets to increase it's market share(by displacing Macs in schools)
-Does not need to change it's monopolistic practices
-Gets a $1.1 billion tax writeoff(They will try to write that off)
Wow, sounds like a great deal....for Microsoft and states idiotic enough to sign this(Kickbacks anyone?)
-Henry
"Useless organic meatbag" -HK-47
About twenty bucks.
.iso's "valued" at fourty bucks a pop?
Ain't the software business grand?
Can I pay MY legal fines by donating Red Hat
KFG
Today, Phillip Morris, manufacturer of cigarette products, agreed to settle all pending lawsuits that allege that they (PM) sold cigarettes to underage smokers.
The generous $1.9B settlement provides for Phillip Morris to provide, free of charge, a lifetime of tobacco products to every Junior and Middle school in America. The settlement would consist of $1.1B worth of prepared tobacco products, and $800M worth of reconditioned ashtrays and smoke detectors.
Phillip Morris attorney Hugh Smokem commented that "This is an equitable settlement which answers our critics charges that we sell tobacco products to minors. Clearly, no tobacco will be sold here."
30
$1.1 billion worth of software does not cost Microsoft anything. It's essentially free for Microsoft to crank out more software since the R&D has already been paid for. That reduces this so-called "settlement" to just a Microsoft marketing campaign.
Best solution: they must contribute $billion or so of cold, hard, cash to a fund for school technology improvement. Then independent technical experts and educators can suggest uses for the money that don't necessarily benefit Microsoft. This settlement is a total victory for Microsoft - I'd hate to see what happens when they actually win a case...
Your right to not believe: Americans United for Separation of Church and
Bullshit. These kids need better computers in their classrooms the way staving Afghanis need shiny new Air Jordans.
These kids need school buildings that aren't falling down, schools that are free of violence, teachers who are competent and well-paid, and textbooks that are up to date. Computers in the classroom (other than in progamming and clerical classes, of course) is a fad that will ultimately have as much revolutionary impact as educational filmstrips. (Beep.)
This is a loss for everyone except Microsoft. In any sane nation, their corporate charter would have been revoked long ago, their corporate HQ razed and the ground salted, and Gates would have spent a week in the pillory, being pelted with rotten tomatoes and old DOS manuals.
Tom Swiss | the infamous tms | my blog
You cannot wash away blood with blood
Uh, the alternative is not a lump sum payment to any government. This is a settlement of the *private*, class-action, civil suits brought againts the company by users purporting to have been materially harmed by the monopoly. The alternative is a lump payment to any SOB who wants in on the class. Wired says about $10 bucks a head after attorneys' fees.
This is eerily like big tobacco settling their suits by providing free cartons for distribution in schools. Locking in another generation of lusers.
The size of the MS monopoly is starting to generate a gravity-like field which distorts perception of reality in its presence. Even ostensibly unbiased media coverage of MS seems boggled as to how to speak about them. I can't imagine any other entity in any other industry even suggesting such a thing. And now MS is dictating security policy on Capital Hill. Its like GM setting emmissions standards. Thankfully, the Fates look askance at such hubris.
And lately I do too. Until a few months ago I liked to imagine that I understood peoples fear of the unknown, their reliance on the familiar; I took a gentle, only slightly patronizing tone with Windows users. Now I regard them all as moral beggars. If you run Windows you are wrong, and should be shunned from polite society.
illegitimii non ingravare
Have you not been reading the case? at least one of the points at issue is that M$ has been forcing hardware vewndors who sell its product to not carry competing products (ie. if you want to make a PC with Windows on it you can't sell PCs with Linux or Be, or etc on it).
The result - I couldn't buy a laptop with Linux, or even a blank one to put Linux on myself - now because of the DoJ suit things have changed (a little). That's called "leveraging a monopoly" it's illegal
So long as a customer goes to buy a PC at a brand leader like Dell, or Compaq, or Gateway and they don't have a choice of a non-M$ OS, or of one without an OS (at a lower price of course) then we don't have a choice.
PS: you want to buy all the old copies of Windows I was forced to buy with my last few computers? oh wait I'm not allowed to sell them - I was forced to pay for them, declined to accept the license but seemingly am still bound by conditions in the license I didn't accept that bar me from selling it
Suppose for a moment that Disney has been convicted of lacing their movies with illegal, subliminal messages to trick viewers into purchasing Disney products. Suppose that to make ammends they offer to donate $1B worth of "educational" videos to schools but that these "educational" videos also contain the subliminal messages. Would you support the Disney "settlement" in this case? Sure kids may learn a little more with the new videos, but as a side effect the original problem of subliminal messages not only persists but is actually made much worse through the expansion of their audience into these schools. Now replace "Disney" with "Microsoft" and "subliminal messages" with "anti-competitive behaviour" and you have the situation with Microsoft.
-----
Free P2P Backup, Windows & Linux
This agreement is such bullshit that it boggles the mind.
Microsoft gives away some of it's software to schools that could not have afforded it anyway (so they are really not losing potential revenues).
The real kicker of this settlement is that it sounds like Microsoft will get to value the software at its reatail value and not at the actual marginal cost to Microsoft
Microsoft loses almost no money from giving away the software, except the cost of distributing the cd's. So they get to write-off $1.1 billion in profits, value the give-away at $1.1 billion, but their actual costs are only pennies per installation. So if they value windows XP at $200 but the actual costs of distribution and media on that one istallation are (let's be generous) $5, you can see that this $1.1 billion settlement really costs them only $25 million dollars (taking the $200:$5 ratio of stated-value:actual-cost used earlier).
Now since this $1.1 billion dollars is subtracted from their income, and assuming Microsoft pays about 15% corporate taxes, we can see that they get a $165 million write-off for about $25 million dollars. In other words, Microsoft ends up $140 million dollars richer from this deal.
Now there is $128 million in training and support they are promising (again, real cost to Microsoft is probably less) but even that leaves them with a profit. There are vague promises of setting up a foundation with up to $250 million, but that is not a firm number.
Also they will be trying to obtain matching funds from other charities, to leverage this operation.
And when you get down to brass tacks, this deal benefits Microsoft in a very important way. This gives them an excuse to train millions of schoolkids on how to use their stupid software so that when these kids eventually look for jobs their employers will have to buy software from Microsoft because that is what their employees have been trained on.
Also Microsoft gets good P.R. for "helping disadvantaged kids" (ha!) and don't have to spend millions more staying in court and risking a truly costly jury award.
In summary, Microsoft gets to escape any future civil liability, while instituting a training program that makes their software more valuable at virtually no cost, or even a cash gain for themselves. And all the lawyers will get fat fees.
Sounds like a great deal for Microsoft. Now what would be really good is if Microsoft had to spend $1.1 billion dollars deploying other companies software in disadvantaged schools. Wouldn't it be great to know that the Linux or FreeBSD or Oracle, etc., etc., installation at your local school being paid for by Linux?
evanchik.net
It's getting rediculous when you don't even bother to read the articles properly before posting the headlines, thus biasing people. You are far from an unbiased news source...
... this is NOT EQUAL TO $1.1B.
$900m in software + 200,000 reconditioned computers + $90m in teacher training + $38m in technical support + $250m for the foundation + $160 to teach kids how to work with computers, guys, basic math.
900 + 90 + 38 + 250 + (est $40m for the computers) + 160 = $1478m
I watch all of the people here who complain without even reading the articles, and believing word-for-word what the editors post in the headlines and it makes me sick. You are a jouralist outlet that serves half a million pages a day, and you should be a lot more responsible than that.
Let me also call this fact into light:
The settlement proposal came from one of the lead plaintiffs' lawyers in the case
Oh interesting, so it was the prosecution's idea to do this...
and also:
Estimates of the value of the settlement ranged from $1.1 billion to as much as $1.7 billion, one source said. "It's going to get money to the people that need it the most," this source said.
And as I counted, the $1.7B is a lot closer to the value than the $1.1B, and this is also not counting the costs of actually figuring all of this stuff out for MS. And don't think that for each copy of windows handed out they don't have any costs either, they're not free once you consider everything into account (you add up all costs of developing and divide by the number of products made)... It's not going to cost them $900mil, but it will cost $400mil or so...
I just get tired of people who hate Microsoft and blindly believe everything that they're told (partially because they want to believe), and yet are being completely hypocritical. We're in a capitialistic society ladies and gentlemen... In this society man exploits man... If you were in their shoes, can you honestly say that you wouldn't do things any differently?
---
Having said all of that, yeah, they're being overly monopolistic, and yes, this is a rediculously small punishment for what they've been caught doing. I mean, not that $1.5B is a small chunk of change, that is a large chunk of money for any corporation, but they're not really being restricted hardcore from repeating the same "mistakes"/"crimes" in the future. And as anyone knows, the companies that survive don't do so because they're magnanimous, they just learn how to hide their mistakes better the next time.
But then again, with the court's track record lately, could you honestly have expected anything different? (sigh)... Justice will have to be postponed for yet another day.
If God gave us curiosity
Force Microsoft to donate $1.1 billion among the Free Software Foundation, the OpenOffice project, KDE and GNOME projects, the Linux kernel team, and various others. That'll pay all the significant Open Source developers out there for hmm.. at least the next 10 years.
>what about the hardware to support them? That's not mentioned at all
Yes it is.
Microsoft also would be responsible for making available 200,000 reconditioned computers and laptop computers during that period, $90 million in teacher training and $38 million in technical support.
Makes me wonder though who is lining up to get this contract for 200,000 'reconditioned' computers? I've always wondered what happens to the leased machines like the ones our company gets. We have a 3rd-party leasing company that gets the boxes from Dell which we lease for 18 months. We ghost the drives and put them on people's desks. When they go off lease, we wipe the drives and the leasing company takes them away.
My first guess would be that MS is going to source these from multiple leasing companies that operate in the areas where these 14,000 schools are?
Hmm, when I was in high school they made a big deal about beingup to date with the latest software used in industry. I remember clearly writing all my reports in WordPerfect 5.1 for Dos, just like industry. Didn't help me any though, by the time I got out of college MsWord was the standard (word95 I think). Not that it matters, the company I work for uses FrameMaker when we need formated text, and otherwise emacs, or vi depending on your religion.
I also remember watching the transisition from Word*Star, but I was a kid so that was on the sidelines.
With that history it seems to me that computers change too quick for it to matter what you learn on in high school, it will be obsolete before long anyway.
Short version:
Most of the people posting against the settlement know not what they say.
Long version:
Most of you seem to have this knee jerk reaction to anything with M-I-C-R-O-S-O-F-T printed anywhere within. I think MS has a monopoly. Wow, what a revelation. Whooda thunk MS would ever be accused of such a thing?
Here's some info that I'd like some of you to consider before you flame me mercilessly and kill my karma:
1) MS didn't sprinkle pixie dust on PC users and magically become a monopoly. You and I MADE them a monopoly. And don't give me bunk about "the OS that people saw growing up was Windows, so that was the only OS in the universe". Whatever. When I was in school, we had teletype terminals and IBM DOS machines. There was no MS monopoly back then. I'm in my mid 30's so it's not like I'm talking about the dark ages of computing.
2) If you put Windows machines in schools, Apple will piss and moan about it. If you put Apple machines in schools, MS and everyone else will piss and moan about it. If you put Linux in schools, BSD folks will piss and moan about it. Face it, there is no OS on the planet that can go into schools that will get a 100% endorsement even within the free/open-source software world. Period.
3) Let's see what's more benefitial: average PC users receive a check for the $20 determined to be the "damage" we sustained as a result of MS's monopolistic actions, or kids in poor neighborhoods/schools get access to training, hardware, and computer related education that they would not be given access to otherwise. Hmmm... Let's see... (If you have to honestly think about it, you need to work on being more human and less greedy.)
4) I don't give half of a rat's ass if students learn to do word processing on Word instead of Abiword. I started off with DOS, then I moved to Windows, then I moved to Linux, and now I'm working with BSD and UNIX. I started off the same way these kids will start off, and despite all of that I'm not a Windows user. Gee, could it be possible that I had -- *GASP* -- freedom of choice? Reading comments posted here, you'd think that if MS puts Windows in classrooms that the people in those classes will nevereverEVER touch anything other than Windows. Get real, folks.
5) Windows is -- on the whole -- easier to use than Linux, *BSD, or UNIX. I say that as someone using these latter OSes daily and the former OS almost never. I don't let my preferences cloud the issue or induce prejudice against Windows, though. I don't care if you're more familiar with the latter OSes. Windows is easier to deal with for newbies than any of them. And until developers start putting the end-user experience in front of developer coolness (take a hint, free/open-source developers), this will continue to be a true statement.
5) Windows experience is more marketable right now than Linux/BSD/UNIX experience, and will continue to be that way for quite some time as far as I can tell. Unless companies completely ditch Windows and start over with a new OS (which will not happen, no matter how many op-ed pieces you read saying the opposite), it's going to be a long, long, LONG time before Linux/BSD/UNIX experience makes you more marketable on a global scale than Windows experience. And with the web services wave just about ready to rise, the OS people use will become less important than the browser it's running, so people will have less incentive to go through the IS/deployment/training nightmare associated with a company-wide OS switch.
Flame away...
Unfortunately, our beloved country is ever more controlled by corporate interests. Even Al "I hate Big Oil" Gore receives a ridiculous amount of money from corporate sponsors. No comment needs to be made about GWB and his administration.
Here's my take on why most people in government support Microsoft. First, whatever the morality of their practices, they are arguably the most successful business in history. They pay lots of salaries and benefits and have created much wealth.
Also, many people remember how scary it was in the 80's when the Japanese were kicking our asses in every way (with the Koreans and other Asian nations not far behind). MS, along with Intel, Oracle, Sun, etc. have brought the world technology leadership solidly back to the US. Many politicians want to keep it that way.
Don't get me wrong, I'm badly disappointed with this proposed settlement and the one for the still-pending DOJ case. That's why I only use Linux on my computers (except for a lingering Win98 partition at home to play a couple of Windows only games).
You know what? Thank God for all MS's security holes. If Windows/IE/IIS/Passport were all actually secure, then they would completely take over everything, no question about it. Then we'd all truly have our entire computing experience controlled by Redmond.
I'm getting depressed, I'm going to shut up now.....
...after being legally found a monopoly, accused of strongarming their way into markets and gaining marketshare by squeezing out competitors, as part of the proposed solution, Microsoft wishes to give away over a billion dollars worth of their software to the nation's poorest schools.
And Apple (or other software vendors) can compete with this how? And this avoids further penetration of the educational software market exactly how? This prevents them from pushing other software vendors out of markets how? This avoids cyclical dependencies on their software precisely how?
I want some of what the state AG's are smoking.
Now, putting on my reality cap, I understand that to have to tell your voting public that you turned down the opportunity to have a one billion dollar infusion of software and computers into the poorest schools simply because you thought it would be wrong to let a company get away with something, and that overall, the people who are making money with the company will still make a lot of money with it after you "win", is something akin to political suicide. But it is still laughable.
But then it could be just me.
http://biz.yahoo.com/bw/011120/202744_1.html
Anyway. Of course an overriding goal is to increase the company's bottom line. However, traditionally, companies have also followed the constraints of the particular nation's laws. If not follow them to the letter, than at least to not directly oppose them.
This Microsoft page suggests there are at least 40,000 computers on the main Microsoft campus (search for the first "40,000" on the page). Since they want employees to use their latest and greatest version of Windows, Microsoft needs to replace computers frequently. Old boxes are just too slow. Replace each of 40K computers once a year for 5 years -- how many old boxes do you need to dispose of?
200,000
What a coincidence.
Email: slashdot3@FreeMars.org (Address will be abandoned when it gets spam.)
Bill Gates' reaction to the settlement
Notice the poor innocent youth to his right...
I'm not a journalist, but I play one on slashdot
You seem to be implying that the best way to learn how to use computers is to offer open APIs w/ an open code base, reams of documentation at every level, and avid support world-wide. You also seem to think that compled UIs with all available options right there in front of new users is a good thing. Here's another enumerated list for you:
1) "Using" a computer is not the same as developing on a computer. Here lies the fallacy that is dragging down Linux and other open-source OSes: end users don't care about APIs, cool developer tools, and open source code. They care about *using* computers. When I said that developers needed to put end-users in front of developer coolness, this is the *exact* thing that I was talking about. If you're an open source developer, you need to stop thinking like a developer and start thinking like an end user. Computers are tools, and when they're made accessible to the masses they can unleash all kinds of wonderful stuff; make them cryptic w/ GUIs that encapsulate 100% of the functionality, refer folks to source code and APIs to learn how to make things happen, and send them to newsgroups and mail lists where they'll be flamed for not reading the comment the developer put in header file X before asking questions, and you'll lose a potentially valuable user base. Let's face it: free/open-source developers more often than not write apps for other free/open-source developers. Your comments illustrate this nicely.
2) There's more to computer-oriented careers than software development. More people use computers than develop for them. Again, you're illustrating how developer-centric this realm is. I'm saying you need to step out of this before making a real difference for these OSes.
3) "Dumbed-down" user interfaces are necessary for the average human. You and I may be able to configure DNS using a command line and vi, or even a slightly dumbed down UI like webmin, but the average IT guy won't. Yes, intelligently weeding out the complex stuff and leaving that to command line folks or another GUI under an "Advanced" button makes sense. I would welcome more dumbed down GUIs on Linux/BSD/whatever. It would make my life easier (less questions to repeatedly answer).
4) You completely missed my point about web services and browsers. If an IT group is faced with a decision to either swap out an OS so that some different software can be run or just keep an OS around (like Windows) that will work just fine with a web services application, there is absolutely, positively NO reason to go through the IT headache of changing OSes on hundreds of computers company-wide. What you're saying is that if the browser on Windows and the browser on Linux works fine, then there's no reason not to switch to Linux. Huh?... Have you ever deployed anything across an entire company before? Leave-it-alone is the best policy when it comes to situations like this.
5) I don't know exactly where you're seeing these "reams of documentation", but after using Linux for 10 years I still am amazed at how poorly documented it is. The mass-market books available in bookstores are good for pressing flowers, but most of them aren't worth much more. And if you're talking about the ancient man page collections and HOWTOs/FAQs, they're in sad shape as well. And even when these things are "complete", they're so cryptic that without prior experience you'll have a lovely time trying to figure out what the hell you're supposed to do to get effect X out of utility Y. In other words, the documentation sucks.
Try again.
Microsoft Windows never refers to itself for bad things, only good things. Ex: Windows has detected new hardware, and must restart your computer [not windows]. You have installed new software; you must restart your computer [not windows]. Your computer [not windows] has crashed. People then associate all the annoying things with the whole computer and not the operating system itself.
Got friends?
Here is CNNs take of the whole thing.
o so ft/index.htm
http://money.cnn.com/2001/11/20/technology/micr
NPR just had coverage of this on all things considered today. There they stated that it would cost Microsoft 1.1 billion. Here is my letter to them...
Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2001 18:12:38 -0500
From: "Clark C . Evans"
To: atc@npr.org
Subject: Incorrect Statement about Microsoft Settlement
You mentioned the Microsoft settlement on your
program this afternoon. And I'm afraid I heared
two mis-representations:
1. This program will cost Microsoft 1.1 Billion.
FACT: This program will cost Microsoft $300 Million.
The CD-ROMs and paper that the licenses
for their "$800 million" of Microsoft
software won't cost Microsoft more than
a few thousand dollars.
Further, since these schools are too
poor to buy the software, you can't
argue that it is a loss in revenue.
FACT: Having Children learn to use Microsoft
software, instead of open soruce
alternatives (such as open office
and linux) increases the value of their
software; since more people are familar
with it (the value of software is
proportional to the user base). It's
hard to buy new recruits.... costly
actually.
Having thousands of children learn how
to use Microsoft software "for free" is
hugely valueable to Microsoft. This is
worth more than $300 million alone...
2. This money may be used to buy non-Microsoft software.
FACT: The software licenses "retail value
$800 million" are for Microsoft
software.
Perhaps some of the $300 million can
be used to buy non-Microsoft software,
but I doubt it.
I'd like to mention that RedHat has an alternative [1]
if Microsoft *really* wants to spend 1.1 Billion.
1. Microsoft just buys the hardware instead.
2. Open Source software is used (for free).
I'm afraid that Microsoft's play is just a mechanism
to extend their monopoly. It doesn't help anyone
but Microsoft.
Could you please air a correction?
Best,
Clark Evans
[1] http://biz.yahoo.com/bw/011120/202744_1.html
Red Hat's whole deal is free software, so why didn't they help out poor school districts a couple of years ago? Does anyone really think stunts like this are going to be enough to stop RHAT's downward spiral into dotcom obscurity?