Slashdot Mirror
Red Hat Proposes Alternative Settlement To MSFT
cwsulliv writes "Red Hat, Inc. has proposed an alternative settlement to the Microsoft class-action lawsuit in Maryland. Microsoft originally proposed supplying a limited number of poorer school districts in the US with PC hardware and limited-license Microsoft software.
The alternative proposal submitted by Red Hat would have Microsoft supply NO software but dramatically increase the number of school districts receiving hardware. Red Hat in turn would supply ALL the software (Open Source) and unlimited support via their Red hat Network.
"
Red Hat's not being arrogant (or at least self-serving). Microsoft's deal would bring them money in the long run (five years from now when they hold a gun to the schools' heads), but Red Hat stands to profit absolutely nothing. In fact, by offering free support, Red Hat is actually giving away what they could make money from.
MSIE: The world's most standards-complaint web browser.
Jesus, that is quite a few PCs.
I for one hope this happens. I find it kinda amusing that Microsoft's proposed settlement includes extending their monopoly into schools, tying a generation or two to Microsoft products.
Judge: For the unlawful shooting of a Police Officer, I sentance you to be thrown in jail for 3 years!
Microsoft: I've got a better idea, why don't I kill 3 more? Then you can let me off!!1
More at The Register
They do stand to gain something out of the deal, though -- a generation of kids brought up using Red Hat Linux instead of Microsoft Windows would definitely help them out in the long run.
The five-years from now is nothing. When we're talking long run, we should be looking over the next 30, 40, 50 years. Nobody's looking for any money in 5 years, they're all thinking, "how can we get these kids hooked on our products so that for the rest of their lives, they're buying from us?" It's what every advertising agency is trying to do when it advertises to kids and teens -- it tries to hook them on a product for the rest of their consuming days.
Not much difference here, but at least Red Hat is an alternative to the beast.
To think they stand to gain nothing in the long run is foolish.
J
J
$1 billion = 1 million PC's
Red Hat is going to support 1 million PC's for free. How much would that cost? How many do they currently support? Do they realize the beating these machines take? Do they think that school teachers and librarians (who usually do the first line support) have any computer knowledge?
Red hat is going to support 1 million installations of RED HAT LINUX for free.
This is insane. It's just a PR stunt.
Let's not stir that bag of worms...
And it's good PR for Red Hat. Nobody will take them up on the offer (though it would mean serious money for Red Hat in the long run if they did), and they get to look like they're even more strongly "for the children" than Microsoft. Nicely played!
``Life results from the non-random survival of randomly varying replicators.'' -- Richard Dawkins
You can run some Windows applications on Linux, using various methods. Chances are that at least some of the educational software will run.
Have you investigated what educational software does or does not run under the various solutions for running Windows apps on Linux?
Microsoft doesn't care about providing a platform for educational software; they want the kids to be hooked on their proprietary operating system and applications. Mass indoctrination of future Microserfs is the key to their survival. So this action can hardly be called an act of restitution for anti-competitive behavior.
one of the problems I have using Linux is that I grew up using Windowsy stuff. Linux is VERY different. You need to think about things differently because the OS operates in a very different way.
If kids start with Linux they will A) have no problem learning it and B) be more sophisticated about how computers work. And, most people would agree, they'll have no problem working in Windows. On top of this, Linux offers a sophisticated development environment where kids can learn about programming. Without paying $500 per seat for Visual C++
children learn new things very easily, regardless of how complex they are. Look at how quickly they pick up languages for an example.
It breaks my pluginses, my precious!
This isn't about helping the kids. This is about punishing Microsoft for illegal acts of which they've been convicted. They're proposing their own slap-on-the-wrist punishment couched in "helping the kids" rhetoric, but really what they want to do is escape having to actually really pay for anything. Microsoft's allegedly 1.1 billion dollar plan actualy consists mostly of donated software, which in real terms costs them nothing. Red Hat is just calling them on this bluff -- if MS had to buy hardware, they'd actually have to spend real money. Of course, even then, 1.1 billion is nothing to a company with 36 billion in the bank.
Could do that, but I would guess that those dual-boot systems would mostly be booted into Windows. And that brings up the question: "Do schools want Linux?" If the schools can't/don't use the Linux boxes, it is kind of a waste. If we are going to push for Linux boxes to be part of the settlement, we had better make sure that there is usable educational software for the boxes.
No replies made to AC posts. Please log in.
Hah! Everyone who knows Linux should have NO problem learning Windows.
BTW, isn't that the message in every single goddamn ad for Windows? Ie, "So easy to use, even if you're a freaking moron who fell asleep in the middle ages and just woke up, you'll be emailing movies to your grandson in no time."
To that end, thats the argument Redhat should take to court. "If windows is so easy to use, whats the benifit of putting kids on them so early on?" At least that'd force MS to actually admit that using an operating system (tho I suppose they'd use the euphamism "computer") requires some learning and training.
But like I said, knowing Linux forces you to know computers. And knowing computers, its pretty easy to pick up Windows at your own leisure. The reverse is not true, as one of the main purposes and selling points of windows is that it allows people who don't have a clue about hardware and software to email, surf the web, and use word processing.
"Old man yells at systemd"
You can't sit kids down at a computer and yell at them that they better start learning to spell. As an educational tool, computers suck tremendously. Correctly used, ie for information retrieval and similar things, they are a great asset. Teaching is best to leave to the teachers.
War is one of the most horrible things a human can be exposed to. And one of the worlds largest industries.
The subject of my email is an African proverb that refers to the fact that when largeer than life entities do battle (e.g. kings at war), it's typically the little people in the middle who suffer the most. Having spent time as a mentor at a poor school in inner city Atlanta I think both proposals are self-serving, misguided and will provide less benefit than is being touted.
First of all about computers and software in schools. Studies have shown that the benefits of computers in school range from minor to non-existent especially when compared to tried and proven practices like increasing class sizes, upping teachers pay and engaging students in extracurricular activiteis like field trips. Secondly, in situations where computers proved to be beneficial it took an average of 3 years for the teacher to successfully integrate computers into the curricullum. Considering that the average lifespan of PC hardware is 3 - 5 years, this makes any push for computers in school a decision that should be weighed heavily before being taken.
As for having the students use Linux instead of Windows, I can't see how this is a good idea in either case. On the one hand, you have poor schools that are faced with having to find cash to pay for MSFT products after a certain time period expires and they have become used to using them and on the other you have places where middle school students struggle with concepts like "multiplication" (many teenage students I mentored did multiplications on their fingers) and "quadrilaterals" (and this was after repeated prepping by teachers in preparation for one of many standardized tests that students had to take) who are expected to learn how to use Linux. I hardly see that as Win-Win but instead Lose-Win where the winner is either Red Hat or Microsoft
The schools themselves will viciously decline.
I'm not that sure. They'll have to choose between 20 PC's with MS software on them or 100 PC's with Free Software on them. Not to mention that with the MS deal, they end up in 5 years with 20 PC and NO software at all.
Opus: the Swiss army knife of audio codec
Nobody's looking for any money in 5 years
Hm, no, that's exactly what Microsoft was looking for in it's "you have to purchase any new software after 5 years" clause. (And yeah, it helps them in the long run, too.)
Remember "Bring 'em on"? *sigh
You are right the Red Hat did this no more out of altruism than Microsoft did. But there is a crucial distinction: this is supposed to be a PUNISHMENT for Microsoft for illegal misdeeds; that doesn't apply to Red Hat.
Red Hat's proposal, whether adopted or not (and it almost certainly won't be) just highlights that the original proposal was not only not a punishment, it was a boon to Microsoft.
It benefits the students in the long run if they know how to use a wider range of software. The software evolves constantly and being able to learn how to use new tools, regardless what is used at the work place, is most important.
Does it occur to anyone that if they wanted it, they can install it anytime they want?
Yes and they do regularly. This would only give them free support that would have normally cost them around $50 per installation, or they would have to do without if they used the typical free install.
I can only think back to the days of when I was in grade school and we had all Tandy trs80s in many classes. Linux is no more difficult to use than one of these machines, and it is much more powerfull. Even in Highschool we had all dos based 386s. yes 14 years old and useing a command line just like everyone else in our school. This was a regular public school as well, no high paid privite school teachers or special computer support staff. Just the underpaid public school teachers and the students to support everything.
Paying taxes to buy civilization is like paying a hooker to buy love.
As a technical employee of a school district, I can say this would be a good thing, especially with the Unlimited support available to them. We have quite a bit of linux expertise, but if we were to ever have a staff turnover, and the higher-ups didn't hire Linux people, they would be in a world of hurt. This would increase Linux penetration, as well as help out significantly more schools.
Trying is the First Step to Failing --Homer Simpson
Perhaps those children who grow up to be scientists or researchers will start submitting journal papers in Word format instead of TeX? For what it's worth, I wrote a book, and didn't touch Word once. (Admittedly disingenuous on my part, as most of the publishing industry *does* expect authors to use Word. vim + DocBook worked for me, though.)
how to invest, a novice's guide
...but it wouldn't really be unprecedented.
They might be planning to supply the schools with a free RedHat OS and free support. The RedHat package they get will include free, RedHat-made commercial software, too - stuff which you pay for on the open market. (Let us name one such example "RedHat Office Pro 20xx".) Kinda like a 100% discount version of the college student discounts you find on software in campus computer stores.
There would be a catch - again, not without precedent: said discounted commercial software cannot be purchased or used by non students, and the student agrees to pay for a license upgrade once they graduate - or if they don't, then return it and uninstall it off their system.
Since these kids were hooked on RedHat Office Pro 20xx since they were wee lil tots or whatever, and RedHat has usurped Microsoft as the sole maker of industry-used word processors, databases and spreadsheets, etc., there'll be MS Office and RedHat Office Pro standing as giants in the office world, just like Apple & the PC (before Microsoft killed Apple). He will gladly pay for a copy of RH-Office Pro so he can have this necessary tool for his adult, employed life. (Just as many people went and bought the next version of MS Office at full price after they had graduated.)
RedHat could make RedHat Office 20xx a GPL'd thing at first, and then pull a VA Software, and fork it. And worse, they could cease doing any further development on the GPL'd RedHat Office. Everyone else would be free to take the source code and TRY and keep up with RH Office Pro via reverse engineering and what not. But it would be a road fraught with incompatibilities and missing features, to say the least. (See: MS Office vs Word Perfect 8 vs Star Office vs KOffice vs Abiword...)
RedHat seems to be saying they would not do that to us now, but with all the kids hooked on their software at a young age, and with the chance that they could rip half the market out of MS' hands (by properly exploiting this Macintosh-esque opportunity), they would have you over a barrel.
And of course when you graduate from college RedHat will make you pay for support.
And being a company that is publicly traded and not privately owned, they creditors - aka share holders - to answer to. You cannot ultimately predict what your creditors/share holders will demand, and as different people come and go who own large slices of RedHat debt (er, um stock), who knows what their agendas will be? I am sure Bob Young does not own 51% of his own debt/stocks. If he doesn't, his stockholders could forcibly usurp him by calling in the debt (selling their shares). Even if he has 51%, jeez, if angry stockholders sold their, say, 30%, Bob would be screwed bad.
My point is, RedHat COULD pull an Apple computer here, and make money off getting people hooked on them as kids, and while they are being altruistic now, RedHat has shareholders - and eventually the shareholders will not be so altruistic.
--- Grow a pair, liberals... stop letting the Republicans bully you!
On the other hand, shouldn't it tell the DOJ / attourneys etc. something if another company is willing to do the same thing as Microsoft's punishment for free? Like maybe it's not a punishment? Like maybe BillG and pals are cackling evilly and toasting each other as soon as they get out of the coutroom as they are "punished" by further extending their power while at the same time looking like goody 2-shoes?
We should thank anyone who is willing to provide free stuff to schools (tobacco companies excluded), but MS was supposed to be being punished. It pisses people off to see them suggesting their own punishment and then refusing anything else. Its a double standard and displays the lack of integrity of the US justice system.
Go find out what the schools actually use. Then post links to the Linux version / equivalent of each.
I don't think you can do it, but I'm not just being negative. Even if you don't succeed, the results of any such attempt should be publicized, because they could eventually lead to success.
The two big problems schools face are funding and expertise. Schools don't have enough money to buy fancy commercial hardware and software and keep it up to date, and teachers are rarely above the level of the most naive consumer user, but they're on their own.
The Linux suggestion does a great job at dealing with the funding problem. That just leaves the problem of making these free systems do what schools need to do and completely admin'able by a very naive consumer-level user.
Making Linux systems easy enough for schoolteachers to use has never been any kind of priority for the Linux community.
"Those who have never entered upon scientific pursuits know not a tithe of the poetry by which they are surrounded."
But which do you think Microsoft is more concerned with -- getting a bit of money in five years or getting a lot of moneyo ver the course of the next couple of decades?
That's what I was getting at. It's the long, long run that's important here, not five years down the line.
J
1. Kids should learn how to program. Nothing will help more to learn how to program and understand what an OS does than an Open Source OS like Linux, and yes, it should be Red Hat, because Red Hat is the only company, who might be able to handle the task at hand.
2. Teachers should learn to program and learn to teach how to program. Nothing will help more to understand how to program and how to teach it as having well developed tutorials on CD or online designed to help teachers and students to learn it. Red Hat has started their Training and E-Learning programs and seems to be very well equipped to produce such specific training services and software for schools.
3. Red Hat SHOULD IN NO WAY give up to make a profit on the long run in providing services and e-learning services to schools. Red Hat is a company and may be one of the few left who might make it, which has philosphically stood stead fast for opened source code software.
I consider anybody a hypocrite, who for whatever "uncool" reason thinks that Red Hat is not allowed to make money with what they do. The kids, which will be educated in programming in highschools, are the future programmers, who will go on and become the professionals of the future. They might want to write open source software again. I want them to find a successful company like Red Hat, which is capable of hiring them. So, please, your lovable slashdotting fathers out there, if you want your sons to find a job in programming in the future, don't be so darn stupid to deny Red Hat to make money.
It really doesn't hurt to have high school students knowing a bit of shell scripting and to have an understanding about a *nix based OS. Not only highschools should use Red Hat, but also colleges. It's ridiculous to deny ANY student to look at the source code of a program on their own computer and force them to use a proprietary OS.
4. The argument that there is not enough "educational" software running on Linux written for kids is a phony argument. Linux in itself IS educational. Because kids can discover by themselves how to program, they might develop themselves faster than you think their own "educational programs".
And what the heck are you waiting for ? Can't YOU write the educational software, which might still be missing ?
What more do you want ? Do you want them "TO SURF THE NET", "CUT AND PASTE", "COPY", "STEAL", "CHAT" at school ???? Heaven's sake I rather would teach my kids at home than to let them deteriorate into ADD kids flipping from website to website.
In short, why isn't there an open letter to sign for anybody who would like to give their support for Red Hat's proposal.
Smart Heads need Red Hats.
you're right, linux isn't (currently?) up to the task, primarialy because of software base (questions about Linux's suitability for non-geek desktops aside). but Red Hat's offer still has some good ideas in it. helping the schools is always nice, since no government in the US gives them the cash they should have, and the counter-offer does take M$'s obviously self-serving ploy and turn it into something really punative. targeting the poorest schools is also a nice move (on the part of M$ and Red Hat). and, most importantly, it's likely to have some lasting effect as it may (hopefully) encourage a viable long-term competitor to M$.
so, if it's a good idea, but RH and Linux can't pull it off, who can? simple: Apple. they've already got a good reputation in the education sector, they've got good app support, and it's their traditional strong suit anyway. it'd also avoid subsidizing one of M$'s biggest de facto partners (Intel), who've also benefited quite a bit from M$ abusing their monopoly.
so, how 'bout it, Apple? wanna step up to bat for the kids, put M$ in their place, and improve your long-term prospects for years to come, just for the cost of some support?
i speak for myself and those who like what i say.
- M$'s monopoly has helped keep Linux out of schools
- Linux not being in schools discouraged edu. app writers from porting to or writing for Linux
- putting Linux into schools would encourage greater edu. app support for Linux
- this would increase Linux' momentum, impacting M$'s monopoly
- this would acomplish the real goal here, punishing M$ and preventing future offenses.
all this is true, entirely logical, and valid reasoning. the problem here is that it would, until the software companies catch up, very much degrade the usefulness of those computers to the schools that recieve them. while it's certainly a huge improvement over M$'s "offer", something that doesn't diminish the positive effects would be even better.to which i'd propose swapping Apple for Linux. administratively, it's much more familiar to the people who'll be running these boxes, Apple can absorb the support costs better than Red Hat, and Apple's already got both a very positive reputation and good app support in the education sector. and, of course, Apple's been hurt probably much worse than Linux (since they've been abused my M$'s monopoly before Linux was a concern), so it's a further improvement to the punative nature of the settlement.
i speak for myself and those who like what i say.
Just want to add that in 5 years the macs would probably still be useful...
They need to be used properly. And I don't mean administered or installed properly. If a student does not want to learn, you have bigger problems than simply increasing productivity. You need to actually get involved and motivate the people (AKA students, yes, they're people too). Of course, this leads to a lot more things that people don't want to hear about, like making schools useful for more than extended advertising campaigns, and paying teachers competetive salaries (and most likely STILL not compensating them properly for what they do).
These types of issues should be the a priority. Not that we shouldn't be working on making computers useful as learning tools, we (should) have enough resources that we can dedicate something to that too. But our priority should be the foundation.
funny munging
Why should the court specify what the schools are going to get? If this is a penalty, it should be a blank check donation that schools can spend on anything they want, as long as it's non-Microsoft. It's not a penalty unless some of Microsoft's money and market share goes to their competitors. If a school already has a Linux setup, they'll want more stuff to go with that; if they already have Apple stuff with PowerSchool and carts of iBooks, then they will want more of that. If they have all Microsoft stuff, in part because of Microsoft's illegal actions, then they will have an opportunity to see what they've been missing with some other stuff.
Also, it would be a good penalty to have Microsoft pay for a UNIX/Mac training course that's offered free to MSCE's that want it. In other words, you paid to become an MSCE before Microsoft's actions were brought to light, and now you have a free way to upgrade your skills to other tech and round out your knowledge and maybe stop pushing MS kit because it's all you know.
Another penalty would be free Windows 3.11 for any machine that can run it. These machines are out there, and often they are junk only because of software licensing. They ALL had DOS because of Microsoft's illegal licensing (pay for DOS whether you want it or not), so it's not like Microsoft didn't already get a cut of the cost of these machines originally. Apple has offered System 7.5.5 for free for years, and that is much higher functionality than Windows 3.11. That's why there are so many old Macs still doing functional work, and even being sold around on eBay to do functional work. The equivalent PC's (late 486's and early Pentiums) are going to the dump, or sitting in the basements of office buildings. Microsoft recently hassled a charity for collecting these and putting Windows 3.11 on them for kids. That's not right. If their software weren't so much more fragile than the hardware, these machines would still be functional (in other words, you'd turn them on and they'd be as good as the day they first went into service).
1.Young kids can use all that Mac Educational software.
2.Older kids can take classes on UNIX using OSX.
3.Then, these older kids can go into businesses and setup free unix systems for a carrear......FreeBSD and Linux
4. Remember this chat is about stopping the Microsoft Monopoly...... and promoting some opensource in the process.
Hopefully, if this does turn out to be the deal, Microsoft will kindly remember not to include any Windows-only hardware in the computers.