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.
"
At least Red Hat sees what's going on: Microsoft's "punishment" is hardly a punishment, instead it's just an expanded advertising campaign that can lay the groundwork for a MS-addiction of enormous proportions once this phase of the punishment runs out.
What's too bad, though, is that MS had the foresight to see what a golden opportunity this sort of punishment was, and Red Hat is only seeing it now that MS has suggested it (and frantically scrambling to make sure it doesn't go through). I was livid when I heard about what a cop-out this whole thing turned out to be, but I was also a little peeved that none of the Linux vendors realized what a potentially important market this could be to invest in.
Have to hand it to Microsoft. Satan himself runs the show, but Satan is no dummy.
--------
Bleah! Heh heh heh... BLEAH BLEAH!!! Ha ha ha ha...
Sorry Hemos, Michael beat you to it in the update to this story.
Slashdot monitor for your Mozilla sidebar or Active Desktop.
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.
How is this going to help the kids? People don't want MS to give the software cause it is a tax write-off and will force kids to learn Windows based OSes. It seems that RedHat wants the same thing: a tax break and to force kids to learn RedHat based OSes (Linux). Why not let the schools decide what would be best for their kids to learn? I think it will look bad for the OSS community to force schools to use OSS. Maybe a 50/50 split? This way kids can learn Windows (which is a valuable skill, despite what some people think of MS) and will learn Linux (which is an equaly valuable skill, despite what some people think of Linux).
No replies made to AC posts. Please log in.
In any case, this is a briliant PR/Marketing move on the part of RedHat, that will result in great publicity reguardless of Microsoft's answer.
Whoever came up witht this at RH is definitely earning their pay.
Ñ'
Well, if you're learning about computers, EVERY program on a Linux box is educational!
pr0n - keeping monitor glass spotless since 1981.
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...
Teach the kids on Linux rather than Windows. It's a better OS, though the real world generally uses a crappier one.
Teach the kids Esperanto rather than English. It's a better language, though the real world generally uses a crappier one.
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.
it's own software is so patently ridiculous... even more amazing is the limitless gall Microsoft has in presenting this "remedy".
I'd be walking around with a paper bag over my face even if I was only remotely affiliated the the legal team persuing the settlement in this deal.
I wonder if I could convince my bank to accept in-lieu of hard cash this handy little program:
void main()
{
while(1)
printf("Look mom! A program!\n");
}
Yes yes.. I know this doesn't do much, but you will concede the loop closely models the average behavior of some MS software that comes to mind... like MS Outlook; in particular: it doesn't do anything particularly useful and uses up insane processor resources... also, I will counter argue that since you have the source, you can take some time to make it useful.
Do not spread "09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0" over the internet, thank you.
Hrm, could this have a *little something* to do with the fact that Microsoft has had a monopoly in the schools. With 980,000 or so potential Linux computers in schools, software development companies might consider making their educational software cross-platform, or maybe even some Linux-specific offerings. Until now there was been no motivation for them to create education software for Linux, so a major ramification of going with RedHat's proposed settlement would be to get the ball rolling in this area. That is, of course, a very good effect of a punitive monopoly settlement, giving the competition a jump start.
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
What will the kids run? What educational software is there for Linux? I mean REALLY? Sure, there is some, but it's not even close to what is available for Windows.
I've been hearing this argument since the 80s, except then the status quo was the Apple II and the scary technical alternative was the PC. Then, 'everything' schools ran worked on their 10-year-old Apple 2s, and there was nothing running on Windows 3.1 or DOS that they were interested in. In reality, 'everything' was "The Oregon Trail", "Print Shop", and some crappy home-made software written in Basic. Now, the same attitude exists about Windows. What is all this 'educational' software, anyways? The crap book publishers "give" away to entice administrators to buy their book? The question isn't "what will the kids run if they have to use Linux", but "What are they running now that they need windows for?"
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.
Eh? Been in a school lately? I have, and I can safely say that the number of people there with the technical knowledge and/or self-confidence necessary to install an OS on to a computer is vanishingly small. They literally cannot install Linux (or anything else) if they want to, or if they can, they aren't allowed to because management is too worried about "messing stuff up". That's why support would be the critical piece of Red Hat's proposal... they would need to send out people to help install/convert the computers. Hmm, I wonder if Red Hat could use volunteers for this? I'd do it...
I don't care if it's 90,000 hectares. That lake was not my doing.
Really? How many people would be interested in volunteering for something like this? I can look into arranging something if there's sufficient interest...
Ed
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).
First, if Red Hat's offer does nothing else, it points out the duplicitous nature of Microsoft's offer.
Second, if the point is to introduce the students to the principles of computer science, then Linux is perfectly adequate to the task. We aren't out to create a generation of Word-using stenographers, we are out to expand the minds of the students.
Third, there is no reason for any school to keep Linux on their machines if they choose not to. They can install any OS they like. True, they may have to pay for it. The cost-free option remains theirs, but they can go and install BeOS if they choose.
Fourth, the benefit of this proposal is not that Microsoft gets punnished for their evil deeds. It is not that they get their monopolistic plans thwarted. It is not that Red Hat gets to capture the hearts and minds of the students. The real benefit is that 800,000 more kids get to sit in front of 800,000 more monitors and tap away on 800,000 more keyboards than the original proposal. Five times as many kids get access to five times as many computers, running a capable, highly reliable, highly efficient operating system that can be utilized at no extra cost, or replaced with the OS of their choice (should they decide to do so) for far less than the cost of acquiring the equivilent systems themselves.
What a pity it won't happen!