Slashdot Mirror
Red Hat CTO Testifies at MS trial
An anonymous reader writes "Red Hat CTO Michael Tiemann testified on behalf of the 9 states in MS's trial. From the article on SF Gate: "Red Hat Chief Technology Officer Michael Tiemann said Microsoft adds 'extensions' to critical communications methods that computers use to transmit security information, print, and perform other tasks. Those extensions are proprietary to Microsoft, he said, and despite recent actions Microsoft has not been forthcoming in releasing details of those changes.""
The thing is over and Microsoft has pretty much won. How do these 9 states think that holding out any more is going to do anything? Especially with another 6 years left with this administration that totally supports the Big M.
Who moderated that insightful?
It's a troll I see posted verbatim all the time.
Is it wrong to add something to your own product? (I consider a protocol also a product). It's just a new version, with new features and then Mr. Redhat can't compete, so he justs talks a lot blabla to get attention... yawn.
If Linux wants to 'win' they should develop a better product. And even if they have a better product, then they should try to get new users and MS-stuff-users using their products.
If you don't, you lose, that's the whole idea of a free market. Not only in computerindustry, but just anywhere there is one.
I tried Linux Mandrake a few times, but I'm not really impressed about it. There was always something that didn't work when I installed it.
Sure, I get it too work with some help, but that's not an option for pc-noobs and people who don't want to put that much time in it (which I can imagine, I must admit). They just want to install and it should work.
Sure Linux/Unix is a good product, but it's just what you want to do with it and how much time you want to spend on making it work the way you want it. If you have the time and you want to use it that way, that's your opinion and I think you should support your own idea's. But other people just don't.
I can live with other OS's and other supporting their OS, but I know many who don't. So, c'mon guys, on whatever OS your computer is running, stop acting like clowns and stop this useless conversation.
If you hate Unix, you'll always hate Unix and if you hate Windows, you'll always hate Windows. There's no solution and I don't think this conversation will ever end... at least not in the next ten years.
*sigh*
Looks like I'm going to read a lot of conversations like this and it looks like I'm going to write a lot of this (also useless) messages to get you people live with each other. But heh, that's just me...
Are you kidding? Apple and Linux came out of essentially socialist environments. On the one hand the Homebrew Computer Club, and on the other, Free Software.
Regardless of what various militias, racists and dissident groups might say, the individual US states are not *sovereign* in any globally accepted (or proper English) sense.
AFGHANISTAN is a sovereign state.
PANAMA is a sovereign state.
The USA is a sovereign state.
The individual "states" that make up the USA are not sovereign, because they do not have independent right to make war.
This was settled by force around 1865 or so.
The main thrust of your argument (the states have considerable ability to prosecute Microsoft without Federal interference) is correct.
--Charlie