Slashback: Norwegian, Nader, Handheld

Slashback below with a handful of updates on Walmart's OS-free PCs, another X-Scale PDA, Ralph Nader's plan to slip the Big Government carpet from beneath Microsoft, and how you can help save Norwegian history. Film88 gets slapped down by the copyright barons, but 802.11b gets a reprieve. Read on for the details.

Putting it all online. "As earlier reported on Slashdot, poor Ottar Grepstad has difficulties getting into his database. Now they're available for download! This is one geeky challenge you don't want to miss. :-) You'll find the story here (click on 'the password mystery'). 'use Xbase;', anyone? :-)"

The loyal opposition. Helmholtz Coil writes "Yahoo! is carrying a rebuttal to the letter James Love and Ralph Nader wrote to the OMB, from the fine folks at ZDNet. Some interesting points, very interesting tone to the whole piece. The question is, though-when can we expect a rebuttal to the rebuttal?"

They need a Free OS focus group :) Gecko writes "Remember the PCs without a pre-installed operating system, selling at Wal-Mart's? OSNews got their hands on one of these and they test Windows, Linux and BeOS. Apparently, the company behind these products had immediately replaced the on-board winmodem with a hardware PCI one, in order to be compatible with Linux, but their new AthlonXP/Duron PC models now come with a newer S3 Savage4 DDR integrated graphics card that is not supported by XFree86. One keeps wondering why they sell these PCs without Windows, if they are not able to test their hardware with other OSes before sending them to Wal-Mart for sale."

A new meaning for Pocket Rocket. Hot on the heels of XScale introductions and announcements from Toshiba and Fujitsu, Brian writes "Acer, Inc. today announces the Acer n20 series, eight months after announcing support for the Microsoft Pocket PC 2002 platform, the announcement also made Acer one of the few manufacturers to support both the Palm and Pocket PC platform. PDA LIVE.com again has the scoop and the photos :)"

I hope the pace picks up on the introduction of machines based on Intel's XScale processor.

Dog Star. DHR writes "An update to an earlier story shows that Sirius the satellite radio provider has finally come to their senses and withdrawn their petition to restrict the 2.4GHz band."

Intermission. bubblegoose writes "Yahoo has a story about Film88 being taken down by the MPA. They say it's because the servers were in the Netherlands, I think it more likely due to a good /.'ing."

Comments

target of OSless PC

[Hollins]

One keeps wondering why they sell these PCs without Windows, if they are not able to test their hardware with other OSes before sending them to Wal-Mart for sale.

I don't think Linux users are the target buyer for these PCs. I suspect most of them are being sold to:

1. Folks with a PII/300 who want to upgrade and are planning on installing their OEM Win98SE
2. People who intend to install a pirated windows, most likely a copy from the office or a buddy

Both of these categories are in violation of MS EULA, but I would guess 80% of the machines end up with Windows on them. Most people who install an OEM copy of Windows will have no idea that they're breaking the law, which I believe is a large part of the reason click-wrap licensing gets away with so much.

I'm curious, how prominently are these PCs advertised as not having an OS? Is Wal-Mart getting many returns because nothing happened when the machine was turned on?

Re:target of OSless PC

[Qrlx]

Both of these categories are in violation of MS EULA

We really need a court or two to weigh in on this issue of reinstalling the OEM OS on a new PC. I can see how Microsoft wants to protect their revenue stream by selling you a new OS when you buy a new PC, but I'm not sure if that's solid enough legal ground to stand on.

What, aside from Microsoft's assertion, makes the OS and the PC inseperable? If this is legally possible, why don't we see it all the time? For example, it's well-known that a car that costs $15,000 has got $30,000 worth of parts in it. Yet the auto manufacturers make no claim that you can't take the fuel filter from your old Honda and put it in your new Honda, or sell it on the street, or make a funny hat out of it.

Additionally, what is meant by the term "computer?" Is it the CPU, or the HD, or the RAM, or the MB, or what? If you upgrade all those items, one at a time, are you then required to buy a new OS because it's essentially a new computer now?

I (and many others) don't think Microsoft's assertion that an OEM OS is only valid on the computer it was sold with is legally viable. But until a court addresses the issue, we'll just have to take their word for it. Or not, like the people buying OS-less PCs at WalMart. I'd love to see their faces when the U.S. Marshalls break down the door.

Maybe a highly ethical Wal-Mart employee out there will feel compelled to provide the BSA with the names and addresses (via credit card receipts) of all those who've purchased OS-less PCs, thereby ensuring that our economy doesn't lose untold more millions due to software piracy.

Re:target of OSless PC

[BeBoxer]

The spare parts cost more. If you take your car apart, and sold the parts, they would be worth more than the car. People don't do this because it's too labor intensive, and most folks don't like used parts all that much. So to turn it around, if you bought all the spare parts you would need to build a car, it would cost more for the part alone than the whole car.

Which is just like with a PC and Windows. The PC and Windows are worth more apart than together, due to the steep discounts on OEM versions of Windows. But auto manufacturers can't stop you from parting out your car. Why is M$ allowed to stop you from parting out your PC? I should be able to buy a Dell, put Linux on it, and sell the new copy of WinXP for whatever I can get. Just like I can buy a new Ford, put in an Alpine stereo, and sell the OEM stereo.

Re:Walmart?

[Cody Hatch]

Please tell me your kidding. Comparing sweatshops to slavery is ludicrous (and to think I've seen people complaing that calling copyright violation "piracy" was bad...).

People in sweatshops are there by choice (unless they are actually slaves, which does happen (rarely) but then the problem is the slavery, not the sweatshops). The reason people choose to work in sweatshops is because the alternatives are WORSE. Is it a awful thing for a 13 year old kid to be working 12 hours a day for a few cents? Yeah. Would it be better if he was starving on the street instead? Not really.

Also, don't make the mistake of judging wages in terms of the price of a cup of Starbucks Super Mocha Java. In China, it's common for young women from the interior to go work in sweatshops on the coast for a few months, then go back home to the village, where they're now quite well off (yes, even at sweatshop wages), and can easily find a husband.

What is your boycot going to do? Well, actually, you'll probably just get ignored, but if you do have an impact, it'll probably be that Walmart's suppliers shift production to automated factories in Mexico. Yeah, that'll sure help the starving kids in Myanmar...

If you want to have an impact, calculate the difference in price between everything you buy that was made in a sweatshop, and it's factory-made equivalent, then donate that money to a charity. You'll do far more good.

Re:Walmart?

[joss]

You probably overestimate the difference between being a slave and working in a sweat shop. An economic position where one must work hard for 18 hours purely to survive is pretty close to slavery. I suspect that the workers would be better off if they really were slaves - the owners would then have more incentive to invest in training and would be inclined to take better care of actual property.

You're right up to a point. It is worse for those working in sweatshops for you to simply boycott sweatshops' products.

People used to argue that it would be wrong to boycott slave manafactured products because unless the slaves were productive and profitable they would probably be executed. Again, it's a reasonable argument, but it misses the point slightly.