Slashdot Mirror


Halloween VII

mjh writes "ESR has reviewed the latest Microsoft leaked Linux strategy document. A very interesting read. Summary: OSS is winning some battles, but Microsoft is poised to bring out bigger and nastier guns." To the extent that people read it and gain some insight into what Microsoft is actually thinking about Linux and Open Source Software, it's useful. To the extent that anyone draws a conclusion from this document like "we've got Microsoft on the run", that's just idiotic.

10 of 512 comments (clear)

  1. Re:its bogus by tomknight · · Score: 5, Informative
    Read http://opensource.org/halloween/faq.php for a little info on this. Yes, it may be a fake, but it may not. Read it?

    Tom.

    --
    Oh arse
  2. Re:Reportedly by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    You should've left the last sentence off("Oh wait..."). We all know what you're talking about, and with that little bit of ambiguity, it would've been a lot more funny.

  3. Unlikely! by Lysol · · Score: 2, Informative

    First off, she was placed - no nevermind. No point in debating the fact that she was not qualified to sit on this case.

    Anyway, even if she did care, nothing can be done about it now. It's over. The US has shown its' love for the almighty dollar once more. As asshcroft said - it was a victory for the American consumer.

    All one can hope for is that m$ will fall by its' own hand. With substantial world unhappiness this can happen soon. I mean, really, how can poorer countries be expected to shell out >=$75 ever other year for stupid upgrades and fixes? Economically, their business is not sustainable.

    Unfortunately, we're gonna have to wait for that to happen - which is the worst! Ugh, waiting...

    1. Re:Unlikely! by denisbergeron · · Score: 1, Informative

      Even that I'm a long term Open Source beliver. When I saw your post that say :
      "to shell out >=$75 ever other year for stupid upgrades and fixes?"

      I just want to point, that if you use boxed Linux distribution, you will pay >= $100 every four or six mouth for product that are not even upgradable one to the other.

      Are you even try to upgrade Mandrake 8.2 to 9 without loosing all users configuration. Or Upgrade any other distribution to the same, but more recent, distribution whom was updated every four to six mouth ? no ! I try more than one. And every time, I have to reconfigure all the user preference.

      Since W3.1, you can upgrade to the next/ more recent version without a problem. (except of course the problem caused by the bsod) !

      --
      Ceci n'est pas une Signature !
    2. Re:Unlikely! by Melantha_Bacchae · · Score: 4, Informative

      denisbergeron wrote:

      > Since W3.1, you can upgrade to the next/ more
      > recent version without a problem. (except of
      > course the problem caused by the bsod) !

      Obviously, you didn't try to upgrade to Windows 95 when it first came out. Took me eleven months of reformats and reinstalls, corrupted registry, and a near useless (and getting worse) computer before I gave up. I reformatted, reinstalled Windows 3.1, swore eternal hatred towards the Microsoft I once loved, and started looking for alternatives. Why did this take eleven months? Because I loved the concept and GUI of Windows 95 and really wanted it to work. I had been looking forward to it coming out, and had even preordered it.

      In the late 90's, I experimented with various Linux distributions, built my own Linux server, etc. I eventually settled on Suse. Installation was fairly easy even then (a breeze compared to Windows 95), and I handled the lack of distribution "upgrades" by upgrading my hard drive at the same time. I'd install the new version on the new hard drive, then just copy my files and stuff over. Upgrades were fun, gave me more room, and I'd spend an hour or more carefully selecting what packages I wanted. I still have fond feelings for Linux, and I currently own the Linux based Zaurus PDA.

      In the fall of 2000, thanks to the coming of OS X and some prodding by Godzilla (courtesy of the extremely pro-Apple movie "Godzilla 2000"), I took a look at Apple's Macs for the first time since a chance encounter in a college book store back in 1985. This time I appreciated what I saw, and fell in love. I bought an iMac, and when OS X first released, I installed it without any headaches.

      Exactly seven years after my Windows 95 nightmare began, Apple released OS X Jaguar. Again I brought an OS of great promise home to install it. This time, though, the results were very different: everything I'd hoped for for the past seven years came true.

      On December 14, 1996, Mothra resurrected a charred Apple sapling ("Mosura" 1996).
      On December 14, 2001, Mothra returned to see its fruit ("Gojira, Mosura, Kingu Ghidora: Daikaiju Soukougeki").
      OS X Jaguar: truly the Apple of Mothra's Aqua eye.

  4. Re:The executive summary by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    All in all, a rather vapid document, but at least ESR restrained himself on the asides. Funny how losing 99% of your paper wealth can make one more humble.

    ESR humble? Hah! He's by far the most arrogant, egotistical speaker I've ever heard. Every other comment was about what he did, who he spoke to, how he really started the OSS revolution. Though I largely disagree with RMS, he at least seems more interested in Free Software ideals than in patting himself on the back.

  5. biz dev definition by Call+Me+Black+Cloud · · Score: 4, Informative

    Eric Raymond, clearly impressed with his own wit, writes, "BDM Business Development Manager: fancy term for IT salespeople and IT sales managers."
    Biz dev and sales are quite different. Think strategy (biz dev) vs tactics (sales). Business development, well, develops new business. New markets, possibly new products, new partnerships. Sales executes, possibly getting into new markets but not on the level of biz dev.

  6. Re:Looking for proof. by KoolDude · · Score: 5, Informative


    Here is a Web Archive link to the MS document that *somewhat* validates the first set of Halloween documents, obtained from the Haloween FAQ.

    --
    getSexySig(); /* returns sexy signature */
  7. Re:Are you kidding? by unicron · · Score: 2, Informative

    It's not a troll. Don't think because I have a varying opinion on something that I'm just some asshole looking to start some shit.

    As for your belief, business, the one's spending the BIG cash, do have to buy their software, and they still buy Microsoft products, so I can't agree with that belief.

    --
    Finally, math books without any of that base 6 crap in them.
  8. Uh, no. by dmaxwell · · Score: 5, Informative

    Ed Muth admitted that "No. These documents do not represent an official Microsoft position or road map. They are technical analyses written by a staff engineer that represent the thoughts of one individual at one point in time. They were intended to encourage an informed internal discussion of issues by marketing and engineering middle managers." Of course they tried to make it sound as though it didn't really mean anything.

    They have since pulled the press release from their site but Microsoft did admit it was authentic document. I've read it myself from the horse's mouth on Microsoft's site.

    Here is the Wayback Machine's archive:

    http://web.archive.org/web/19990117031504/http:/ /w ww.microsoft.com/ntserver/highlights/editorletter. asp

    Is this proof enough?