Slashdot Mirror
For Microsoft, Market Dominance Isn't Enough
chemstar writes "Last summer Orlando Ayala, then the top sales executive at Microsoft Corp., sent an e-mail titled 'Microsoft Confidential' to senior managers laying out a strategy to dissuade governments across the globe from choosing cheaper alternatives to the ubiquitous Windows operating system. Ayala's e-mail told executives that if a deal involving governments or large institutions looked doomed, they were authorized to draw from a special internal fund to offer software at a steep discount, or free, if necessary. Steve Ballmer, the Microsoft chief executive, was sent a copy of the e-mail.
The memo, which focused on system software for desktop computers, specifically targeted Linux, a still small but emerging competitor. "Under NO circumstances lose against Linux," Ayala said." Perhaps that's because, as roomisigloomis writes, "Seems that MS' licensing practices are working against the company," pointing out this article which "suggests that open source, Linux and other software is actively being sought."
How can BSD be dying when it has a mascot like this?! Linux needs to get its act together if it's going to compete with the kind of hot chicks and gorgeous babes that BSD has to offer!
You just can't take Linux seriously when its fronted by losers like these. You Linux groupies need to find some sexy girls like her! I mean just look at this girl! Doesn't she make you hard? I know this little hottie floats my boat! This guy looks like he is about to cream his pants standing next to such a fox. As you can see, no man can resist this sexy little cock teaser. Even this old bearded Unix guru is apparently unable to take his eyes off her!
Join the campaign for more cute open source babes today!
I hate to make this comparison, but...
Taking control of Europe was not enough for Hittler. He wanted to control the entire world. What we have with MS, is very much the same thing. A trillion dollars is no longer enough to feed all the hungry piranhas, and that's not what it's all about either. It's the recognition and the power that comes with being "an executive at Microsoft"..
Basically, this is no longer just about an operating system. This is about a way of life. MS is deeply entrenched in many other business, and we don't even notice. While we're watching them twirl their left fist at us, their right hand is getting ready to slap us in the face.
I only hope that we're waking up to this fact early enough...
---
Death is only a state of mind.
Only it doesn't leave you much time to think about anything else.
So, if you want to have Microsoft software for free, you know what to do!
My karma ran over your dogma
It's not the price, really. Corporations and governments are willing to pay the price of Windows to ensure that they have support and stability. But the licensing of Windows -- product activation and the like -- are what's really kicking Microsoft's teeth in. Consumers are willing to overlook a lot, but not things that actively make their life harder, for no personal gain for them.
see topic
To want to beat out the competition.
Many large corporations drive prices down to crush the little guy.
--------
Free your mind.
the bigass ".NET" advertisement I got when I loaded this page. Figures. Thanks Slashdot.
I hate Microsoft as much as the next geek, but really, what do we expect from a company? Companies aim to make as much money as possible -- excluding not-for-profit & charitables -- so why should anyone be surprised that they do anything within their power to make their software as widespread as possible?
It seems to me that every time there is a posting about something else MS does, it's the same old stuff: they want more market share, just like everyone else. That's it, it should be expected by now.
Keep in mind that I am not excusing them for any unethical practices, just something that nags at me.
Maybe the EU should look into dumping charges against MS, if they offer to give it away for "free"...
Fascism starts when the efficiency of the government becomes more important than the rights of the people.
As the chair of my neighborhood gardenclub, we have been considering implementing a new server rack with either Win3k and MSSQL to track the movment and eating habits of chinch bugs. Given our modest budget, it currently looks as though we will have to forgo using MS products in favor of OSS/FS alternatives. Can I have my free software now?
Just as irrigation is the lifeblood of the Southwest, lifeblood is the soup of cannibals. -- Jack Handy
How dare a company try to increase its profits and make more money?! How dare a business try to best its competitors in the marketplace?!
I for one am disgusted and only hope that this evil is vanquished!
jack's bicycle is music to my ears
Any company with a bussness stratagy that has the words "at all costs" in it really has some f'ed up company heads. I mean think about it microsoft wants everyone on there systems cause everyone knows there is no such thing as "fre windows" especially with some of the newer business plans microsoft has been tossing around. Here ends the rambling; It is miss spelled? i dont care.
Everyday You see me is the worst day of my life -Office Space
Isn't this illegal? Here we have a convicted monopoly selling it's products at a loss to shut out a smaller competitor. Isn't that illegal?
Lesbian Nazi Hookers Abducted by UFOs and Forced Into Weight Loss Programs - -all next week on Town Talk.
After a while, we discovered that we were only being used as a tool of negotiation to get lower prices for WinCE licensing... it seems that using Linux as a disuasve weapon was effective. It seemed that they would do anything not to lose to Linux
Having fourty two stories an hour about Microsoft Isn't Enough
I'm shocked. Shocked!
a special internal fund to offer software at a steep discount, or free, if necessary
What about the support, source code, DRM crud? Sorry, but when MS says "Free" you have to look for the fine print.
Trolling is a art,
This memo demonstrates an important shift in their strategy: they are now in a position where they are competing against Linux on thedesktop, having lost many key battles on the server side. This means that, despite religious crusades and many rifts in the Open Source community, the competition between such projects as KDE, GNOME, and XFree86 has produced better products that are now able to compete on a level playing field with the Windows XP desktop. We know this only because Microsoft said so itself.
Eight years ago when I first started running Linux, I knew it wasn't ready for the desktop. During the internet gold rush of the late 1990s I knew it still wasn't ready for the desktop. But today it is. There is no turning back now - unless Microsoft manages to lock us out of our PCs they will have no chance to reverse the tide, and Windows will lose in the end.
Washington, DC: Bush announces plan to take over the world ...
Ottawa, Ont: Jean Cretien announces Canada's plan to bring peace on earth
Melbourne, Aus: Australian Prime Minister announces plan to give free beer to the world.
Pyong Yong: North Korean leader announces the plan to arm the every 3rd world dictactor with Nuclear Weapons.
Of course, if MS had charged them full price, they'd be pilloried for contributing to the "digital divide."
Stop by my site where I write about ERP systems & more
Actually, I would say market dominance _is_ enough for Microsoft. What they're doing, and what I consider a smart move, is thinking of market share as an evolving variable instead of the numbers for the current year.
Linux, for instance, is an evolving force, in the ascending part of its life curve. Microsoft is at the top of its own curve right now (some may say that started falling already) and to them the concept of "market share" now involves an evironment working against them rather than towards them.
Thus their harsh move of self-preservation. This is not really different from recent moves by the RIAA, and it's actually smarter, but it probably won't work, because the ascending side of their curve is behind them now...
Karma cannot be described by words alone.
I wonder why the focus is on GOVERNMENT accounts staying with Microsoft software? Sounds like the Feds are trying to keep Carnivore/Magic Lantern on the world's desktops. "We'll pay to keep that backdoor open!"
Random Businessman 1: "We're doomed! Only a miracle can save us now!"
Hysterical Woman: "We need Linux! Tux, where are you?? Save us!"
Random Businessman 2: "Look! Up there!"
cut to shot of Tux, soaring above city. Tux looks down, smiles and waves
Chorus of Schoolchildren: "Tux!!!!"
Yes kids, tune in next week when Tux saves the world from the evil clutches of Microsoft yet again ...
Obliteracy: Words with explosions
You wonder how people keep their jobs at these places. If you stop and think over the past three years how many "leaked" documents there have been, you would figure people with stuff to hide wouldn't write it down on paper, or in email.
Sure, it makes people think you've got something to hide if you are completely paperless, but then who doesn't? It may seem impractical, but for stuff like this, you are just plain foolish to commit it to anything other than memory.
best web host ever
If I recall correctly here in Canada at least it's illegal to sell your product below cost with the purpose of driving your competitors out of buisness. Now this is also traditionally very hard to prove expecially when you take annual licensing costs and support into the equation, and I guess the competitors would have to be some of the distro vendors (Redhat, Mandrake, etc.). Do other nations (US and European nations) have similar laws that might come into play here?
I stole this Sig
So now one of the US's foremost companies is going to try and squeeze other countries to use their system? Other countries can do little about our government's arrogance, but they sure can do something about Microsoft's!
Besides which, investing in open source allows them to grow their own in house experts to learn and take care of the software.
If brevity is the soul of wit, then how does one explain Twitter?
While I still haven't figured out why I should be outraged that Microsoft's sales force, you know, sells stuff, that bit made me laugh. Like this guy is James Bond, successfully impersonating a consultant. I've worked the KDE booth at Linux conferences, alongside teenagers who know even less about the IT business than I do -- Steve Ballmer himself could walk up to the booth and unless he was sweating and screaming, "Developers! Developers!" no one would recognize him.
I mean, do Microsoft sales people have horns and a tail? Why would anyone doubt him?
What I'm listening to now on Pandora...
This week, Steve Ballmer donated 25 million euros on licenses to Spanish govt to put Windows in schools (English ) (French), one of the places in which Linux is spreding more thanks to Linex and other projects that other places here in Spain are starting.
But as I see it, this is positive. This means they're afraid anough of Free Software that they have to give for free Windows licenses.
Seems to me the business/government market has clung to MS for the sole purposes of familiarity and ease of support. Hire any MCSE off the street and you have qualified support personell. Have a problem, call up Redmund and tell them about it.
Windows has kept essentially the same for the past few years, minus a few "enhancements" (a.k.a. extra features not many people need). This facilitates people turning their heads towards more customizeable software, where a kernel can be compiled for any given specific purpose, and only the required software runs.
Aside from the incredibly cheap software itself, the unmatched compatibility-for-purpose, and customizability make Open Source a very viable solution for previously proprietary, overpriced, "as is out of box" software. And as potential support people and developers materialize out of the mould, it's getting more and more serious consideration.
It's just plain sick of Microsoft that they would consider just giving their multi-thousand dollar software away simply to keep market share. Wonder how that would make me feel, if I were a business owner. Knowing I paid $2,500 for an enterprise server, when a friend of mine's business gets it free just so they remain a Microsoft customer. Really would make me consider the alternatives all the more, for fear of getting played like a fiddle by the monster of dominance.
Let's see ... ... ... ;P
If I can't make a better product, I'll just give it away for free and use my monopoly to have people use it
This sounds familiar
MS hasn't done this before have they?
-A.M.
Pimpin' all the Karma Hoes!
I think I'll wait until a reputable news source reports this before I overreact.
This top secret confidential memo got leaked to the International Herald Tribune, but noone else.
Uh huh, sure.
Next up on slashdot, crop circles made by crunchy peanut aliens from Uranus.
I don't need no instructions to know how to rock!!!!
Copyright © 2003 The International Herald Tribune | www.iht.com
For Microsoft, market dominance doesn't seem enough
Thomas Fuller/IHT International Herald Tribune
Wednesday, May 14, 2003
Discounts for biggest users are aimed at keeping software rivals at bay
BRUSSELS More than 90 percent of the world's personal computers run on Microsoft software. For Orlando Ayala, that was not enough.
Last summer, Ayala, then the top sales executive at Microsoft Corp., sent an e-mail titled "Microsoft Confidential" to senior managers laying out a strategy to dissuade governments across the globe from choosing cheaper alternatives to the ubiquitous Windows operating system.
Ayala's e-mail told executives that if a deal involving governments or large institutions looked doomed, they were authorized to draw from a special internal fund to offer software at a steep discount, or free, if necessary. Steve Ballmer, the Microsoft chief executive, was sent a copy of the e-mail.
The memo, which focused on system software for desktop computers, specifically targeted Linux, a still small but emerging competitor. "Under NO circumstances lose against Linux," Ayala said.
This memo as well as other e-mails and internal Microsoft documents obtained by the International Herald Tribune offer a rare glimpse into the inner workings of a company with so much cash - $43.4 billion, as of December - that it can aggressively discount its products in a bid to protect its huge market share amid the wreckage of the technology sector.
The documents show the muscle that the world's largest software company is prepared to use to protect its dominance, including a relatively benign form of corporate spying and discounts to capture "big plays" - a Microsoft term for deals involving the world's biggest clients.
Yet these sales tactics also come with risks. The covert intelligence gathering - including one case where a Microsoft employee attended a Linux trade show pretending to be a consultant to an elementary school - raises questions about whether Microsoft has pulled back from the aggressive business practices that got it into so much trouble with antitrust regulators in the 1990s.
Perhaps more importantly, certain discounts may run afoul of European market regulators, who are currently investigating claims that Microsoft violated antitrust laws.
Discounting is a normal corporate practice. But under European law, companies that hold a dominant market position, such as Microsoft, are prohibited from offering discounts that are designed to block competitors from the market.
Microsoft has been concerned with the legality of its discounts in the past, at one point consulting a London law firm on a specific discount plan.
But in an interview Wednesday, the chairman of Microsoft operations in Europe, Africa and the Middle East, Jean-Philippe Courtois, defended the use of the special fund described in Ayala's e-mail, saying it was part of a strategy to be "competitive" and "relevant" in the market for big government and educational deals.
"Linux is obviously a key competitor," Courtois said. Rivals use similar tactics, he said.
Sun Microsystems Inc., for example, "is giving away StarOffice to basically governments and schools," he said. The suite of programs runs on both Windows and Linux systems.
Courtois also said Microsoft sometimes gave away software to "very low income countries." He cited a program where Microsoft donated software in South Africa and helped train teachers to use it.
Ayala's memo says the discounting fund could be used for "developed and developing countries" but says an "initial focus" was being put on Latin America, Africa, the Middle East, India and China.
In his e-mail, Ayala focused on governments and large institutions. A separate memo obtained by the IHT shows a discounting program for corporate customers worldwide. Two days after Ayala sent his memo, Mike Sinneck, head of Microsoft's services depa
I really don't think this is so much about MS being successful, as we know it is, or about the quality of the product they produce, which we know is crap (got your latest IE security patch loaded?), but the fact that MS does it's absolute best to keep any competition from emerging. The IE/Netscape, Realaudio/Windoze Media Player, and Linux debacles all point to a monopoly that will do literally anything to avoid competing directly with other vendors. If they think you have something good, they buy your company out. If you won't sell (aka Netscape, Real Audio, and Eudora), they crush you by writing a compatable but 'extended' product and giving it out free. A company with this kind of control is unstoppable. They are now extending their reach into media (MSNBC, MSN, etc), hardware, and anything else they see as profitable. With billions to play with there aren't many industries that can survive an onslaught by MS. The government really missed the boat when they didn't break them up this time. After numerous other anti-trust infringements MS now has pretty much free reign to do as they wish.
> "Under NO circumstances lose against Linux," Ayala said.
Saying that makes it sound like the penguins have already won.
Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
and old tale about a couple of gas stations and a guy named Rockerfeller.
And those are the steps of the passive resistence:
2. ridicularize - they ridicularize the resistence as if it would avoid more people to join the movement
3. worry - they worry and notice that it is really a problem, but it could be easily avoided.
4. fight - they fight against the resistence with all its power.
5. lose - they lose the battle and assumes that they must live with the new reality.
That's the way it has always worked, from Gandhi to Luther King. All we need to do is keep living our lives with Linux (and FreeSoftware).
-=-=-=-=
I know life isn't fair, but why can't it ever be un-fair in MY favor!?
So if it's been said before it should be ignored after that? What a narrow world you must live in.
I'm not surprised at this. Microsoft has been being eroeded by linux systems for years. And with the recent advances of KDE, they could be in serious jepordy.
Linux uptime, and speed, outpreforms windows by orders of magnatiude, if Linux ever becomes "desktop ready" then Microsoft will have major problems.
At the moment hoever, linux is not desktop ready, and end user of windows could not navigate the red hat install, and all of the configurations involved with getting familar with the enviornment. This is changing...in 10 years Micorosft may have to do more than give copys of windows away.
A company i was working for recived 4 free copies of windows 2003 server.....we got our shotguns and went skeet shooting.
Desktop users may soon be doing the same thing.
Windwos...its whats for breakfast
Well, I'm assuming that when they speak of offering the software for free, they mean as in free beer, not free speech. And perhaps that is why this strategy, which is ethically questionable, will not take off. Governments may want the source to be open, and may not be impressed with Microsoft's track record with regards to some of their products. Also, one of the reasons Linux is so popular overseas is because it isn't American; it's international. Anti-U.S. sentiment and philosophical differences could make this rather anti-competitive strategy ineffective to the point of irrelevance.
The reason that Microsoft is concerned about governments is that they know that governments have the power to set de-facto standards. If a business partner sends me an unreadable document I can probably work something out with him or her. If the government demands that any electronic communication be in a particular format, that's the format that you use. What's more, nearly everyone has at least some business contact with the government. If a government switches to StarOffice/OpenOffice then you can bet that within a few years StarOffice formats will be the standard in that particular country for almost everything. It won't matter that it some ways OpenOffice isn't as good as MS Word, because it is definitely "good enough," the price is right, and it is the format that you need to use to communicate with the government.
Large institutions are a similar deal. If your University demands that you turn in your assignments in Microsoft Office formats, then you don't use WordPerfect or OpenWriter (or if you do you make sure to double check the formatting with MS Office before actually turning the assignment in. Likewise, if you supply parts to Ford Motor Company and they require that documents you submit be in MS Word format, then you don't use something else.
Microsoft can't afford to lose these big accounts. If they do their entire monopoly will start to unravel around them. It is far better business for Microsoft to give away software to these key accounts than to lose them to the competition.
Same thing with "information wants to be free". Microsoft will die. Information will be free.
-Libertarian secular transhumanist
Now I've got something to fap to. I was running out of Star Wars porno as it is and now I have yet more nerd masturbatory material to 'utilise'.
Microsoft asked a London lawyer about the legality of its discount scheme. Well, among other thing, he wrote: If any case was brought up, "we would obviously contest that assumption [that MS has a market-dominant position]". Really impressive what lawyers can think of trying to claim!
But even he had to admit that the possible determination of market-dominance should play a role in their court straegy...
Competition is a good thing for both Microsoft and OSS.
OSS causes Microsoft to lower its prices so people can afford it.
Microsoft gives "inspiration" for OSS developers to "catch up" and provide more features.
OSS will also do its own innovation for Microsoft to emulate.
IT makes everything more efficient and out standard of living goes up.
Everybody wins.
Also, most of us can easily imagine Microsoft salespeople approaching cash-poor, needy, developing nation government ministers with their "The first ones free" pitch, only to come back later when the government has set up some mission critical application and announcing "Time to pay the piper" .
"don't buy it if you don't like it." Movement or not, Linux and Windows are products. Use the one you prefer.
sulli
RTFJ.
Looks like Microsoft has lost all fear of the anti-trust implications of their actions.
I have to blame our dear president. I don't think he'd allow the Microsoft anti-trust case to go forward no matter how damning the evidence.
I like some of Bush's decisions, but he really sold out when he told DOJ's trust-busters to dismiss the Microsoft case. It was such a strong case too...
Bush has lost my 2004 vote over this alone.
Americans typically think, buy American when it comes to tech so going with Microsoft isn't too hard of a decision. But, Australians think buy Australian. So, they want an Australian OS. Which makes perfect sense. Why buy Microsoft and lower your country's GDP when you can save money, get some Aussies on board, and go open source.
Microsoft has numerous dirty tricks. But this barely merits my typical scathing that I give when it comes to Microsoft.
There is no analysis/rebuttal from ESR yet!?
He must be busy or something
- Back off man. I am a scientist
But in this case the corporation in question has a monopoly - traditionally, they should be required to play by different rules than corporations which do not.
zWhat would an EWOULDBLOCK block, if an EWOULDBLOCK could block would? -- me
Da Blog
You can't bid lower than zero! Even if Microsoft gives their software away for free, you still have to figure in the time and money you'll have to spend dealing with VBS bugs, SQL Server bugs, DRM bugs--oops, that's a feature--and so on.
I don't think this strategy is anticompetitive, since Linux is free (beer); but I also don't think it will be all that helpful for Microsoft, even in the short term.
!#@%*)anks for hanging up the phone, dear.
As a goon in the network brute squad for an enormous and paranoid company, I'm gonna say: How come all of these high level memos get out? Ok granted they've been able to keep their source code contained, but executive memos like this should be at approximitly the same sensitivity level. I could, if I were petty, ask why we should trust security and operation processes from a company that seems either not know what they are, or at least how to follow them. The information in the memo is not a great suprise to any market observer, but it could be, as experessed in other comments, legally damning.
Spyder
So what's the surprise about this? Given the recent SEC filing, there's no surprise.
A significant step will be if MS decides that Linux is enough of a presence in the low-end server market (the one they're desperately trying to enter so there is some genuine growth of the company) that they decide to forgo the double leveraging strategy of tying products like SQL server, Exchange, and perhaps some parts of .NET so tightly to Windows. You know, like come out with a Linux version of these products to gain market share for them? If Linux keeps growing, then this will happen some day.
Secondly, the variable pricing strategy of Windows and affiliated software has already been in effect overseas: it's considered so damn expensive that illicit copies are endemic. Another way of viewing it is that people willing to pay zero dollars but pay the hidden cost of enduring the risk of running illicit MS software (what that risk really costs is a matter for insurance actuaries).
Those warez users have already made their own decision, with MS out of the loop, about the discount they want and what they are willing to pay for.
Furthermore, if MS clamps down tightly on "piracy" via more sophisticated technical measures, then they may end up losing this base of warez customer that just might possibly in the future begin sending money towards Redmond after they've become addicted to MS ware.
It's all very strange.
"Provided by the management for your protection."
As a civil judgement recognized monopoly, the rules are different for Microsoft. Their actions here violate EU laws. The discounts are explicitly to hurt competitors and not to recognize internal savings. Market-dominant companies like Microsoft don't have that option legally.
Even if they give the OS away, you still have to buy all the software from them to make it do something...there are so many hooks that it would almost be impossible for M$ to not make money in some fashion on these types of deals.
Automatics are for old men
Does anyone other than me watch enough Law and Order to realize that since this has been 'printed' by the media, it's no longer admissible in court. Something along the lines of attorney-client privilege, right?
It seems awfully convenient that a reporter was able to intercept communications between Microsoft and their legal advisors.
Microsoft is dead, they just haven't smelled themselves lately...hasn't anyone told Big Steve that it is impossible to compete with FREE?
$42.3bUS (or whatever)...wow, that's a lot of money, but not even close to enough to compete, in the long run, with OSS. It's inevitable that MS closed-loop model will go the way of the Wooly Mammoth. Linux is the disruptive technology that will bring Microsoft to its knees.
never bring a twinkie to a food fight.
Ceren was 17 1/2 at the time those pics were shot (by me), and that was February 2000. So she's 20 now. Quite legal.
s.j.
http://studiousjew.blogspot.com
These products are "free" like cocaine is "free". Free for the first buy. Free for the second buy. Free as long as it takes for you to be completely addicted and dependent -- then it's a leg and an arm.
MS will not continue giving it's products away for zero cost to anyone. They will do so long enough to ensure dependency, then charge full price. If they kept on giving it away at zero cost, they'd go out of business, despite everyone using their products. That's obviously not what they want. Their plan is obviously to make governments and citizens dependent on MS software using mechanisms like the Word incompatability fiasco.
At the very least, all government agencies should require that the formats in which they store information are completely OPEN and FREELY AVAILABLE for anyone to implement.
social sciences can never use experience to verify their statemen
In the specific scenarios covered by this story, Microsoft isn't dumping the price below the competition. It is merely lowering the price to the same level as the competition, which makes sense.
And when a large corporation is lowering its prices in order to keep up, it is usually a good thing for consumers.
Oh, I can't help quoting you because everything that you said rings true
costumers, this is good news.
Just tell them that you are evaluating Linux
and Open Source software and you will get
an extra discout...
You'd proably use the same tactics in their position. They are on the edge.. Microsoft, even if it produces good software, will lose a ton of money once their stranglehold on the industry is broken. It's a chicken and egg problem.. what happens when linux gains critical mass, and the dollars start pouring into application development? Believe me, for many busniess apps, all it takes is a few very significant clients to say they want linux versions to make them change platforms.
when it used to compete against Solbourne for a hardware deal.
...watching the last Dinosaurs do everything in thier power to draw down the asteroids.
These guys are *so* missing the point that they can't even comprehend the big picture.
Well, here it is, MS-boyz. Not that it will help.
*Everything* that you hold dear about the way your company is. That's the secret. That's the gimmick.
It's not pricing that's driving organizations to OS en masse.
It's not security that's giving them your current and former customers motivation to migrate.
It's not a desire to contro thier own destinies that has governments around the globe cheering "free the source" and "All GNUs is good GNUs"
It's not the fact that your entire customer base is at, or just below the threshold of "having been put through too pain and oppression (YES!! OPRRESSION is the word!!) just from ONE vendor."
It isn't that the companys leadership is severley out of touch with the needs and sentiment of the marketplace.
It isn't that we are entering a new era when companies such as yours simply can not compete against volunteer services (i.e. Open Source / Free Software programmer-teams)
Here's the secret.
It's all of that.
The platonic archetypical Form, the essence, the very nature of software megacorp is the problem. You are losing because of WHO YOU ARE, not because of any one thing you are doing.
If you can make the change, transform your enterprise completely, great. You will still be around 10 yrs from now. Of course, you'll be just another OS/FS programmer-team, albeit a large one. And hey, a lot of us would welcome you.
But as you are, you're a dinosaur. And the more you try to be a dinosaur, the sooner you'll pull down those asteroids.
So go on. Fiddle with the licenses some more. Give your software away to anyone who suggests they're tinking of migrating to Linux/ free software. Spew more lies, obfuscation, FUD, and marketspeak into the public's ear. "Embrace extend, and extinguish" to your heart's content.
We'll raise a toast to your valiant struggle and determination to fight to the very last. It's not much as virtues go, but if it's all you got, use it.
And after the toast, we'll log back on and make some more changes to our software, publish them, and wait for feedback from our Users.
The Users know the difference between a friend and a predator.
The Users Know.
The Users Know.
In the 70's, there was a phenomenon known as, IIRC, the $30,000 coffee mug.
Essentially what happened was Hitachi was offering a much cheaper alternative to one of IBM's mainframe products, and when Hitachi salesman came by to give their bids, they'd give managers a mug with a Hitachi logo on it.Managers soon discovered that if they had this mug on their desk when the IBM saleman came in, said IBM salesman would lower the price of the competing product by $30,000. Hence the $30,000 coffee mug.
We all know what happened to IBM's market leading position shortly after this. And now Microsoft is on the same path.
In fact, it looks like they're quite desperate. In Ghandi's "first they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win", we're clearly well into the "they fight you stage".
"Then you win" is not far behind...
Follow the adventures of the new wandering jews
The Norwegian government resigned last year from their deal with Microsoft for delivering software to the whole administration to look at alternatives. Linux was mentioned as one of the possible ways to go.
Last week Steve Ballmer visited to have a meeting with the Minister of Administration. The most published result from the talk was that the government get disclosure of the source code. And probably, according to this, got an opportunity to renegotiate for a better deal.
Just an example. But what it means is that Linux and Open Source gives (large) organizations a hand in negotiating price and conditions with Microsoft. I'm not sure if that means anything to the Open Source Movement at all.
I'm not even sure if that's good for Open Source. Expensive and closed Microsoft is good for OSS, because that means Linux et al is where to go for open systems. If large corporations (in Norway, the government, military and one large corporation now has access to Microsofts source code) can get to the insides, that means a lot of resources that could go to the public good is kept locked up by MS anyway.
So we started a policy that banned XP for "security reasons" and made a sweet deal with Red Hat. Unless you had a valid reason to use an XP product, you used Win2K or Linux. Linux meant that we could use older machines on our server farms and pay virtually nothing because, funny enough, Red Hat gave us a site license for support. Not that we use it (or need to) very much.
Suddenly, Microsoft "produced" a disk with Product activation disabled (sort of, it's kind of complicated), but claimed all kinds of voodoo like it had a copy protection so complex, we couldn't burn a new one from the master... even sector-by-sector copying. Bollocks. You could use any XP disk, just as long as you followed the directions MS gave us for the "master CD." Now we have a lot of the CDs all over the place, with a site key (and no, I won't give it to you, use Linux and be free) and the "process" to make it work legally by our contract. It took them two years to backpedal that far.
It's weird, because for so long, Windows was essentially "free" (although, not legally) because until WinXP, more than half the people I knew had "borrowed" an OS CD from "somewhere." Microsoft knew that (I mean, come on), and like a drug pusher, made sure the buyer was hooked before they started charging (my proof is how they made MSIE a dominant browser over Netscape). But it's not that easy anymore. Linux desktops are getting better and better, and while Windows is easier to use for the most part, it's lack of flexibility, anti-customer anticompetitive stance, and their brazen arrogance in the field is really dulling their blade.
But in this case, I can't fault them for trying to give away freebies, I mean, trade shows do that all the time. But what we should really be wary of is when they get politics involved, and claim stuff like DeCSS is proof that Linux should be banned in the US or something equally as stupid to us techies, but is all greek to your average politician who could be $wayed by $ome other thing$...
__________________________________________________
www. - where else can you get blogged to death?
What support? MS requires you to PAY for technical support. Their web-site is extremely user-unfriendly, a real PITA to get useful information out of. In the end, if you want support for Microsoft software, you pay for it in the form of a Full-time Employee who supports your network, or by buying "Per Incident" support from MS.
What stability? There's a new "Security Patch" issued every two days that must be thoroughly tested to insure that it doesn't bring the entire office down in flames. (See story about Win 2k/XP patch from last month that made even the fastest machines crawl.)
While OSS doesn't eliminate the need to hire an FTE to support your network, it does drastically reduce your licensing expenses. In our office we just build the cost of licenses for MS software in the price of any PC we buy because otherwise the departments would bitch a blue streak about how much "extra" all that "Included" software costs them. (I know this because we used to break it down for them, and three times annually some manager would pitch a bitch about how "IT Should Be Paying For My Licensing Costs".)
Who did what now?
IIRC, corporations are required by law to provide the best return possible for their shareholders. By sharply discounting or giving away their products, are they not intentionally making themselves less profitable? Could Microsoft shareholders not sue them?
This space left intentionally blank.
Disclaimer: I'm an IT consultant for a small business using Access as its only DB.
I've currently got a project that is easily 2 months overdue because of stupid bugs in Access. The worst is this one: if one of the databases becomes corrupted, all of the databases which synchronize with that DB will become corrupted as well. I've actually witnessed databases losing records during a synchronize because some stupid jerk of a programmer at MS thought that the good thing to do would be to delete records to make the tables match. So instead of the good copy filling in missing records in the bad copy, just the opposite happens - good records get deleted from the good copy, and now both copies are bad.
At this point, it simply doesn't matter if Microsoft gives its software away - consultants like myself are going to charge you so much for working with their bit-trash that you won't be reaping any savings. Honestly, there's a reason why I charge more for MS support, and it's not because I'm greedy, but rather, because I recognize the headaches that it presents to the average developer.
Quite frankly, I'm getting sick and tired of explaining to my customers that the reason why they're losing thousands of dollars a day in downtime and lost data is precisely because they chose to use Microsoft software. Get clue! - Microsoft does not care what happens to your data; they've already got your money, stupid! .
The society for a thought-free internet welcomes you.
Not that I know the law or anything.
This page was generated by a Barrel of Circus Midgets, and that is the way I like it!!!
These type of leaks traditionally occur around Halloween, don't they?
To a Lisp hacker, XML is S-expressions in drag.
Do you not realize that Oracle and SUN do the very same thing? That HP does with HP-UX? Apparently it is only news if MS does it... LOL.
What the hell would Linux users (myself one) have to bitch/post/whine about if MS didn't exist? Hell, there'd be nothing on theRegister, and 1/5 of the slashdot traffic would disappear... Sad but true.
Loading...
On the licensing front, it's more like the mask is off. M$'s recent licensing was every bit as bad as the "zealots" and other free software advocates have said it would be all along. The Next Generation looks even worse than all but the most paranoid visions could predict. There, bare faced, is the power hungry monster we all worried about. It's not easy to force that on forgien governments and others who have considered things.
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAH-HAAAAAAAAAAA!
As always, someone does something stupid. Alienates their clients, and then expects to keep their monopoly too.
... if you're in a position to help increase Linux' piece of the market, use it! I recently started a new job at a company running virtually all MS kit, but soon realised they were far from happy about the cost of renewing licenses and keeping tag of all their paperwork to prove they'd bought everything.
;-)
;-) I've never tried the Linux exchange alternatives, but I'd be interested to hear of anyone who's done this...
There was a glimmer of hope though, a couple of rack-mount linux boxes sitting idle. It was obvious that someone had attempted to set up some services at some point, but given up I presume so they were mostly badly configured or just plain broken. So I set to work in my (brief periods of) spare time. Samba, named, squid, apache, dhcpd, PHP, MySQL, iptables and some other bits and bobs later and just about everyone was impressed at how well they intgrated with the rest of the network. They actually make it much easier to manage the hundreds of Win98/2K PCs in use around the place! In fact, all server replacements/upgrades and additions will now be Linux boxes (currently changing all printing servers over too). I'm no hairy-chinned guru; so if I can manage this, I'm sure plenty of others (especially here) could take some time out to do some good
The only hurdle is Exchange, although I'm sure the management would be thrilled to find a "Free" replacement without the quota limits (the version in use has a limit on the amount of disk space that can be used for mail storage, apparently you can pay more for a version with the FILESIZE_LIMIT=xxx constant set to -1
Can't see the desktops changing over to KDE or Gnome, since the software just isn't available for our needs, but in the server room, MS is simply an innefficient and unnecessary expense.
Code, Hardware, stuff like that.
Cool! Now throw in some comedy, action, music, sex, plot and special effects in accordance with the formula and we have a box office hit!
Let's call it Firebird.
At first glance, this looks like an egregious violation of most anti-trust laws. But digging a little deeper, one must consider that 'Linux', although a competitor of sorts', is not monetarily infringed by Microsoft's actions. 'Linux' doesn't lose revenue by Microsoft taking 'Linux' marketshare. IANAL, but I think anti-trust infringement requires either competitors or customers harmed, generally monetarily for an valid infraction to noted.
Now if RedHat, a competitor who could be monetarily harmed, were to complain, Microsoft could be held in violation of anti-trust laws
...remind the potential Microsoft client of their one major innovation. The Blue Screen of Death.
All I want is a kind word, a warm bed and unlimited power.
They at least know Linux IS a threat to them. This has been said 1,000,000 here so I won't go further but another point I will make is that you would think the same Government in the USA that may be getting free software from Microsoft due to the competition of Linux would also say Microsoft is not a threat. It proves, once again, that competition is good and I cannot believe the government would not try and give technoligies every advantage such as Linux more help by seeing MS is a monopoly, considering THEY may get free software out of it.
Not to mention, if MS can afford to give away their software for free, there has to be some anti-trust involved here. I though there were laws stopping a huge company from selling their products at a loss, or even free, to stop the competiton?
"If you are a dreamer, a wisher, a liar, A hope-er, a pray-er, a magic bean buyer
Some say this is dumping -- selling their product below cost just to push out a smaller competitor. Sure, it fits that definition, but Microsoft is lowering its price to that of a competitor who is also selling below cost. Alan Cox's labor alone probably ads up to more than a penny on the two debian machines I have right now which would be two more pennies than I spent on their software. (Aside, if each of us sent Alan a penny for each of our servers, how much money would he have?)
Some are calling this just another unfair tactic, losing money to maintain marketshare. Well, maybe it is, but isn't that what M$ is doing with the XBox? Rumor has it that Sony did it with the PS2 at least when it came out. Numerous other business models do this as well. Maybe Microsoft is turning to a business model where the software is free (under certain circumstances) and they earn their money on the support calls and Must Consult Someone Else certifications? Isn't that the business model all the free software people advocate?
I don't like Microsoft's history or how they do business, but I'm racking my brains here to find a way that they're evil and my favorite business OS, Linux, is good. All I'm coming up with is either ways to kill Linux accidently or ways that this is a legit thing to do.
Perhaps there's something to do with how the prices are different? Can it be proven discriminatory, or is it along the same lines as airline seat price differences?
The best I have is that foreign governments can prohibit or tariff Microsoft OS imports that are under priced because they're being dumped-- when and only when they have local developers working on Linux and consider that flavor to be domestic. Much like the US is doing (illegally due to WTO agreements) with steel.
Microsoft was evil, in my opinion, when they released IE for free against Netscape's paid-for product. Why is free as in beer Linux good when it's apparently forcing Microsoft to give their OS away for free? Aside from brand hatred of Microsoft, why do I want Linux to succeed? Simply because I can and have modified the source code (but that gets back to it being Free as in libre which I think should stay out of this argument).
If it's reasonable to cast licensing paranoia aside for a moment, Microsoft appears to be offering those who cannot afford their software the ability to get upgrades for free without having to pay for migrating proprietary code to the Linux platform. If I replaced "Microsoft" with another business name, that would be A Good Thing.
Can we write a law that refers to the Microsoft business entity specifically and prohibits them from "selling" their product at a loss as punishment for prior practices?
It is called dumping.
It would be hard to prove giving permission to use has a cost above $0.
You can freely use the above statement. Didn't cost me much to do that did it?
Yes. In fact, the first article said that Sun has been giving StarOffice to schools. But that doesn't make what MS is doing right.
From the article I mentioned: Discounting is a normal corporate practice. But underEuropean law, companies that hold a dominant market position, such as Microsoft, are prohibited from offering discounts that are designed to block competitors fromthe market. And that is the reason for the MS bashing. StarOffice hardly has a dominant market position, you know.
They're protecting their market position in the face of a potential competitor. I wonder how many Vacuum Tube manufacturers scoffed at the transistor when it first came out. Where are they now? Micro$oft is correctly seeing Linux as a threat to their long term OS dominance. Their product may not be too great, but neither was VHS compared to Beta and where is Beta these days? M$ knows how to market...and maybe the OS/Linux community needs to learn how to also!
World domination!
For such things like an office application? If the government REALLY wanted to help stop the monopoly of MS without shutting them down, perhaps an internation standard should be set for word processing documents etc. that governments use exclusivly. This way, others could compete with MS in the office and MS would have to implement these standards thus allowing competiton.
Perhaps it's wishful thinking, and I just don't see it ever happening, but it would be nice to set a standard, updated every year, that people would prefer. Call it the Unified Office Architecture or something.
"If you are a dreamer, a wisher, a liar, A hope-er, a pray-er, a magic bean buyer
You're not fucking kidding. I can see that guy's crotch outlined against his tight, tight outfit.
Failure would be even more costly then, suicides etc..
What do they have against competition anyway? are they so scared they will actually have to listen to their customers and actually take notice of what others are doing? no more churn out what the heck we want.
I believe in the long run (the very long run) Microsoft will be forced to become purely a services company. Software will eventually only have "use value" and no longer fake "sale value" as Eric S. Raymond puts it. As a services company they may survive, but not without strong competition from even the little guys. They know that if they can no longer convince people to buy their software they will have to sell themselves out for services, which they know will bring a far lower revenue stream and inability to become a monopoly.
Developers: We can use your help.
On the other hand, for people who are ready to learn some new things (just like they had to do with Windows when they first saw it), Linux has been ready for the desktop for years.
Escher was the first MC and Giger invented the HR department.
We're in the middle of a nasty registered-mail war with them about licencing of software.
As a result, more and more of us are moving to Linux (developers can run whatever they want on their machines, so long as they get the job done). No licencing hassles, and no software-asset-management hassles.
In related news, an internal memo from Microsoft was released today that confirmed Microsoft is aware that Linux exists and that it is a competitor.
"We know," said Microsoft company spokesman Bob Chambers.
Slashdot readers collectively said "AHA!" and then proceeded to shake their heads when told tha Microsoft would try to compete with other products.
"We just can't believe it," said Jeff Nerdmeier, an avid Slashdot reader. "That Microsoft would try to compete in the marketplace is just amazing to us. Why they don't just give everything away, well, we don't understand it."
When Nerdmeier was told that Microsoft might try to compete by price-cutting and free installations, he further stated: "This is unprecedented. No other company in any industry has ever done something like this. We're shocked."
Also in the news today, Slashdot readers were amazed to learn that the United States is a capitalist nation and that their assertions that an entire industry should survive solely on the basis of services rendered in support of what otherwise should only be free, open products, some regard as dogmatic, highly political, and even quasi-religious.
In related news, scientists revealed a study today stating that Linus Torvalds is a human being, not a God. Slashdot readers formed lynch-mobs in response, vowing to "git them anti-Linux bastards".
Chr0m0Dr0m!C
Comment removed based on user account deletion
SCO Suspends Distribution of Linux Pending Intellectual Property Clarification;
Read it
here
I see a restraining order in your future
"I'd rather be a lightning rod than a seismometer." -Ken Kesey
Much appreciated. Maybe we should nominate Princess Leia to be The Official New BSD Babe! Who's with me?!
oh, RIGHT, and all of Microsoft's past transgressions were under a Republican White House, too?
I never could figure out why microsoft didn't put out a linux distro too. I mean, they'd still be able to sell it, and they could promote standards and make it the only distro that can emulate windows (maybe not only, but they sure as hell could do a better job than anyone else). Plus they would have complete control of the market, if they managed to sell it, which I'm sure they could. They usually just buy their competition, but here they're choosing to fight. Like it's a point of pride that they can make everyone use one product. I dunno. Just my thoughts.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Ok granted they've been able to keep their source code contained, but executive memos like this should be at approximitly the same sensitivity level.
Every time someone successfully breaks into the source code repository at Microsoft, their brains melt. It's a very effective strategy - the source code equivalent of the Medusa. Only specially trained MS developers can bear to look at the code for any length of time and even then, the constant barage of marketing material renders them useless fairly quickly. Those developers who can't stay the course end up as Soylent Green for the canteen.
I've been told that Microsoft already employs about 140 CISSP certified individuals. Of course this does not explain these memo leaks, or for that matter, why the Microsoft "Services for Unix" product does not include support for ssh keys making it effectively useless. My guess is that they're too busy working on iLoo designs, i.e. redifining what "sticky keys" means.
But last I checked, none of them are civil judgement recognized monopolist companies, publicly traded for-profit entities. There is a difference between checkbook diplomacy for governments and monopolistic behavior for corporations.
You wouldn't happen to be a Farker, perchance?
Note to M1-ers: a curt but otherwise insightful message is not "Flamebait" or "Troll".
Why do they need to draw from a special
internal fund to give their products
away for free?
Ansi's and stupid tricks!
- Your Name
- Your Email Address
- Your Phone Number
- Your Gender
- Your Birthdate
You need this, so that you can login to the open licenses website and aquire your serial numbers. You need to repeat this activity for every new open license that you buy. It's WORSE than the damn license activation in Windows. In addition, I've noticed that you now need to license individual services in Windows Server 2003 (specifically, the Terminal Services service), and then you get to use your Passport account to add "client access licenses" to it. It's no wonder that people are beginning to choose Linux, where you only need to install XFree86-Server and go to work, and never have to worry about having too many clients accessing it at the same time...The wheel is turning, but the hamster is dead.
For Microsoft, Market Dominance Isn't Enough
but your entire article is about how microsoft wants to increase its market...
where were you educated?
The British were not willing to kill unarmed Indians forever.
Americans were not willing to see blacks attacked with police dogs and fire hoses forever.
Germans had no problem with killing and enslaving the "lesser races", and did so till they ran out of bullets.
Soviets had no problem with putting "dissidents" into concentration camps in Siberia, and did so till it was no longer economically viable.
obviously a typo, should be Ballmer Blows Gates.
All they are doing is matching the price of the software they are competing against, how is that dumping exactly ?
Just remember to take off your suspenders and at least trim your beard...
-Zipwow
(seemed fitting while we're throwing around sterotypes)
I don't know which is more depressing, that 2/3 didn't care enough to vote, or that 1/2 of those that did are crazy.
Ah, but the only sex that comes to mind is MS screwing some other business it has tied down. And the B&D would push it overy any MPAA guidelines.
-Rusty
You never know...
IANAL, but I do remember my college political economics class. This is predatory pricing. It is illegal in the US for a monopoly to engage in this behavior, especially when they are already under court order. However, when dealing with overseas governments, the US law may not apply.
The only serious question left is how far the US Government will go to prop M$ up. Will they pull a rescue like they did for Chrysler? Will they step up government buying and force that garbage on offices and schools? Will they make Next Generation laws? The rest of the world might wriggle free, but there are many unAmerican things M$ can get done here before they go away. I think they should be alowed to fail like so many of the software companies they ruined and so many telcoms that have gone under. The ideological fight between TIAA and real free market advocates will be something for all to see.
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
Maybe microdot.org -- oops, sorry, someone's sitting on it. You should go make them an offer for the domain!
Hey, good news. microslash.org is available. Here's your chance to become famous! If macslash.org can do it, so can you. Unfortunately, you might have to load up a linux server to run the slashcode, but it won't be the first time a Windows-centric site was run by a Linux box. I'm sure no one will notice...
Will make mistakes like this a thing of the past.. Since the email will expire and cant be read outsde the company or printed or viewed without your secret decoder ring...
Though i still wonder if there are issues related to 'shreadding' of documents..
Documents MUST be preserved and producable to the courts on demand..
---- Booth was a patriot ----
We should publish this in as many places as possible so that noone make a fair deal with M$ after all now as an IT manager you know if you want 90% off all your windows licenses just tell the M$ sales rep that you are seriously considering swiching to linux or *BSD for all your desktops and servers. This is great M$ either looses money hand over fist handing out free copies of their software or they have to give up this anti-competitive strategy. Either way they just lost this little battle.
Repeal the 17th Amendment TODAY! Also Please Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
If someone asks questions, then the Open Source thing-to-do is answer (you know - be open with the individual).
Reading that quote makes me assume that the MS approach is different...
This is not my sig.
And I promise I won't cum in your mouth.
We always knew what windows was worth and that the high costs of ownership were hard to justify. I like seeing people say it.
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
Linux has been doing this for years!
/own/ tactics. What if MS were to start giving the OS away free to everyone? (Like Sun has started doing in a limited way) What would you say then?
Give it away free, easiest way to cut into other's market share. Netscape and IE BOTH did it (Netscape was NEVER not available for free, atleast it never was to me)
You can't really complain about someone picking up on your
"You can't do that! Because, uh... were doing that and then we wouldn't be able to compete.. er..."
And if Linux is allowed to have lobby groups and SIGs that lobby educational and government entities on the suposed benefits of using "Open source only", why not Microsoft doing the opposite? I mean you have to expect it! Instead we get more whining.
Linux has set up a huge and market dangerous precident by giving away so much functionality for free. If that's the way Sun (partially already), Microsoft (also partially already) and Apple all go over the next few years, where will that leave Linux?
When you set up unorthodox battle rules, don't be suprised when your enemy follows your tactics...
Contrary to popular belief, coding is not all free blow-jobs and beer. Those things cost MONEY!
So when is a MS going to have Redhat Linux written on the box as one of the products that qualifies you for the cheaper "Upgrade" version?
Bad boys rape our young girls but Violet gives willingly.
Cameltoe? Huh?!?!
This is more like it.
is more than just NT 4. There's also NT3.51, that only I seem to remember. 2000 is really NT5, and XP is really NT5.1.
Software installation kicks ass in Linux. My debian boxes can get all the software it needs online. A single command (or three clicks in gnome-apt) can install/remove nearly any program I know of. If you mean installation of commercial programs, Microsoft seems to have the advantage because of autorun(a security hazard) and not having broken binary compatbility (in theory, try running a V4W app in NT5).
Put the source onto disc with a Makefile and an optional tcl/tk installer. It'll work a decade from now.
You can't judge a book by the way it wears its hair.
Hehehe,
Im sure she's quie a le-gal target
(Sorry couldn't help my self)
but once again I'm at my usuall dillema, the problem is not to locate but to catch the target in a way that does not involve me doing time
Umm, isn't the OpenOffice Team a separate entity from Sun?? I know they started with the STAROffice source, but I didn't know they were part of Sun.
Oh, that's right!!! Sun can give away OpenOffice for free, as it's not theirs!! I can't wait to download OpenOffice from Microsoft's servers... I mean, Sun gives it away, so could Microsoft. The difference is, OpenOffice (no matter who owns them) is freely available for download, whereas the crap that is Office is not. If I have to pay $300-$600 dollars for a product, and someone else only pays $0-$100 for an indentical product then, you may say I didn't lobby hard enough, but I call bullshit. Not only will I not do business with the company with such practices, but I will actively try to discourage anyone from doing business with them as well, for it appears to me that said company is engaging in what I term "ripping off segments of customers". If they think product is worth XX to some people, but only worth X less than XX to others, well, screw them. I don't care if they give volume discounts, that would be understandable. But, as another poster said, if you paid full price for a product, and someone else got it free, just because they didn't want it, or were considering something else, you'd be a little upset.
For those who describe their systems as 'boxen', do you order multiple 'boxen' of corn flakes also?
Just because you use an OPEN FORMAT to create your documents in doesn't mean that anyone can view them. There's this thing called encryption. There's even this free software program called GPG which will encrypt things for you, though I'm sure the government has better encryption. OPEN vs. proprietary data formats is completely irrelevant to how secure you can make your data.
social sciences can never use experience to verify their statemen
--there's another side to him, I just heard of it last year. this is a quote from gandhis autobiography.
"Among the many misdeeds of British rule in India, history will look upon
the Act depriving a whole nation of arms as the blackest."
Make of it as you will. What I make of it is (have to admit I have not read the book so I invite a correction from anyone who has, if applicable),is that non violence is kinda of where it's at to resist with when you've already been disarmed. And of course, it depends on the circumstances, some beefs deserve non violence,passive resistance, but IMO, other beefs require a more active sort of resistance.
Speaking as an older civil rights marcher, then on to anti scam war and anti slavery draft protests, I think both techniques have their times and places. The correct tool for the job idea.
MS' IE is part of their file-system browser. And whether or not it comes with Win2k, you ARE being charged for it in the cost of any MS OS you buy, or any OEM PC you buy which has an MS OS on it. Moron.
social sciences can never use experience to verify their statemen
I repeat myself when under stress I repeat myself when under stress I repeat myself when under stress I repeat myself when under stress I repeat!
K-Meleon (mozilla-based, I believe) renders web-pages much faster than IE5/6, and can launch as fast as IE5/6 if you use some preloading trick like IE5/6 use.
social sciences can never use experience to verify their statemen
Such is business, where the survival of the fittest and smartest determines who lives. Linux is being used by many companies, some with great success. But I think Microsoft will continue to have a monopoly for quite some time, though certainly not for product superiority, just smart and shrewd business tactics.
What O'Rourke and Brix describe is not just "disguising" their association with Microsoft, but is in reality an outright unethical fraud.
Kinda like these characters?
Or do you perhaps approve of the deception in this case (maybe because it's so richly deserved)?
Edith Keeler Must Die
How dare we hate that company and hope ill will for it. How dare we want to prove to the the slavering Microphants that Microsoft takes Linux seriously. That like with DR-DOS their internal view of Linux is that's it's a serious industrial platform, unlike their public stance that's it's an unworkable double plus ungood cancer kept running by hobbyists with duct tape.
How dare we decide to hate Microsoft. We should love our master. Ingrates!
-pyrrho
those closed source voting machines? here in georgia despite both exit polling and pre polling showing otherwise, and a lot of poll day "glitches" that about disappeared from the news as fast as they were reported, we had a huge turnaround in which party become dominant. Biggest upsets since civil war days. Yes, just coincidental we were the first entire state to use the computer voting machines.
I really doubt the US vote is relevant anymore. If it needs to be "fixed" at any level, it can happen now, and no one can find out if it was. We are being presented with "trust, but no verify".
Of course, the *real* reason MS wants to make sure governments have their software has nothing to do with making money, and everything to do with the NSA having back doors into every government's data!
Until now, that is. While helping my 16-year-old son (also an avid Slashdot reader) do research for a term paper on technology and journalism, I stumbled across some information that made me change my views about Slashdot completely. In a nutshell: Slashdot, and more accurately, its parent company VA Software, has deep and mutually influential ties to the Microsoft Corporation. In fact, Slashdot's own editors are paid (albeit indirectly) out of the coffers of Microsoft.
Yes. It's hard to believe. At first I couldn't believe it. But a few simple Google searches and 45 minutes' research on Lexis-Nexis (as well as a couple of phone calls to a friend of mine at the SEC) revealed the following:
At first I was more amused than shocked; I mean, the technology industry is notoriously incestuous and its leaders, even those who are in competition, often sit on the same boards and are members of the same organizations. So what if a few board members of Slashdot's parent company are also directors of a company funded by Microsoft? Well, it gets more interesting.
As it turns out, in May of 1999, VA Software submitted to the SEC Form 5506-D, Application for Direct Non-Ownership Subsidization. This is the form that a corporation will submit to the SEC when it wants to directly fund a subsidiary from its own parent corporation. (It's basically a tax shelter for companies with a lot of subsidiaries) The application was approved in July 1999. The applicant name? OSDN. In other words, Form 5506-D basically eliminated the middleman between OSDN and Murberry-Slocomb. Following the money, I now saw that OSDN was being funded directly from an infusion of captal that Murberry-Slocomb has receved from Microsoft!
Weird. I know. But what does this all mean? Honestly I have no idea. I'm not the custodian of any privileged information. A look at VA Software's web site and a Google search is all anyone needs to find the same information that I found. Are Slashdot's staff being paid through Microsoft? I sincerely hope not. But the facts are there and it sure looks like it. More importantly, what does this mean for the future of Slashdot? Can any grain of objectivity or journalistic ethics be preserved? What happens when the company you are bashing, nay, the very company that you preach the loudest against, Microsoft, is the same company that signs your paycheck? Could there be a deeper link still? Who knows. As far as I'm concerned, I'll never look at Slashdot the same way, ever again.
I am as big a linux fan as anyone but do you honestly think that Microsoft's survival is at stake here? Highly doubtful, IMHO.
Think about it. You have one of the top five largest corporations in the WORLD (market cap). Let me repeat that: in the world. That company is worth $275 billion as of today. Cash reserves on-hand are $46 billion. In cash. As in, "Wow, Steve! Our statement is huge this month!". Think of how many hundred dollar bills that is. Microsoft employs over 50,000 people directly and, no doubt, hundreds of thousands more indirectly through consulting, help desk, services, and other software/services.
In other words, they are big, important, and so-far, very very smart. Oh yea, and don't forget rich.
Now I know Linux is a good OS (I use it!) and I am sure there are many areas where it is the *best* choice for an OS....but the idea of Linux alone "bringing down" Microsoft is suspect at best. There is much more that must go into a product (OS, Office, or otherwise) other than good programming, better technology, or the "right" philosophy behind building your product. It takes much more than that -- and Microsoft has all of those things. Linux does not. I'm not passing judgement as I am an avid user of Linux though I am stating fact. If you think that Redhat, IBM, SCO, or whoever is the flavor of the month can provide all of the "services" Microsoft can (and don't forget Marketing, PR, Lobbying, R&D, Investment capital, standards setting, and other functions that any large multi-national company must have to flourish) then I say to you ------------
Why has Microsoft been so successful over the past 20 years? Could it be because they are good at the things I mentioned above?
The point is: Microsoft is here, in one form or another, for a very very long time (unless the govt breaks them up). Their "survival" is far from at-risk, to say the least.
I have such an incredible hard on over this 17 year old ass.
--they already gave you the IPO money,it's yours, free loot, cool! So isn't it a good deal for you to just now buy back all your shares at that one dollar price so you don't have to deal with stock holders any more? Or are you just trying to keep selling more shares to live on while you do R&D?
They have every reason to believe that any further legal judgements against them will take the same form and incur the same kind of penalty. Furthermore they have every reason to believe that the current (undoubtedly well paid off one way or another) administration will be reluctant to even take them to court again.
So, MS may be a monopoly and the rules may be different. But they can, do and should feel free to do what they like. Welcome to corporate America.
There's a typo on the title... s/market/world
It's a whore's market. In most cases, lowest bid wins. There are exceptions (DOD, I am sure) but for the most part, governments are primarily looking at price.
They demand cheap. That's it. That's the formula to getting the government's business (any government). Got the cheapest product that will get the job done? Great, now if you're the lower bid, you'll get the business.
Microsoft isn't stupid. They can play in a whore's market too. With the margins they have on their products, hell, they can practically give it away and still make money.
Ever wondered about those $10 printers at Future Shop?
How likely is it they cost under $10 to get from Malysia to your home?
Not likely. But they get away with it through the magic of rebates. Sell the printer for $60 to Future Shop, they sell it to you at cost (pretty much), then HP/Apollo/Epson/whoever give you a $50 rebate.
Since the government still gets all their coveted taxes, they're more than happy to play along.
If you could be told what you can see or read, then it follows that you could be told what to say or think - BoC
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Not only was the original Sherman Anti-trust act passed under a Republican administration, the largest breakup after Standard Oil, the breakup of AT&T, took place during a Republican Administration.
One of the biggest mistakes people make is that it is the Republican party which has been infiltrated by the controlling powers of this nation, this is completely untrue.
The infilitration began with the democratic party. Why is a Rockafeller a democrat? Kennedy? Roosevelt?
The reality is the upper classes long ago decided it was in their best interest to adopt populist principles in order to appease the masses. Truly impoverished people are the soldiers of a future revolution.
The democrat/republican system we have today just seeks to blind the truth, nothing more. Don't fall into that partisan trap.
I don't read or respond to AC posts
this is a rather interesting legal situation, one I don't know the answer to, I am thinking though, that if a corporation has a published price, offered to the public at large, then sells below cost to someone else, then the question to ask is "does anyone else have the right to that same lower price?" The reverse is clearly illegal, they can't publish a price then charge you more for it.
Think about it, I walk into the hardware store and buy some tool, it has a price on it,I go to the check out counter. The guy in front of me has the same tool, the clerk and the guy wink at each other, he walks out with the tool and has paid a penny or zero. If it was you, what would you say to the clerk or manager then?
I really don't know any case law on that, but I'm sure it exists. "Dumping" as has been mentioned is illegal, I think those laws apply to the corporation itself and not to any of it's competitors prices, just their own cost of production, AFAIK. I know they can set any price they want, just wonder about the published price angle to it.
This was only Slashworthy a little over 4 months ago... http://opensource.org/halloween/halloween8.php was posted on the Open Source Initiative on January 2.
Signature.
So unless you're trying to avoid/evade/confuse the point, civil judgement recognized monopolist Microsoft is using software pricing to try and harm it's competitor Linux which is a violation of EU law.
Lost amongst all of the discussion about Microsoft's tactics is a realization that this kind of story may vanish in six to nine months, when Microsoft's Rights Management Server begins selling (and is used by Microsoft itself, no doubt).
Microsoft's RMS, in conjunction with Outlook, would prevent emails from being forwarded or printed by individuals who had not been preapproved by the sender. (And methods like "Print Screen" don't work, either.) Obviously, this becaomes even harder to crack once Palladium/NGSCB takes effect in 2005.
It was interesting listening to the NGSCB presentations at WinHEC. All I heard were MS employees describing how NGSCB would prevent company secrets from being leaked. Given the context of this story, is that a good or bad thing?
MS violates anti-trust laws because they know that they can get away with it.
The only politicians who acutally want to have fair compitition (enforce anti-trust laws) are dismissed as anti-business wackos...
"I'll have a Guinness, no wait, make that a Coors Light" -Grad student I work with, who shall remain anonymous...
Rumor is wrong. So sayeth the Gord.
Lawrence Person (lawrencepersonh@gmailh.com (remove all "h"s to mail)
http://www.lawrenceperson.com/
How does this hurt anyone other than microsoft? Linux as an OS isn't going away because of this right? I'm sorry I don't understand how anyone here on slashdot or in any government thinks that they have the right to decide how microsoft dispenses with it's property. If Bill G. wants to give away his fortune dollar by dollar who the hell are we to tell him he can't?
Seriously, to think that that barely-pubescent Avril wanna-be is a babe?? Keerist man! Just go back to your Perl code and pr0n, you freak!
The REAL jabber has the user id: 13196
What you do today will cost you a day of your life
Someone at that show knew exactly what kind of bait to put out. How many geeks who never thought of going to a show like that are sighning up right now to go to the next one, just to go to the BSD booth.
One serious question: after you have the geek at the booth, how do you switch thier mind from the bait to the product?
Great people don't need people to complete them, great people complete other people. -- Matthew Pawlikowski.
...Linux is coming along very nicely. I've dabbled with it in the past, but was never able to get it to do much of anything useful. A few weeks ago I set up a Redhat 9 box, and was quite pleased to find it was within my modest capabilities to set it up as an SMB file and print server and all kinds of other fun stuff from within gnome. Once I saw that I could get the damn thing to be USEFUL, I developed enough interest to start checking things out from a terminal window, reading man pages, and all that fun stuff those slightly geekier than I have enjoyed for years. The point I am trying to make is the relatively minor ease of use improvement pushed me over the edge from being an MS only guy to a guy that is going to be deploying Linux file servers at client sites instead of Win2k servers. Might even float the idea for desktops to some folks.... With each successive ease of use improvement, more people will reach the same point, and Linux usage will grow. MS is rightfully scared shitless about it. Giving away their product isn't going to help them in the long run...all it will do is lower the perceived value of it. I am no longer a doubter. Hats off and many thanks to those that have contributed to make Linux what it is.
If the companies, not just M$ want to begin to set prices dynamically then end users should begin sharing/comparing contracts and using that info to leverage a better deal.
.02 cheaper we'd be all over them for a reduction, and every other big corp would do the same...
Believe me if our company could point to someone else getting it
We had a similar problem with salaries, the new policy does away with salary ranges and makes everything negotiable. It worked for them for a while, now we just sit down monthly and compare salaries, bonuses, and what someone else has managed to negotiate the boss out of in a tight spot...
errr....umm...*whooosh* *whoosh* Is this thing on ?
thats what palladium (or whatever its current name) is for. vendor lockin. then they charge whatever they want. (yes, i know it will be optional at first, then "optional", then really locked in)
hmm... mark of the beast? kinda feels like it...
Opening = raised eyebrow + "not quite". ex: Redhat.
Competing not on wares, but service/support. (From my perspective, granted).
Middle = Nodding in agreement. Well said.
End = LOL, ex:
Plus, the creators of Microsoft have a motivation to make their products solid first time, because they'll lose sales otherwise. They might not do it always, but they are motivated.
Smart ass mode = on
a) you're new here, aren't you?
b) Perhaps you are unaware of a small period of time between DOS 5 and Windows XP?
Smart ass mode = off?
Microsoft is a very forward looking company.
Problem is, they are not looking to the future of computing and making it "better", but looking foward toward getting customers/consumers to upgrade.
From where I "sit" as admin of a few unix servers and a few dozen nt4/5 desktops the "hidden cost" of linux is time. The "hidden cost" of microsoft products is...well...cost. Money (software, hardware, licenses, add-ons, security, viruses/virii).
Now, I'll be the first to admit I have a thick skull at times, so to (KISS) keep it simple, stupid, I say this to myself:
Microsoft is a business.
Businesses are out to make money.
It is safe to assume that Microsoft is out to make money.
Also;
Microsoft is a monopoly.
A monopoly does not like competitions.
A monopoly does like to make money.
It is safe to assume Microsoft wants more money and less competition.
Witness Licensing 6.0 and Product Aggrivation, uhh, Activation.
I suspect they'll get lazy and start releasing buggy versions first time out of the box
See the part about smart ass mode = on.
You're kidding yourself if you think the availability of free software is going to make people into kinder, gentler people.
Yes. Yes, I do. BUT, it depends on motivation and experience.
Hunger to learn + good experience as a newb.
Excellent person to have.
Hunger + bad exp...well, depends.
Just want to "Piss of the Evil M$" + good/bad.
Probably not, but it *depends largely on the person*.
Good post, BTW...just thought you'd like another perspective.
Have you read the moderator guidelines? Well, have you, PUNK? (and I want a Karma: Gnarly option)
For many administrations, the political point of Free Software is clear: no vendor lock-in, spurn local economy and so on. While this works quite well in places like Germany at all levels within the administration, in other areas, where the "Free Software Fever" has only caught partial areas of interest, M$ is doing just what it says in the memo. For example, in Peru.
Last week, Steve Ballmer was in Spain. which some of you might know spurned the Linex Linux distribution (in Spanish), proposed a small autonomous community (a bit like a state, for the benefit of American Slashdot readers :D), which is now being deployed in other autonomouse communities, as seen here.
Steve Ballmer was giving Free Software a bollocing, saying that it was a waste of time and so on. I didn't see the story in /., but it was covered in both Barrapunto (the Spanish-speaking /.), and in some other blogs. Ballmer offered the Spanish government 25 M EUR worth of software (by that, read Windows/Office licenses) for education.
Clearly, M$ is seeing that local efforts can be thwarted by giving 500000US$ (in the case of Peru), or 25M ? (in the case of Spain) worth of licenses. The aim is to stop the local movements spreading, as it is seen in Spain (where other regions are taking interest in Linex) to a national level. In Germany, as the push comes from the top (or so it seems), these techniques don't work.
We'll see where all this leds us to in a few years, tho'...
I'm amazed...this wasn't leaked to Eric S Raymond like the other 60 or so pieces of damning evidence. Anyhow...Has ESR dissected this memo line by line yet?
Don't get me started on the people who use "accountability" in the same sentence as "MS software" ...
Nerd: Derogatory term typically directed at anybody with a lower Slashdot ID than you.
...would the same Microsoft Executive authorize the company to give me free Xbox games? After all, if Microsoft isn't going to gain my dollars, why should Sony? Please oh please oh please...
"Right now, somewhere in this world, Scott Baio is plowing a woman he doesn't love," - Peter Griffin, *Family Guy*
The same situation applied in 1999 with those two storage rivals.
Time and again IBM would beat EMC. But then EMC would get the customer alone in a room and do a 'What will it take to keep you?'
It was bad enough that IBM decided not to contest EMC customers - it was a waste of their time.
But times have changed.. IBM is increasing their storage market share dramatically.
Large corporations are under tremendous pressure. I know of one Fortune 5 who very recently rejected Red Hat in favor of SUSE because RHAT's licensing was so outrageous.
You can bet that customer, an IBM partner due to a recent sweetheart deal (well, the CIO *did* work at IBM), is looking at replacing Windows on the desktop..
Ceren Ercen is a friend of mine. Feel free to e-mail her if you like; she enjoys hearing from fans.
"What exactly is the difference between giving away OpenOffice and giving away Microsoft Office? "
Simple:Sun gives it away to the everyday user, yes Sun still hopes that this will encourage people to buy other non-free(as in price) Sun products, but it is availible to everyone. Microsoft however, gives it away only if that is the only way to keep an account, and only to large groups. You will never see an individual user going to Microsoft sales office and saying, "I can't afford Windows so I'm going to use Linux instead" and hear the reply "Well, how about for $50, no? Then how about for free?"
improving the quality is. Or would have been, if they had listened to me over the years ago every time I was asked what new feature I wanted to see in Windows. Without exception, my answer was always "None, just make what's there work right!"
I am done with Windows now. I was a dyed-in-the- wool Windows advocate for years. It took many, many mistakes on Microsoft's part to drive me away, but they did it.
Case in point: until the beginning of this year my home network was exclusively Microsoft. My server ran NT 4.0 with Small Business Server on top for printer/file sharing, sharing FAX services over 1 phone line and Internet access over another. I had as many as 7 workstations, all running Win95/98SE and, at the end, one running win2k (don't ask, I consult, develop hardware and software, write technical documentation, have a son that MUST run the latest games AND they're my toys).
Starting in January, my network hides behind a Linux firewall/router. The SBS server is down until I can replace the OS with some flavor of Linux. This is the result of of two things: signing onto my server one day and finding an advertisement on the desktop and endless, endless hassles with MS's proprietary proxy server protocols while trying to develop embedded web stuff.
There is now one Linux workstation, any new workstations will be Linux and there will be no XP workstations! This is a result of one weekend playing with the new "improved" XP desktop and looking at the traffic thru my server to the Internet while that XP station was running (tell me why in hell XP has to phone home when I open a help file?).
My primary concerns are now security and usability. All of the software I mentioned above was purchased; cost or the threat of an MS audit was not the problem. In the last 4 months I patched the Linux on my firewall/router once. Any guesses how times I patched NT or the many services that make up SBS in the four months preceding that? I don't remember myself but I do remember checking once per week and never, not once, NOT having to download a patch for some MS piece of software.
Free is not enough! Pay more than lip service to security and quality issues, quit invading my system for personal information just because I purchased your software, start thinking about MY rights instead of Hollywood's and get rid of the ever-fancier eye candy on each new release of your desktop (I got work to do, damnit!). Then maybe I will consider Microsoft software again.
that micro$oft realised that their software was rubbish and decided to Dump it!! i wonder which rubbish dump they are taking it to?
there would be a heap of coasters (their OS cd's) to get for free!!!
oh, and no i didn't read the article. is it that obvious?
Read the EFF's Fair Use FAQ
IF microsoft wants India on it's side, they better make the desktop software free too, not just Windows Server 2003. They need to "give" away computers to basically entire Asian markets to make them switch. And if they still want China, they too have to give China a billion or so dollars under the table. Know what that's what's going to happen. All for innovation and knowledge to spread. Your open source will win eventually but keep in mind you hippies better behave or else Microsoft will GPL their work.
Just because you're a customer doesn't stop you being an idiot.
Government of the people, by corporate executives, for corporate profits.
you signed your life over with the license agreement. Face it, they need your information to make it better for YOU! You want to buy the things you are interested in don't you? If you want a computer get a Sun workstation. If you want a toy get a PC. If you want to live in happy little fluffy cloud place get a MAC. It's that simple.
It's kinda funny that while fighting a trial for the right to bundle stuff, that the have been making plans to start selling the stuff seperately all along! Kinda makes you wonder why they added all those features for "free" if they knew they would be charging for them later. If they added them to add "value" to the product, then where is that "value" going now? Why are they purposefully taking it away?
Or was the whole thing just a shame to "dump" software on the market for free to shut out potential comptetitors by using their vast "monopoly money" to subsidize the below cost software. Cause they're telling us it costs them lots of money to develop now. And we gotta pay up!
from the Garter group at the end of the article about switching to OSS:
Without it, the investments [Linux] could lead to higher, unanticipated costs."
Gee! like the B-slap from having to re-buy MS monopoly-priced stuff! Just make sure you never go back to MS!
Sun sell *Star Office*:
0 /
http://wwws.sun.com/software/star/staroffice/6.
It costs $50 per user. It's *based* on Open Office, which is freely available from another source.
Oh, and the moderators are utter fuckwits for the insightful moderation. Too many morons with moderation points.
Government of the people, by corporate executives, for corporate profits.
As a product development manager, I have a list of "nice to have features" which are scrutinized before being implemented by market research.
"Why" you ask?
Because product development is about building a product that meets a need. The best needs are those you can get your customer to explicitly state ("I sure would like a flavor of Coke that tasted like lemon was in it too"), the second best are those they imply they need ("I have been drinking Coke for years. I like it, but I want a little something to spice it up"). In either situation, Coke with Lemon is born.
Microsoft may be rich, but they aren't Coca-cola. No one is saying "we want our computers to be so tightly locked down that administration and use is impeaded" And Microsoft is taking the implied desire to maintain control over sensitive documents to develop a trojan horse for their own DRM solution.
I'm a Switcher
I only came here to do two things; kick some ass, and drink some beer...looks like we're almost out of beer.
Ummm last time I checked this article was discussing MS's actions OUTSIDE of the US, hence subject to the laws of the countries they are operating in.
Also last time I checked MS has already been pinged by the US for illegal use of its monopoly position. MS has a long history of dodgy business dealings that cannot be excused by the trite "We're capatilists dammit".
Every company has a face that markets and speaks for the spirit of the company. Microsoft has bill gates. Who like any other human being (I hope) is not going to live forever.
Like him or hate him, he has a competitive nature that's a backbone and a half for M$. When Dave Thomas passed away, Wendys had to reconstruct their marketing plan. Rockerfellar, Ford... the list goes on. M$ will be on top at most for another 40-50 years.
Microsoft makes many products other then microsoft windows or microsoft backoffice.
Rather then trying to these products that are in direct compitition with linux.. why not actually create something that a linux user might use?
Like, "Microsoft Office!" While you can say what you want about Microsoft, Office is a VERY popular package. I personaly am a fan of word, dispite having open office installed and have tried using it exclusivly for about 9 months, I find I actually prefer microsoft word.
Microsoft, love 'em or hate 'em, is a software company who has in the past been contracted to design software for diffrent systems. They rather got their start by porting basic over to a number of diffrent machines.
While you can say what you will about microsoft, Office(tm) is indeed something that businesses are willing to pay for. If they can make Internet Exploder for solaris, they likely are able to actually to port over atleast Microsoft Word and Excel.
There is no sanctuary. There is no sanctuary. SHUT UP! There is no shut up. There is no shut up.
" Not only was the original Sherman Anti-trust act passed under a Republican administration, the largest breakup after Standard Oil, the breakup of AT&T, took place during a Republican Administration."
That was then. Today it's completely different.
War is necrophilia.
It always is, isn't it? The Clinton Administration brought MS up on charges and went after their monopoly status, yet Billy C signed the most heinous legislation we've seen in a while into law:
The DMCA.
Go figure. BOTH PARTIES ARE CORRUPT.
I disagree. A MSFT monopoly is far far better. All these Linux Geeks out there support Linux not for its excellence, but for the thrill of standing against MSFT ! Try to understand that Microsoft has achieved in just 5 years what UNIX could not achieve in 20. Uniformity and standardization. After all you UNIX geeks out there could not even agree on a standard GUI after all those years and continue to ship Gnome and KDE ! Now the success of MSFT burns in to your hearts. How many of you will continue to love UNIX/LINUX after staring down at Microsoft Weaponry (Stocks) for the first time. Come on guys ! Deep down everyone is a Ferengi.
-------- Cluster bombing from B-52s is very, very accurate -- the bombs always hit the ground.
Our entire college got free copies of Windows OS for all faculty and students. MS took a large tax write off to cover the costs. Good deal for us and them.
The republicans are more corrupt.
Seems like a pretty good strategy. Make sure that everybody is using Windows... a pretty basic business plan for MS.
I think the thing that scares the execs at MS et al is the fact that Linux/open source is a very different threat than a normal business... they can't really out price it because the software is free in the first place. They can't buy it out or bully it because nobody really owns it.
If you're a MS exec, you're thinking "why the HELL are people doing this basically for FREE??" In the make-as-much-money-as-possible business world that your traditional exec would thrive in, it would hardly make sense to do something for free.
So, its scary... KILL IT! Humans have been doing that since before history was recorded. But, usually attempting to kill a good idea to keep money and power seems to fail in history... for the most part... meh.
--- If I had a funny sig too, you might be laughing now.
The value of open source is not the cost of acquisition of the code, but the openness of the protocols and file formats. This protects you from the vendor lock-in that makes a monopoly product so expensive in the long run.
Xix.
"Everything is adjustable, provided you have the right tools"
*BUMP*. 8===D 8===D *BUMP*.
Give it up now!
I can't hear myself say
I can hear myself think
I can kill an artist
for food
today
I vant to FUck you all
Large trucking firms used to do this to drive out the independent truckers. When an independent bid for a load, the large firm would always undercut his bid, even to the point of taking a loss. They could take the loss, but the independents couldn't.
This almost drove all independents out of businesses until it was made illegal. I'm sure the same anti-dumping laws could be used for this case.
Linux still has one advantage in that it won't go out of business due to lack of income.
It always is, isn't it?
In a way, yes, it is. Look at the Southern DEMOCRAT party, which ran STROM THURMOND for President in 1948. Need I say more?
Go figure. BOTH PARTIES ARE CORRUPT.
However, I still have to agree with this.
It is precisely because they are a monopoly that they don't have to obey any US/EU laws. By the time anybody can get a decent case going against them, they have moved on to the next version of Windows, the damage is done and the money is in the bank. $43 billion can buy a lot of lawyers that can slow any legal process down, while the software gets sold.
Congratulations! Now we are the Evil Empire
Like ENRON.
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
If you are the best example of how today's philosophers, technologists and writers reason there is no hope for humanity.
As a technologist I am sure you know Linux is selling nothing, there is not such commercial entity called Linux.
You have companies that comercilize Linux and whose costs in doing so are not zero. The cost to get hold of the source code of Linux may be close to zero, but the cost to put up a distribution, support it, commercialize it and distribute it is clearly not zero. If you consider in the picture Debian they are selling nothing. They are a group of enthusiasts that re not bent in commercially competing with anybody but in solving a need they have, namely to ensure free access to a stable computer platform.
Sorry but as a technologist you frankly suck.
As a writer you are hopelessly innacurate. Granting you the grace to equate "Linux" with "companies that commercialize Linux" it is easy to check that the companies don't sell their wares for zero. They make available unssoported copies of their product for free but if you need support you are charged for the privilege. They are just using a different business model, but in no way they are thinking about shout out a competitor.
If oblitearating the competition was their main aim they would be osing closed source software, applying for patents like if there i no tomorrow and making their products completely incompatible with other products. Which they are not.
Switching back to your attempts to be a technologist, you are missing completely the point. In a hypotetical world in which Linux was the only game in town you will have far many more advantages as a user of computer infrastructure.
You will not be dictated when your systems are obsolete, that is a decision that you could take on your own,
You could hire support to correct or enhance your software without depending 100% on the software manufacturer.
Your access to your own data would not be compromised by the demise of a company or by its whims in regards to licensing.
You would not be submitted to unwelcomed external software audits by dubious organizations backed by IT consortiums.
Heck, I wish I could post the details. Where I work (A big company, its name almost sinonimous of capitalism itself) we have a team of developpers modyfing Open Source software to our own internal needs and deploying it globally. We know exactly what is in the code, we can fix it when required, we can fine tune it to our needs.
How for the love of the Chipmunks do you do that with MS or any other closed source software?
Enough. I am really tired of people that claim expertise but that are clearly uninformed.
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
... is if this site reamins ethical and unbiased.
I don't care who pays the bills, I care if those monies are used to impare free discussion of ideas.
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
Yeah, you've got your technical zealots and your marketing zealots.
My beliefs do not require that you agree with them.
I have found that techno-geeks are the first to admit when they have done something stupid. Ever done an "rm -rf" in the wrong directory? I have. Ever written a shell script called "foo" that makes this call inside it: "./foo &". Try it sometime. Doing stupid things are part of the game, get over it. You were lucky you had someone who was willing to help, instead of just telling you to reboot your system, or reinstall the OS.
My beliefs do not require that you agree with them.
People were still posting today but I will be the last person to post a direct response to the parent because this story has dropped off the front page; it is dead and forgotten and in about twelve days time MY RESPONSE WILL BE SET IN FUCKING STONE, preserved in its last, lustful beauty for all Slashdot eternity.
/me sobs quietly to self.
This is the fucking best thread ever. It's been fun, guys, but it's now dead.
a developer for writing the software. "make install" still works of course, and is essentially the same as running an installer app, with cross platform support.
You can't judge a book by the way it wears its hair.
Comment removed based on user account deletion