Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft FAT Licensing Plan - No Big Deal?
prostoalex writes "InternetNews.com describes the reaction to Microsoft's decision on FAT licensing. It doesn't look like the company is expecting to make any significant money out of licenses (there's also a cap of $250K, so none of the big guys will have to pay millions to Microsoft). It also doesn't look like Linux companies are stressed over this decision. "We are only accessing FAT32 file systems, not using them. This licensing program is of little interest to SuSE", a Novell/SuSE spokesperson said."
Good to hear. Given the trivial amount of revenue it will bring to Microsoft, it makes me wonder why they bothered at all. They could have made the terms much more onerous and expensive, but they didn't.
In fact, Microsoft has been pretty cool about licensing terms and pricing lately. Many corporate Linux users are dumping Linux because of the IP/SCO concerns, and from what I've heard, Microsoft is offering some very attractive pricing for those companies that are seeking to switch.
No, I don't have the exact pricing in front of me - I'm a developer, not some Microsoft shill, so you'll have to do your own homework. It really shouldn't be any harder than a call to your regional Microsoft sales representative, though.
Some people design things to be freely available to the public (GPL), and others want to protect thier inventions. Like it or not, FAT is a Micro$oft product and its patents are really designed to get money from the big boys. Home/power users (regardless of the OS they use) who use the FAT filesystem dont have jack shi* to worry about really. It seems the slashdot crowd just like to winge about nothing. Whats the worst that could happen? Price of Dell PC's might rise by a few cents? For those of you smart enough to know what a filesystem is and who hate Microsoft, fear not. Besides, when was the last time you actually paid for software let alone a filesystem LOL!