Slashdot Mirror
Cringely's 2004 Predictions
somethinghollow writes "Cringely's 2004 Predictions are out, and he makes a very interesting claim concerning Linux: 'The SCO debacle has created a crisis within the Linux community. They pretend that it hasn't, but it has. This will come to a head in 2004 with either the development of a new organizational structure for Linux or the start of its demise. Linux has to grow or die, and the direction it takes will be determined in 2004.' With a claimed 70% successful prediction rate, you at least have to listen..."
For example: 1. A year ago, I wrote that HP/Compaq would continue its long slide to oblivion, and if you look underneath the corporate numbers, you'll see I was correct.
:).
SO the corporate numbers are OK then, their stock is up over the year (reference) so I'd say so corporate numbers sure are decent, then what basis is there for saying they are performing badly? Perhaps if I refer to an unspecified quantity I can make up a story about it too. Like, er, Dell will start slide into oblivion, which if you look below the corporate numbers (that is below profits, penetration, users, sales, turnover, employment, etc) you will see I am correct. What was I correct about? Well, ask me in a year and I'll tell you.
2. I predicted that Dell would continue to grow at the expense of its competitors
The home/business PC market is getting mature, so if any company grows it is largely at the expense of its competitors. Dell were growing market share, one doesn't have to be a genius to see that a lagged deterministic trend will continue, it is more insightful to look at the rate of change that growth is having, but he didn't do that.
3. I wrote that Linux would continue to give Microsoft fits (that's true) and that Microsoft would be forced to compete on quality. Pick a low quality (costly) product. It comes under pressure from a free high quality product. The low quality (costly) product comes under pressure. A 3rd grade kid could draw that line of reasoning.
4. I said that Sun would decline further, generally because of the success of Linux.
(Fastidious comment, which of these Suns did you mean?) I can give a little credit to this since unlike the other 'predictions' it was not already written mud, though perhaps it was written in mud ready to be fossilised. Though looking back to financial numbers, Sun Microsystems doesn't seem to have done too bad.
5. Here is one I got wrong. I predicted that China would standardize on Linux running on MIPS hardware.
OK, so he stopped predicting the sun would rise tomorrow and got on with some original thinking. And failed, though it was a nice idea.
6. I was wrong, too, in my prediction that Microsoft would force Intel to adopt AMD's 64-bit Opteron instructions.
Hard to see this happening at the time, but again an interesting idea.
7. I correctly predicted the Mac G5 computer line
This had been announced by Apple already.
8. correctly predicted that V.92 modem development would stall, but that nobody would care Or perhaps saw nobody cared about V.92 (DSL+ is where the action has been for the past 3 years), so predicted it would stall. Nice insight.
9. I predicted that Microsoft's Palladium security plan, now called Trustworthy Computing, would be distrusted and stall.
It was already distructed. Well done on the stalling part, it was just wishful thinking for me
10. I wrote that Hollywood would come up with new digital rights management schemes that would be promptly broken
An encrypted system where many have the same key is a system that has a key for anyone. Always been like that, always will
OK, so I could go on, but his 'predictions' are a combination of the obvious (with a little critical thought) and the failures (when he gets beyond stating the obvious he usually gets it wrong). I do not trust this person's predictions.
karma karma karma karma karma chameleon, you come and go, you come and go.
First of all, as far as I remember, there are no patent violations in the case with SCO.
But besides from that...
Offcourse it would have affect, it linux was declared illegal in the US, but most, if not all (haven't checked up on it) of the western world, plus a lot more, already recognizes patent and copyright, but it still doesn't mean that what any victory for SCO was based on would be legal in the other countries.
Just because an american judge might declare something illegal in the US, does not in any way make it illegal in other countries, EVEN if they recognize patent and copyright.
Point taken, but we are speaking of a hypothetical case in which Linux is declared "illegal". SCO's complaint against IBM and press releases contain all sorts of allegations about their IP being included in Linux without their consent. If a judge were to find in SCO's favor in the IBM case it could lend weight to SCO's claims that they own the "intellectual property" behind every modern OS.
Just because an american judge might declare something illegal in the US, does not in any way make it illegal in other countries, EVEN if they recognize patent and copyright.
The Berne Convention does require other countries to recognize copyright of other nations that have signed the covenant. The Patent Law Treaty will sow up the same sort of thing for patents.
[Set Cain on fire and steal his lute.]
That was a bit different. There were two seperate problems with crypto in the US - patents on fundamental techniques given to RSA and export controls that were never updated to reflect the advances in the state of the art.
The export controls did exactly what you stated: drove crypto jobs out of the US. The problem of patents on fundamental techniques will soon be addressed by The Patent Law Treaty.
Do a google search or check the WIPO page for a view of what the future holds concerning US IP laws applying to the rest of the world.
[Set Cain on fire and steal his lute.]
They had announced it would come during 2003. You are mixing the announcement date and the announcement.
The Berne Convention does require other countries to recognize copyright of other nations that have signed the covenant.
Yes, but just because an american judge says that the copyright has been violated, doesn't mean that other countries has to obey the US judge. This must be handled by the individual countries justice systems
Hitchkiker's Guide to /. Linux Users: Don't Panic!
There's no reason to panic(9), should the current Linux implementation be declared illegal in a US court:
But this is only theoretical. It is most likely that a judge will require that some code be purged from the Linux kernel; code that can be really easily hacked up in a few hours or days.
DONT'T PANIC! (The Hitchhiker's Guide to /. Linux-Users)
cpghost at Cordula's Web.
The worst case scenaerio is that SCO manange to score retrospective compensation against any commercial organisation that has made use of linux during the last decade.
That problem applies to any software, not just Linux. Broken IP law and submarine patents means that any software may have this problem. And have you seen M$'s guarantee recently? Like most software they don't guarantee jack.
Whats at stake is the reputation of OSS, GNU, GPL, etc.
Again, reputation applies to any software, not just the Linux kernel. I think the market is a lot smarter than you give it credit. The dangers of M$ lockin are real, documented and obvious. The legal FUD you are talking about is just that. FUD. The market knows about FUD. Look at how they've reacted to the SCO case so far. Despite all the bullshit Daryl is generating, according to informal surveys he hasn't affected the purchase of Linux and Linux services at all.
---
It's wrong that an intellectual property creator should not be rewarded for their work.
It's equally wrong that an IP creator should be rewarded too many times for the one piece of work, for exactly the same reasons.
Reform IP law and stop the M$/RIAA abuse.
I've never liked Robert Cringley's style or manner, which basic can be summed up as observing the obvious, then claiming all the credit or screaming "SCANDAL" where there really is none. But what made me really dislike him forever is his total lack of journalistic ethics a.k.a. MAKING SHIT UP.
He has a history of INVENTING stories that simply do not exist. IMHO he should meet the same fate as Jayson Blair. I do not know why PBS hasn't caught on.
A prime example is his incredible story of bouncing a Wi-Fi signal over a mountain, which can be found at http://www.pbs.org/cringely/pulpit/pulpit20020207. html.
Most of his Wi-Fi tall tales are at least physically possible, but this one crosses the line.
See Rob Flickenger's Response.