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..."

56 of 436 comments (clear)

  1. As a member of the Linux community... by jrockway · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I can say that I'm not worried about SCO. Think about it like this. If Linux becomes "illegal" it will be illegal just like all the warez and pr0n on kazaa. And God knows that nobody makes or downloads those.

    In other words, nothing will change because nothing CAN change. As long as people want to work on Linux, they will. The Internet and the minds of its members are not property of SCO. So too bad for them.

    --
    My other car is first.
    1. Re:As a member of the Linux community... by mcbridematt · · Score: 3, Insightful

      And of course, who says that it won't continue to still be legal outside the U.S....

      If SCO was to launch world wide lawsuits in the unlikely case that it wins, it would be decimated by the time it finishes.

      Oh my.. what did they do to our precious Caldera?

    2. Re:As a member of the Linux community... by miu · · Score: 5, Insightful
      In other words, nothing will change because nothing CAN change.

      I agree that making Linux "illegal" would not stop people from using it. It would put an end to: comercial software, many supported and semi-supported porting efforts, corporate desktops, embedded devices, hosting companies offering Linux, etc.

      I'd say a lot can change.

      --

      [Set Cain on fire and steal his lute.]
    3. Re:As a member of the Linux community... by phatsharpie · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Actually, if Linux becomes illegal, and is in the same league as warez, mp3s, and pr0n on Kazaa, it would bode very ill for the future of Linux. Where Linux has been making tremendous headway is in the corporate server space. If it becomes illegal, it would no longer be deployed in this niche. In other words, the only market segment that Linux is gaining legitimacy.

      Sure, this is Slashdot and many people run Linux here, but the vast majority of people in the real world do not run Linux, and there is still a fair ways to go before people do, and if the OS becomes illegal in the mean time, the game is pretty much over.

      -B

    4. Re:As a member of the Linux community... by svanstrom · · Score: 4, Insightful
      In other words, nothing will change because nothing CAN change. As long as people want to work on Linux, they will. The Internet and the minds of its members are not property of SCO. So too bad for them.


      The "movement" will slow down, become more "underground", and some of the people will aim their work at other OSes rather than have to deal with a potentially nightmare(ish) legal process.

      The ones already making a lot of money out of the use of linux (routers, basestations, pvrs etc) will pay for a license, and then it's business as usual.

      A few people will start working on something that is open, free and capable of replacing Linux; the process will be slow, and initially there will be a lot of politics stoping any real work from getting done.

      At a time when M$ has started losing ground simply based on "momentum" a serious problem with Linux will be a HUGE problem for the free/open source-community; and the only company that will truly benefit from it is M$.

      Open source as an option for businesses/governments could be set back anywhere from 3-10 years.

      Things CAN change, things CAN get a lot worse than it is today...
      --
      perl -e'print$_{$_} for sort%_=`lynx -dump svanstrom.com/t`'
    5. Re:As a member of the Linux community... by Rumagent · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I find it highly unlikely that Linux will ever become warez. Should SCO claims carry any merrit, the code in question would be removed instantly - which is exactly what SCO doesn't want. They want to be able to milk every linux user from now until hell freezes over.

      It isn't going to happen of course. Linux is nothing without it's community, and who would contribute anything to SCO?

    6. Re:As a member of the Linux community... by miu · · Score: 4, Insightful
      It would still only be illegal inside USA if it came to that, so I don't the rest of the world would notice much change.

      Patent and copyright recognition are the big demands the US and WTO make of countries that want to join the globalization oligarchy. I think it fairly likely that a change in the legal status of Linux in the US would have effects throughout the world.

      --

      [Set Cain on fire and steal his lute.]
    7. Re:As a member of the Linux community... by bit01 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Get real. SCO did not write almost all the code in Linux, it does not own almost all the code in Linux, it cannot control almost all the code in Linux. Whatever files are found that are SCO's, if any, will be replaced virtually instantly and it will be business as usual.

      To say Linux will "become illegal" is childish and silly. Just as likely, illegal software will be found in M$Windows and M$ will have to stop shipping. Fat chance.

      ---

      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.

    8. Re:As a member of the Linux community... by miu · · Score: 4, Informative
      First of all, as far as I remember, there are no patent violations in the case with SCO.

      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.]
    9. Re:As a member of the Linux community... by You're+All+Wrong · · Score: 5, Insightful

      """
      A few people will start working on something that is open, free and capable of replacing Linux"?

      Start? Excuse me - *BSD anyone?
      """

      There's a more obvious answer - just rewrite the bits that are IP violating. Believe it or not there are loads of linux hackers who could probably rewrite the contentious bits in a matter of days.
      When that happens, Linux suddenly becomes legal again. You can't taint new linux with the (alleged) faults of old linux. Then again, I beleive the SCO suit has no teeth anyway.

      I think Cringely is just going for the attention, and we've given it too him. Look at the prediction "it will either get bigger or smaller". What kind of prediction is that?
      Here's one:
      Akozakie - this coming year you will either drink more or less caffeinated drinks than this past year.

      What are the chances that prediction is correct?

      Here's another one:
      This coming year at least one bear will shit in the woods.

      Cringely, attention seeking media whore, who'd a thunk it.

      YAW

      --
      Your head of state is a corrupt weasel, I hope you're happy.
    10. Re:As a member of the Linux community... by MoonBuggy · · Score: 3, Insightful

      There are many good points made in this thread, however the one that you all seem to be missing is that the collective agreement of all the sane people here is that SCO's allegations are completely baseless and will fade away as soon as the stock takes a hit because of it. The illegality of linux would be a major blow to the OSS movement and while it would recover it would take time. Linux is not, however, illegal and we all know it. SCO are simply not going to win here.

    11. Re:As a member of the Linux community... by gantrep · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Umm, wha? The issue is not the legality of an entire operating system but rather localized sections of code in that operating system. In the worst case scenario, if it's found that this code is honest-to-god infringing, responsible community members will rewrite the areas that need to be rewritten, not that it will go underground and die or some such tripe.

    12. Re:As a member of the Linux community... by bit01 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      If you go with the SCO claim, they claim ownership of a whole hoard of header files and other key source files.

      Software is soft. Nothing is so key that it cannot be replaced. Linux is the unix standard now (there are now more linux users than all other unix users put together) and at worst some standards may need to change. That might not even be a bad thing.

      Besides, SCO is saying that they own all derivatives of UNIX.

      Code ownership is viral? That's a new one on me!

      Linux is a clone, not a derivative, of the original Unix. This has been well documented. Since [almost] all the Linux code was not written by SCO for them to claim anything at all about this code is spurious. They might have some patent claims but those can be worked around.

      Remember, you can sue anybody for anything, but winning is another matter entirely. As has been previously discussed SCO is probably just running interference for M$.

      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.

      So what's the solution?

      In the near term shorten copyright and patent terms, actually enforce the innovation condition on patents and force the patent office to deal with the fact that is impossible for a small government office to rationally evaluate all human knowledge.

      In the medium term have much more sophisticated ideas and laws about what it means to own intellectual property. I cringe at how simplistic current law is on ownership of IP. Amongst many other problems it has no recognition of the intangible inputs that go into IP (eg. a stable, supportive society), no recognition of the identical effort but differing rewards small and large organisations get for writing and selling IP (by many orders of magnitude eg. $70M to Arnie for a movie, $10K to another actor for identical effort and almost identical result on a similar movie), no recognition of the economic network effect (it has value and should be taxed), no recognition of partial ownership (IP is not discrete, whatever lawers might think) and no recognition that ideas "whose time has come" lead to simultaneous or new but un-innovative invention.

      At a minimum patents should be splittable amongst multiple near simultaneous inventors, there should be a cap on how many copies of a piece of IP can be sold before it returns to the public domain, court cases should not only be win or lose but explicitly proportional (eg. he wrote 70% of the software but she added 30% of value). The list goes on and on. Lawyers and law makers are asleep at the wheel at the moment and somebody needs to give them a kick up the backside.

      In the long term we need new legal forms unrelated to the traditional patents and copyrights to deal with this new, soft "universe" our generation is creating. Remember, software is anything we want it to be. How we structure it will have impacts on future generations we can only guess at but let's structure software and the law surrounding it (also software!) for human beings, not vice versa.

    13. Re:As a member of the Linux community... by bit01 · · Score: 3, Informative

      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.

  2. What utter nonsense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    "Linux has to grow or die"

    Erm, why? Linux isn't a company. If Linux stopped growing, there'd still be thousands of developers and testers working on it. Cringely evidently doesn't understand the whole ethos behind the free software world; his comment is ridiculous.

    1. Re:What utter nonsense by drfireman · · Score: 5, Interesting

      "Linux has to grow or die"

      Erm, why?


      This is just an old trick, popularized by horoscope and fortune cookie writers, applied to the computer industry. There's almost no conceivable course of events during the next year (especially given the certainty of more SCO-related headlines, at least on Slashdot) that couldn't be described as at least provisionally consistent with this prediction. If Cringely provided some analysis or insight, I guess there could have been an interesting point here. But it's really just a throw-away.

      As an exercise, review the years to date for Linux. Each year has seen some significant movement towards both growth and death. Lately there have been interesting maintainer changes, which would probably qualify as changes in organizational structure. It's hard to remember a significant period of time during which Linux hasn't confronted something that could be loosely described as a do-or-die challenge. The same could probably be said for most if not all organizations in the tech industry. If Cringely really wanted to make a non-obvious prediction, and this was the best he could come up with, he probably just didn't give it much thought.
    2. Re:What utter nonsense by HiThere · · Score: 4, Insightful

      That's pretty much another "tautology" prediction. Nearly everything has to either grow or die. Homostasis is a quite difficult art to master (and software hasn't even attempted it). OTOH, as Linux is the fastest growing server platform, and a fast growing desktop platform, and a fast growing embedded platform, it's tautologically true in another way, also.

      Note: Free software can die. (Well, go into prolonged hibernation with no appearant awakening time.) All that's needed is for the maintainers to loose interest and not be replaced, while the environment it was used in evolves. Check the Debian site for oprhaned packages to see some software that's just started the long descent.

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
  3. I like this prediction... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    I predicted that Microsoft's Palladium security plan, now called Trustworthy Computing, would be distrusted and stall. That looks right to me.

    Predicting that a microsoft security product isn't reliable? Predicting that a microsoft product is late?

    Cringley is THE ORACLE!!

  4. Give Me A Break... by Bowie+J.+Poag · · Score: 4, Funny



    "They like to pretend that it hasn't, but it has."

    Yeah, just like I pretend that Cringley doesn't matter, but he does.

    --
    Bowie J. Poag

  5. Um, what? by JanneM · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The problem with a prediction like that is that it's largely content-free. Changing organizational structure of Linux, how, exactly? When he says "Linux", does he mean kernel development or the whole OSS community? What, exactly, is wrong, and how (and why) does it need to be changed?

    As fluffy as that prediction is, we can have Andrew Morton take over maintainership of 2.6 from Linus Torvalds this year and Cringeley can claim another success at the end of 2004.

    --
    Trust the Computer. The Computer is your friend.
    1. Re:Um, what? by ender81b · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I think what he means is either more corprate structure or less corporate structure.

      For example, currently driver support in linux is horribly broken. Worse yet, it is horribly broken *by design*. The kernel developers refuse to freeze a driver api for the kernel (like MS did with win95/98/me and win2k/xp) or make a DDK (to my knowledge) instead changing the api every major release and sometimes on point releases. They have a point -- doing so encourages the development of open source drivers instead of binary only drivers. Unfortunatley this is one area in which corporate interests might superceede the interests of the individual kernel developers. Possible.

      Another area we might see is with regards to linux on the desktop. Progressing, yes, but not as fast as it might if - say - sun or ibm decided to make a serious commitment to linux and either extend kde/gnome/x or replace them entirely. If they come up with a desktop replacement that is far better than the current offerings they will win by default, thus placing the future of linux on the desktop in corporate hands, at least for a short while.

      I think this is what cringley was getting at -- changing linux to reflect the fact that alot of the development is funded by major corporations now instead of hackers working on their free time.

  6. Linux does not have to grow. by miffo.swe · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This is a myth from people who think like a company. The only thing linux really needs to survive is users who like it or want to change linux into something they like.

    If linux becomes oh so unpopular what is it to say that no one just takes the codebase and make something new and better? I think the cat is out of the bag now and thanks to OSS the applications barrier to entry is officially dead or atleast very small compared to how things looked a couple of years ago.

    Without the applications barrier MS has no real advantage over anything else.

    --
    HTTP/1.1 400
    1. Re:Linux does not have to grow. by swillden · · Score: 4, Insightful

      What I hope to see happen is that with backing from Big Blue, Linux continues to gain mainstream acceptance and eventually becomes one of the default choices for corporate use everywhere from the desktop to the mainframe. But that won't happen unless it makes a few more major steps in the propaganda war.

      At least for IBM customers, which constitute a huge segment of the IT industry, Linux is going to be a significant part of their world. IBM has put too much money into their Linux strategy to back off, and there's no technical reason to look for another approach in any case. Linux is already running on lots of mainframes, RS/6000s and Netfinity boxes, and as it becomes capable of seriously replacing AIX, it will do that as well. Linux on the desktop is less certain, but IBM doesn't really play on the desktop (sure, they sell PCs, but it's not a big part of their business and they aren't a big part of the PC business).

      About the only thing that could seriously slow IBM's move toward Linux is for SCO's lawsuit to succeed, and anyone who's been following the case closely knows that there's next to no chance of that.

      Disclaimer: I work for IBM, but I'm not an IBM spokesman. And my part of IBM still thinks Linux is a funny fringe OS.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
  7. The Rising Sun by imbaczek · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I think he's wrong about Sun. If I'm not mistaken, these guys are going to earn some really big $$$ in China.

  8. It must be growing by rootnl · · Score: 3, Funny

    It used to fit on one cd, now it's 3 or more.

    --

    We are the people our parents warned us about.
  9. Non-prediction by wine · · Score: 4, Funny
    Linux has to grow or die: how can this be not true?

    I mean, isn't this like saying that the temperature tomorrow will either be lower of higher than today?

    1. Re:Non-prediction by bj8rn · · Score: 5, Funny

      He should just as well have put these predictions in quatrain.

      I. At the end of the year,
      Two choose new and one
      Will try to abuse, but
      Cause in them no fear.

      II.No man will be killed
      By means of net, but
      Many with their money
      Will be parted.

      III. The mail of lightning
      Will useless be, so Big
      Red something new proposes.
      But beware of traps!

      IV. Old things abandoned will be,
      And this many in danger
      Will certainly leave.
      A rusty knife can still kill.

      Need I go on?

      --
      Hell is not other people; it is yourself. - Ludwig Wittgenstein
  10. Vague vague vague - and probably still wrong by adrianbaugh · · Score: 4, Insightful

    If all Cringely's predictions are this vague I'm embarrassed for him that he only gets 70% of them near enough to count as a success.

    Besides which, linux has coped fine with SCO. Even if there were any infringing code (which, after all the contradictory, facile BS SCO has been spouting, I somehow doubt) it would be a very easy matter within the current kernel development framework to either rewrite the code or dike it out -- if SCO would say what, exactly, the code was. The problem isn't one of the linux development model, it's a problem with SCO and their blatant disregard for honesty, the truth or any kind of propriety. If there was some (unspecified) "other" development model used, we would still rely on SCO telling us what the infringing code was so that it could be fixed or removed.

    Believe me, if there was a problem with the linux kernel development system that meant the whole thing could be brought down using lawyers, Microsoft would have torn us apart years ago. In terms of unpleasantness (and certainly in terms of competence) SCO has nothing on MS Legal.

    --
    "'I pass the test,' she said. 'I will diminish, and go into the West, and remain Galadriel.'"
    - JRR Tolkien.
  11. Off to a bad start by ozbird · · Score: 4, Funny

    Come back in 365 more days and see how I did.

    As 2004 is a leap year with 366 days, I'm guessing Cringely will get this prediction wrong...

  12. I like Cringely, but... by Ransak · · Score: 4, Insightful
    His predictions are the equiv. of me saying 'I think water will be wet next year.'

    3) Despite new anti-spam laws, we'll still be plagued with unsolicited commercial messages, especially using Internet Messaging protocols.

    Sorry, anyone with an Inbox and a clue could tell you this. Vast amounts of spam come from outside the US boarders, where spam laws in the US mean squat. I think he's right on the money with this one though:

    The more vague the predictions, the more likely they are to not be wrong, you know.

    --
    "Powers. I have them."
  13. Some predictions misplaced by mj_1903 · · Score: 5, Interesting
    I *shock horror* read the article and low and behold he has some pretty strange predictions:

    1. The PS2's VU was pretty hard to write software for, but who is winning the market right now?
    2. Nintendo have not announced what proecssor they are using, so how can it be the Cell processor? Who said that Nintendo, Sony and Microsoft were releasing now consoles this year? At this time, they are all gunning for 2005.
    3. Apple are not going to release flash iPod's, instead they are going to release HD based iPod's with 2 or 4gb capacity. This is a solid rumor.
    4. Apple have made no announcement of how many G5's they want to sell, so anything is not what they are hoping.
    5. Chances are the G6 will be released next year as the Power5 is being released next year.
    6. Linux die? How? It's not a company, its a conglomerate of programmers. It's marketshare is rising, not falling. Case in point, OSS such as Apache is only growing in popularity.
    7. How is Microsoft continuing on their normal ways a prediction? It's a fact.
    8. Walmart are going to have some serious issues with their online music store simply because its not easy to use. I agree that Apple at this rate will not be in the lead though.
    9. The Burst case is interesting, but I can't see Apple and Real being punished if Microsoft loses/or buys Burst.

    All up a rather silly set of predictions that is all too vague or missing facts. I can see why he gets 70-80% success.

  14. rubbish by servies · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Just as most 'analysts' the predictions he makes are just so damn global they can mean anything or they're extremely obvious...

    just giving the numbers here and my comment:
    1) Ofcourse MS will. That's what they already wanted to do with the Xbox and failed (IMO) and they still are doing this... Geeez what a prediction...

    2) Do I really need to say anything about this... It's pure bullshit...

    3) Geez don't we already know this...

    4) Geez, all these companies already told this to everybody who wanted to hear this... My my what a prediction...

    5) Rubbish...

    6) I predicted this at the start of the SCO case and everybody knew this from the start...

    7) Nonsense...

    8) Can't comment on this because I don't live in the USA.

    9) I expect HP to grow, Sun will stabilize and Dell will indeed start to compete in new markets as they have done every year the last 2 or 3 years...

    10) Can't comment on this one as I don't know the situation.

    11) Geez, ofcourse WiFi will grow... and ofcourse progress and service will be spotty... and ofcourse a new business model won't work...

    12) Can't comment on Wall-Mart as I can't buy there etc and I'm not living in the USA...

    13) Can't comment on this as I don't know anything about Apple.

    14) Geez... how surprising. But the strange thing is: all the candidates will be against outsourcing because it's bad for the number of jobs in the USA... So don't expect to be able to pick the winner on this point...

    15) That's something they already do for the last 4 years... Nothing new here And ofcource Bill Gates won't get the Nobel Peace Prize... Which idiot would expect that...

    Come back in 363 more days and see how I did ;)
    He's just like the gypsy at the local fair... obvious things and then claiming he thought it up...

  15. My 2004 Prediction by graveyardduckx · · Score: 3, Funny

    I predict 2004 will be different than 2003. I also predict that my prediction will be right. Now why don't I get coverage when my predictions are more accurate?

  16. Ooh, prescient by Rogerborg · · Score: 3, Insightful

    What else does he predict? The stock market will either rise or fall? The Republican candidate or the Democrat candidate will win the Presidential election? We'll be damned if we do, and damned if we don't?

    --
    If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
  17. Wal-Mart vs. ITMS by Fortunato_NC · · Score: 5, Insightful

    No one's talked about it yet, but I find his most interesting comment to be the one about how Wal-Mart's new online music effort will displace the iTunes Music Store as the number one retailer of online music files.

    I disagree with this, for a few reasons. One, they're under tremendous pressure from their conservative customer base (lower-income white America) to adhere to a "moral standard". Have you ever bought a CD from Wal-Mart? They only sell "clean" versions of much of the type of music that would be bought online by the younger Internet demographic. If I was going to buy an electronic version of "Straight Outta Comptom", I sure as hell wouldn't buy it from Wal-Mart's online music store.

    Second, online music is not an area that plays to Wal-Mart's competitive strength. Not many people think of Wal-Mart as a successful "clicks and mortar" e-commerce company. Wal-Mart makes its money by selling cheap consumer goods at rock-bottom prices. So rock-bottom, that their smaller competitiors can't compete, and are forced out of the market. But digital music is a much more level playing field. Apple can work with its label partners to lower its prices to match Wal-Mart's. But honestly, I don't think they have to. The integration with iTunes, the iTunes product on both Windows and OS X, and the huge mindshare that Apple enjoys make for an ability to sell their music at an 11 cent premium over Wal-Mart if they want to.

    Third (and last, I'm getting tired of typing) - can Wal-Mart sustain their price advantage? Or is it like buymusic.com, where the few tracks that were actually available for their advertised 79 cent price were obscure tracks that you wouldn't want, and as some artists complained, weren't legal anyway? Unfortunately for the consumer, I think 99 cents a track is where the industry wants the price for most songs to be.

    I guess that my main point is that I just don't believe Wal-Mart is going to steamroll over the music industry with a business plan of "We do what they do, just a bit cheaper." Too many other companies have already established beachheads, and they're actually innovating. My predicition is that Wal-Mart abandons digital music within 18 months.

    --
    Blogging Weight Loss, Distance Education, and more at verlin.com
    1. Re:Wal-Mart vs. ITMS by DannyO152 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      If I understand it correctly, Wal-Mart's core competency is using its size to negotiate down the costs from distributors and producers. I suspect that if Wal-Mart is offering their music for less, they are paying less to the record companies. The nexus for the agreement may very well be the more restrictive nature of the consumer's use of the Wal-Mart music files. There may even be co-op money for Wal-Mart from Microsoft for promoting the WMA format.

      As this is the entertainment business, I'll just point out that when HBO started to look like it could be a success, other companies started movie channels. And within a few years all the major film studios had exclusive deals with the channels for the right to be the first channel to show the studio's releases. Something similar happened when others saw MTV's success and they followed behind. Deals for 90 day (IIRC) exclusivity proliferated between the channels and the record companies. I wouldn't be surprised if exclusivity doesn't begin to appear this year, and not to Apple's advantage.

  18. Cringley's predictions are self-determining... by fastidious+edward · · Score: 5, Informative

    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.
    1. Re:Cringley's predictions are self-determining... by bobKali · · Score: 3, Insightful

      And they're so vague. "Linux has to grow or die..." Umm, isn't that the way of everything? In a dynamic world (this world) things change. Change usually is either beneficial or detrimental - and this can be oversimplified into "grow or die." Since Linux has been growing since 1991 there's no reason to expect it to stop unless it ceases to be.

      Now what might be impressive would be if he predicted the direction of growth and got that right - but he's not even predicting that.

      I like his regular columns much more than his "predictions"

  19. What's wrong with POP3? by Inoshiro · · Score: 3, Interesting

    "As for old fashioned spam, it will continue to cram our inboxes, making a good business for third-party anti-spam products and services while making e-mail pretty much useless for reliable communication. Microsoft will see opportunity here and propose new protocols to replace SMTP and POP3."

    Why replace POP3 (and IMAP)? These work fine and are completely separate of the SMTP delivery engine. The smart thing to do would be to replace SMTP MTAs with something that does server-to-server authentication, and leave POP3 and IMAP for the MUAs.

    --
    --
    Internet Explorer (n): Another bug -- that is, a feature that can't be turned off -- in Windows.
  20. Technogensia and the Fate of Free Software by ChaoticCoyote · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Linux development may indeed change, regardless of SCO. Or, to put it more accurately, "free" software development must change from a pure technocracy if it is to wrest control of the consumer space from Microsoft. Now, I realize (and respect) Linus's lack of concern about market share and other trappings of competition; I use Linux precisely because I like the technology associated with it. I am also a technoscenti, which means that my needs are quite different from those of most people.

    Technical excellence can be attained in conjunction with meeting the needs of mundane users. "Free" software has created its own hierarchy of haves and have nots, based on technical prowess; the lords of free software turn up their noses and snort when confronted with needs of the commoners. Able to exist on a purely philosophical level, the technogensia fail to see that free software has reached the edge of its current potential. Apple, Sun, and Red Hat will take "free" software to the next level, where it accomplishes solid, practical tasks for real people.

    So in a sense, Cringley is correct: free software (which he erroneously lumps under "Linux") will change, or it will be replaced in the greater world by something more attuned to the needs of the commons.

    1. Re:Technogensia and the Fate of Free Software by swillden · · Score: 3, Insightful

      "Free" software has created its own hierarchy of haves and have nots, based on technical prowess; the lords of free software turn up their noses and snort when confronted with needs of the commoners.

      Poppycock, rubbish, balderdash and all those other silly-sounding patronizing pejoratives.

      Give me an example of free software developers "turning up their noses" at the needs of the commoners. Free software developers work on what they're interested in. Some of them are interested in making things easy and usable for common users (the KDE and GNOME teams, OpenOffice developers, Mozilla developers, hotplug developers, Knopper, etc.) and some of them are interesting in making the underpinnings fast, reliable and secure (kernel developers, tools developers, apache developers, and some subset of all of the people in the first list).

      Okay, so Linus and company aren't focusing their efforts on newbie-friendly GUIs, but why should they? It's not their area of expertise, or interest. Others are doing that. You may be unhappy about the rate of progress but unless you provide someone a reason to care about your opinion, you have no rational reason to think your ill-defined expectations will be met.

      Apple, Sun, and Red Hat will take "free" software to the next level, where it accomplishes solid, practical tasks for real people.

      More crap. Apple's software is far from Free -- at least the part of it that is for "real people". If you want commercial, by all means buy commercial! Sun and Red Hat (and SuSe/Novell, and Mandrake, and...) are just packaging up the same free software that everyone else has. They're not really building user-friendly solutions on top of the Free software so much as riding the same usability wave everyone else is (though they do contribute a lot to the development of Free software -- excepting Sun, of course).

      No, the main thing that Sun, Red Hat, etc. are providing isn't software, it's services. Those services do in fact help make the software "accomplish solid, practical tasks for real people", but it's hardly reasonable to criticize the developers because they want to write software rather than provide services.

      What's next, are you going to criticize your garbage man because he doesn't come in your house and empty all the trash cans? Or clean your house?

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
  21. Re:Crack head. by Sivaram_Velauthapill · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Sun IS dying. Its sales have been declining. Its net losses have been mounting. And so on. It is switching to linux and it remains to be seen how successful that is. Companies like IBM, SuSE and Red Hat have greater market share of the linux market.

    I agree with the prediction regarding Sun Microsystems for a few reasons. First of all, I don't think the CEO of Sun is that great. In fact, I think he isn't very good. He reminds of the CEO of a company I used to work for, Motorola. Both CEOs seriously fall behind the competition and lack any insight. Second, Sun will have a tough time because it is caught between two things: hardware and software. Traditionally, its revenues have been from hardware, with software acting as a cash cow. Right now, it will have a hard time. Does it start selling Intel hardware (in which case it won't be making money off that)? Or does it go with software (which it isn't familiar with)? It looks like it is leaning towards software (with its Java Desktop System (which has little to do wiht java)). It remains to be seen if it can compete with Red Hat and Novell, among others.

    What's the fun in killing people? Costing billions of dollars in damage multiple times a year, even a month, seems like a much better option if I was a terrorist. But I'm not a terrorist, I fear caves.

    Terrorists don't live in caves--at least not most of them. In any case, I haven't read the article but terrorists don't (and won't) use cyber-terrorism because that is not their goal now. Groups like Al-Qaida don't target economic targets right now. All of their targets have been symbolic (warship, embassies, WTC, Pentagon). They may switch to economic targets in the future but we don't know. If they really wanted to cause massive economic hard, they domn't need the internet. They just need to blow the US stock markets. That will cause TRILLIONS of damage! Since financial institutions (like the stock market) are the heart of capitalism, any damage will have massive impact.

    As far as the online music sales thingie is concerned, I don't really have a strong opinion yet. A lot of people are buying songs but I'm not sure if that is a long term thing or a short term fad.

    Sivaram Velauthapillai

    --
    Sivaram Velauthapillai
    Seeking the meaning of life... @slashdot of all places ;)
  22. Poor stuff by heironymouscoward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I'm not impressed. Predicting the next 12 months on the basis of "more of the same" is not a skill. The skill lies in understanding the underlying trends and extrapolating these.

    SCO impacting Linux? Has Cringely even looked at the market? SCO's attacks on Linux have simply turned up the volume on the debate, they have not actually changed the fundamentals.

    As far as I can see, the fundamentals of IT are:

    1. Ever cheaper technology, including and especially software technology. Software drops in price just like hardware does, but it's starting to be a significant driver.

    2. Ever worse infestation by parasitical software - trojans, spyware, worms, viruses - and the use of this by spammers. This is no longer a sideshow, it is one of the main drivers.

    3. Global competition to lower costs, especially IT costs. Few firms can avoid competition, one way or another, by companies halfway around the globe.

    It all adds up to a big problem for Microsoft and a significant advantage for free/open software, especially Linux.

    Microsoft has tried to sabotage Linux through a variety of strategies, and each time they have failed. 2004 will see the start of serious competition, or serious defeat.

    I predict that Microsoft will produce a "Windows Classic" package in 2004 that combines a cheap Windows OS and Office, for $49.95, or less. This is about the only way it can compete with offerings like Xandros Desktop, which provide a very smooth and complete package for around this price.

    Price, security, simplicity. C'mon, it's so obvious that it hurts to have to say this.

    --
    Ceci n'est pas une signature
    1. Re:Poor stuff by RoLi · · Score: 4, Interesting
      I predict that Microsoft will produce a "Windows Classic" package in 2004 that combines a cheap Windows OS and Office, for $49.95, or less.

      When they do that, they would lose probably more than half of their revenue and Bill Gates' and Ballmer's stock would become a lot less worth than it is now.

      I predict Microsoft will continue to do selective discounts, or to put it in another way: To offer great rebates to possible defectors while ripping off their loyal userbase.

  23. How can I believe predictions ... by GreatBallsOfFire · · Score: 3, Insightful

    ... from someone who says "Come back in 365 more days and see how I did" meaning come back in one year and be wrong? 2004 is a leap year.

    Seriously, there are a few predictions there that are simply ludicrous, and others are nothing more than simple set up for saying nothing. The linux prediction that everyone here is most interested in is a hollow, say nothing prediction.

    It is best summed up by the last sentence "Linux has to grow or die, and the direction it takes will be determined in 2004." Talk about hollow predications. Linux is an active project, so it must do something. At any moment in time, and with every decision, Linux will take a positive or negative direction simply because it is active. Since Cringely's prediction contains both outcomes, he can come back next year and claim success. That is, of course, unless Linux stagnates, which isn't about to happen.

    Shoddy journalism. No more or less. Ignore the article and save time, unless you believe in that sort of thing. If you do, send me all your money and I'll sell you this great bridge connecting Brooklyn and Manhattan ...

  24. He got one more right by whitroth · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Cringely wrote:
    "I was wrong in my mysterious prediction of a new electronic way to foment social change. I just never got around to doing it myself (that was the plan), so I'll have to accept that I was wrong."

    I don't see his email, or I'd email him directly...but he *did* get that one right: consider Howard Dean and Meetup.

    mark "did I mention ?"

  25. Misconception about cyberterrorism by Kid+Brother+of+St.+A · · Score: 5, Insightful
    2) We still won't see a big example of cyber-terrorism simply because nobody has figured out how to actually kill people that way. When it comes to terrorism, all that matters are body counts. We will, however, see dramatic growth in cyber-extortion and plain old theft.
    I certainly hope Cringley is right that there will be no big examples of cyber-terrorism. But there are at least two issues that he is getting wrong in this prediction.

    1. Terrorism is NOT just about body counts, it is about the ability to get a group to accede to your wishes by force or threat of force. Killing people is an effective way to do this but it is not the only way. In a highly wired country like the USA, a single cyberterrorist act that cripples the nation's infrastructure and/or economy is just as effective in producing terror as threatening to crash a plane into a building.

    2. Cyberterrorism need not be separate from other acts of terrorism. A cyber attack could well be a component of a large, complex attack. So even if a large cyberterror attack were improbable, it doesn't rule out small ones that are done as one piece of a much larger attack. (For example, using electronic means to extort or steal money, as Cringley admits is likely, could finance another 9/11 attack.)
  26. A Long-Winded Response by PunkXRock · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I usually enjoy Cringley's columns, but this one annoyed me to the point of posting a response to each of his "predictions". For the most part, they're so incredibly vague as to be worthless.

    1) It will happen late in the year, but Microsoft will make a bold run for video game leadership...

    Didn't Microsoft already do this, with the XBox? And let's just say MS decides to -announce- the next console - can we have some predicted specs? No? Then all this prediction says is "Microsoft will announce their next console." Fine, this one actually has a bit of substance, actually puts Cringley in the position of being distinctly right or wrong. Of course, the XBox is now almost 2 years old (launched in Nov of 2001), so it's not unreasonable to assume the announcement of a new console, particularly given how early the XBox itself was announced.

    2) We still won't see a big example of cyber-terrorism simply because nobody has figured out how to actually kill people that way...

    This seems like fluff to me. Did anyone ever predict "cyber-terrorism"? I know it's not something I'm worried about. If al qaeda (or whoever) stop my email for a week, hey, that's less work for me. It doesn't inspire terror. In fact, little that could be done online has the potential to cause terror, save for the goatse.cx man, and possibly this.

    To paraphrase, "I was right last year, so let me try again this year." Watch, I can do it too, with a high probability of success - "We again won't see the launch of nuclear weapons". And hey, if I'm wrong, you probably won't be able to hold me to it anyway.

    3) Despite new anti-spam laws, we'll still be plagued with unsolicited commercial messages, especially using Internet Messaging protocols.

    Oh my god, what a bold prediction! Surely this Cringley is possessed of a preternatural ability for soothsaying. Spam will still be a problem! Perhaps I can pay this man for tomorrow's lottery numbers, or for a Super Bowl pick. Then it's off to the bookie...

    Sorry, my sarcasm got the best of me. To be fair, he does predict possible new email protocols, but he doesn't address whether they will be accepted, or even considered.

    4) Continuing the security theme, look for lots of software companies to abandon support for old products and platforms.

    Microsoft JUST announced they were dropping Windows 98 support. And companies do this all the time. Is he predicting a rise in this type of decision?

    "Companies will abandon old products to get you to upgrade." Once again I am shocked!

    5) The SCO debacle has created a crisis within the Linux community. They pretend that it hasn't, but it has.

    This one has everyone here talking, but what does it really say? Linux will either continue to grow or start to die in 2004. Well, I mean, yeah. Obviously. Linux has BEEN growing for years now, so if it continues to grow, well look, he was right. Oh, and if in 5, 10 years, it's dead? Well, look, he was probably right, it probably started in 2004, or at least it may have. This is a non-prediction. Something will happen, or it won't. All this rules out is Linux stagnating, and who can judge that? What are the odds that every flavor of Linux will stop making major updates, but continue to make minor updates (and thus, not grow, but not die?).

    6) As for SCO, they'll continue to make noise until the middle of the year, at which point the legal case will implode and the company will give up...

    SCO will finally crumble under the weight of their legal lies, you say? I'm sure I speak for much of the Slashdot community, and Cringely's largely geek audience in general, when I say "Yes, we know".

    7) 2004 will be a crucial year for streaming media... At first, this doesn't sound like much of a prediction. Then, he says MS will settle, which

  27. Don't panic! by cpghost · · Score: 5, Informative

    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:

    • Linux itself is only the kernel of a Unix-like operating system. It can be easily replaced with a clean-room implementation, that is absolutely unencumbered (provided that SCO's claims were justified, which will have to be shown in court).
    • Alternative Unix-like kernels are per se easy to develop in a very short time-span. That's also the reason why Unix has been ported to so many architectures in the past! Besides, if Linus Torvalds was able to do it as a CS student (later with the help of a great community), so will others. There's no deep black magic in a kernel, that can't be re-invented. Besides, a lot of Linux codebase is unencumbered, and can be reused. We could perhaps even go back to 2.2.x and redo the parts that may be problematic.
    • It's really about interfaces, not about kernel internals. A Unix-like kernel provides a POSIX interface to userland programs through a standardized C library (among others). As long as a kernel provides this interface, programs will run unmodified.
    • Remember: POSIX interfaces are standardized, which also means that it is legal to write against this specification. SCO can't win a suit by claiming that a POSIX kernel is using "their" interfaces! It is only illegal to use their copyright-protected specific implementation.
    • Oh, yeah, nearly all Linux programs run on BSD, even without the need to recompile anything. Even if Linux kernels were to be declared illegal, we'd still have a fully legal replacement "kernel" for our favorite applications. Of course, SCO (backed by you-known-who) will try to attack BSD next (as already announced), but that would open a can of worms that is much worse than the current anti-Linux stance they're adopting! It's very unlikely to happen, and their chances to win are even smaller. But even here, the same principles apply: there's nothing that can't be replaced.

    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.
    1. Re:Don't panic! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

      The reason to Panic is not that Linux may be declared illegal itself, but that the Open Source development process behind Linux may be declared to be "unable to ensure the legality/authenticity of the produced IP".

      This would not just require replacing the Linux kernel. It would make any software based on the Bazaar methodology potentially illegal and kill both commercial creation and commercial/professional use of such software.

  28. That's a little like saying... by HangingChad · · Score: 4, Insightful

    ..some time in the next year you're going to have conflict with someone you care about very much. The future of Linux is no longer in doubt, it's past the tipping point and rolling downhill. At this point it would be like trying to stop the wind. Even if my some miracle of purchased justice or legislation it was stalled here, US actions are not going to stop it from spreading in the rest of the world. But I don't think that's going to happen, either. The GPL is actually pretty good and based on US copyright law. Telling people they can't donate their time and code to a community project would raise 1rst amendment issues, not that Bush and his thugs care about that but legally it would be a tough sell. And almost every company is benefiting from OSS in some way by this time, so every day the political landscape is changing, too. I think the proprietary software industry is doing all it can. Attacking any OSS project politically, spinning an aura of fear, discounting to hang on to customers. If there were other legal avenues, they'd be using them already, SCO notwithstanding. But Cringley may be right in one aspect, it is getting near the point when Linux needs to be more unified and this year may be it. Either way it's still the best show in town. All the really fun stuff in IT is happening around Linux and OSS.

    --
    That's our life, the big wheel of shit. - The Fat Man, Blue Tango Salvage
  29. Linux has an organizational structure? by SoupIsGood+Food · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Cringley makes one of the classic tech-punditry blunders, which is to confuse Linux with an operating system while simultaneously confusing it with a religious movment and/or trade association.

    It's none of the above, of course. It's a free software kernal, rolled into many operating systems like Red Hat and Debian, but still just a kernel. Pretty much useless by itself, unlike Free, Net and OpenBSD, which are top-to-bottom OS projects, with a central organizational structure that takes care of everything a user could want or need in their Unix system.

    Free Software/Open Source has not one, but two religious movment/trade associations, complete with Famous and Glamorous grand high pooh-bah charismatic heads. Richard Stallman on the one side, and Bruce Perens on the other. Both men and their organizations are pretty much ignored by everyone involved with Linux, save to incorporate their software into the Linux-based OS projects or to toss obscene amounts of cash at them to help them kick Microsoft out of the datacenter. Overall, they're mostly just good for really entertaining flame wars.

    Linux will continue to grow unchecked because there is no organizational structure. People are free to take and use the kernel however they see fit, so long as they share the source code to any modifications, so it will wind up in spacecraft microcontrollers and kilo-processor supercomputers, wrapped in the software needed to get the job done.

    Linux-based desktop operating systems will put in more effort to be interoperable with each other, though it's unlikely they'll all get together and decide to have someone be their collective boss. That's not neccesarily a bad thing, and coprorate customers will be more comfortable knowing that the organizational structure in charge of their Linux-based OS is "IBM" or "Red Hat" rather than a nebulous organization of hippies and geeks... gives 'em someone to sue if it all goes wrong.

    SoupIsGood Food

  30. Right by soloport · · Score: 3, Interesting

    As a member of the Linux community...

    Ever noticed that those who have to say it, aren't?

    Pros: "I know a little about computers."
    Also-rans: "I'm a computer expert."

    Pros: "We'll do our best."
    Also-rans: "We deliver quality."

    Pros: "I'm OS neutral." (though would probably recommend specific OS for specific job)
    Also-rans: "Linux is like a god."

    Pros: "Life always picks up and goes on..."
    Also-rans: "Linux could be threatened! Everybody should worry about it!"

    I'll bet that:
    90% or more of what we worry about, in life, doesn't happen.
    90% or more of what we hope or dream about, and really work at, happens.

  31. mostly the usual cringely nonsense by fanatic · · Score: 4, Insightful
    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.'

    No elaboration, explanation, discussion of what 'grow or die' means. How trivial.

    As for SCO, they'll continue to make noise until the middle of the year, at which point the legal case will implode and the company will give up...This was never more than a stock scam,

    This much at least seems true.

    We'll see more of this ploy in the future.

    This seems unlikely. Once SCO self-destructs and all non-insiders are left hoding shares at 100% loss, this pattern will become evident even to financial analysts (who, with few exceptions, have been amazingly dense sofar). Even Didio and Enderle will be able to see it then, though they'll never have the decency to say so.

    --
    "that's not encryption - it's a new perl script that I'm working on..." - from some Matrix parody
  32. Linux IS organized by tjstork · · Score: 4, Insightful


    Linux is BETTER organized than closed source shops.

    The whole notion that Linux is somehow disorganized is a subtle knock that says: "oh, it has to be centralized to be organized", in other words, only big companies are capable of organization. Yet, big companies are often just as disorganized as the internet blob that is Linux.

    We often note how corporate will can accomplish great things, but, we also live in a world where we disregard all of the dishonesty and infighting that plagues many IT departments and companies. Even MS is not immune to this - with the rumored infighting between the Office team and the .NET team becoming legend, just as the infighting between the Win9x team and the WinNT team - the latter saying their stuff is better, the former saying they are paying all the bills.

    By contrast, Linux projects are out in the open. You can check the status of any via the web, you can see the differing philosophies of the different camps of different systems easily, you can choose to decide which technology to invest in by a transparent and open decision making process. Of course, you could always look at the source yourself, and you may, but for the most part, the process of fundraising in the open source environment is a lot more transparent and accountable than the same process in a closed source company.

    --
    This is my sig.
  33. Its not the first time . . . by ir0b0t · · Score: 5, Insightful

    . . . that a programmer was accused of "stealing" software. As /. readers know, in 1976, Gates attacked those who "stole" BASIC from him and the whole idea of sharing source code. Gates made the following claim in his 2/3/76 open letter to hobbyists: "[By stealing software you] prevent good software from being written. Who can afford to do professional work for nothing? What hobbyist can put 3-man years into programming, finding all bugs, documenting his product and distribute for free?"

    --
    I'm laughing at clouds.