Slashdot Mirror
Should We Follow Novell v. MS in Detail?
e6003 writes "Groklaw has a fascinating article written by a retired attorney. In short, he believes FOSS advocates should be following the recently announced Novell anti-trust case against Microsoft with as much vigour as we do the SCO-IBM case. Whilst the latter is to all intents and purposes settled in favour of the Good Guys, the article points out how Novell v. MS is far harder to call. Evidence produced during this new case, he argues, may be valuable for proving anti-competitive intent on Microsoft's behalf should MS (or a proxy) go on a patent rampage against FOSS. Finally, the article points out that Microsoft either destroys evidence itself (see the Burst.com case) or requires evidence to be destroyed as part of settlements (as in the Caldera DR-DOS case)."
Microsoft has already been brought up on anti trust charges, multiple times.
Boycott, it is the only terminal solution.
For a moment, I thought this was an Ask Slashdot.
why anti-competitive intent would have any bearing on a patent suit? Aren't patents intended as monopolies that will be used, at least in many cases, anti-competitively?
There was Cowboy Neal at the wheel of a bus to never-ever land.
No.
Some "maths"
1. Both are big multi million dollar corporations
2. Hence Novel = i$, and MS = j$!
3. Money is the root of all evil
4. But because j > i, therefore Microsoft is more evil!
Online backup with Mozy, sounds like Ozzie, but more!
"I believe the Novell-Microsoft case, regardless of outcome, could have a major beneficial impact for FOSS, providing we watch it closely. Groklaw is uniquely positioned to collect and disseminate information about the case. In a nutshell, the Novell complaint promises a bonanza of evidence that Microsoft engages in unfair competition to maintain its monopoly in the PC software operating system market and to extend that monopoly to the application markets."
This is a good idea. As MS could sue over StarOffice/OpenOffice, evidnece may come up that is relevant..
This phrase is so loaded that it's hard to broach anything resembling a middle ground here. If you refer to Microsoft as the "enemy" and everyone else (excluding SCO) the "Good Guys", how can you expect to be partial when delivering judgement.
Take a look at what's going on in Iraq. The American "Good Guys" are wiping out the "Bad Guys". From the other perspective, the Iraqi "Good Guys" are being slaughtered at the hands of the American "Bad Guys". It all depends on your perspective. Until you give up the notion of "good vs. evil" in your considerations, you will never be able to find a common ground and eventually peace.
You have to understand that not only are Microsoft and Novell's hands completely clean, they are not completely dirty either. The Iraqi resistor may be shooting at the American soldier because he believes that the occupation is unjust. The American soldier may be shooting back only because he has been trained to kill instead of think. Each one has their reasons, and to them, their actions are perfectly reasonable.
Until you can find a way to reason with the "enemy" and truly come to an understanding, you will never win. You will only fight.
There's an old saying, "The only way to destroy an enemy is to make him your friend."
[I'm not the most impartial person around, of course...]
"[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz
...is that editors be limited to one story about it per week. I'm sorry, but I'm just fed up after the tabloid-like fetish the editors had with the whole SCO thing that most of us didn't give a crap about, at least not on anything near that level. "Darryl sneezes!" "Assistant wipes his nose for him!" "IBM has no comment!" "Groklaw eloquently pontificates!" "IBM says 'bless you', is settlement around the corner?"
Wait- make that twice a week, if you count the inevitable duplicate because the editors can't be bothered to read their own site.
Metaediting, anyone? Jolly good!
Please help metamoderate.
Ok, you win...What burst.com case?
My lame blog.
Dude, I just read all 68 pages. Thank you Fun With Phonics.
Anyone seen my jagged little pill?
You are a human cliche. Try thinking for yourself sometime, boy.
I learned from the SCO case that by reading the article headlines, I can get all the info I need. I really have better things to do then try and track the entire case. When some big thing happens, like when a settlement is reached, I'll read the article, but most of the time, I read the title and figure out it is useless. These cases might be important, but the thing that maters the most for me is the outcome. If this is like the SCO case, there will be a long time where Microsoft will probably spread FUD and try to stall while making up pure and utter bullshit. That's my way of following the case. No need to go into detail as far as I'm concerned.
Scott Simontis
Patent lawsuits and anti-competitive intent have little to no bearing on a FOSS developer, they couldn't afford to defend against or start a lawsuit against Microsoft or another company that size.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Pronounced:
Spo (long O) Li a (long A) tion
SPOILATION is the last refuge of the above-the-law. It will result in a judgment against the party spoiling the evidence - sooner or later.
It would be better to save the evidence and have the DoJ just destroy Microsoft. It would cut down on the increase in entropy.
It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
A lot of linux zeolots around here (and even some Windows users) will be thinking that anything that could hurt Microsoft must be linux friendly.
So my answer to the question posed in the title is "yeah, why not?" Besides, it is topical to current computer events.
Anticompetitive misuse of a given patent attracts more researchers to search for prior art that would invalidate that patent. In addition, 35 USC 271(d)(5) implies a narrow exception to the definition of patent infringement where one with "market power" (that is, a monopolist) ties the purchase of a patented product to another specific product.
I thought the cliche anti-establishment Linux advocate typically at least had proper grammar...
1) This case will provide evidence of why Microsoft is evil.
2) This evidence will show us the face of evil, so that we know what we're looking for when other companies, such as SCO, are evil.
3) When they do more evil, the victims can bring up this evidence in court.
In this case, by the way, "evil" mostly means "anti-competitive and monopolistic."
Mod me down and I will become more powerful than you can possibly imagine!
- money = the root of all evil
- therefore evil = money * money
- therefore j^2 = i^2
- therefore j = i
So they are both as bad as one another? Am I missing something here?Karma? Hey I just call it as I see it.
If you read the sources carefully especially this you will see that it was Canopy, the successors of Caldera that wanted to destroy their evidence because it was costing them too much to maintain it, and they didnt need it anymore because their case was finished.
The key line is "The Canopy Group, Inc. ("Canopy"), filed a motion to this court seeking permission to dispose of hundreds of boxes in its possession..", "the primary issues relate to Canopy's desire to avoid further burden and expense.."
The sort of fudging of facts in the headline here is how you get people who are nearly insane with hatred who post here making the linux crowd look totally unstable to the mainstream.
Back in the bad old days of the railroad - one of the barrons bought up much of the 'good' crossing point land up and down a river. This allowed said barron to 'have control' over access. Eventually the courts declared that the other railroads could not be denyed the crossing point under the idea that access to critical resources can not be denied.
It is possible this chestnut could be dusted off and used VS Microsoft.
Groklaw's doing it. Groklaw does careful, thorough, detailed work. Slashdot doesn't do the kind of in-depth research. (Semi-obsessively reading both sites, I think that I can objectively say that.)
If you feel strongly that this needs to be done, go over to Groklaw and help.
I was reading this article yesterday, all the time thinking... Groklaw.. shut up!... an excellent article that answers the SOL Question I had put out when /. broke the story, beautifully... oh! why I want them to shut up? well, it might not count a lot, but if MS hasn't really thought this through well, which is what the article seems to be pointing to in part, then such articles are going to make them rethink and rethink and rethink... and find some settlement out of court... that means, the very gems the article pushes that we get to collect... well, we don't get to... but of course, if they (groklaw for foss) are going to build support prior to the case to undertake the project, then the only way is to put out such, no? catch 22?
Microsoft decreed that any software (or ...
drivers) that were officially allowed to
be badged "Windows Compatible" had to be
vetted in a Microsoft testing laboratory.
As I recall, Microsoft charged some pretty
big bucks ($50K - $250K) for the priviledge.
I wonder just how many programs (and drivers)
that went through the Microsoft vetting process
were disassembled by MS for future use
For a moment, I thought this was an Ask Slashdot.
So did I. And the question seemed moot, since Groklaw had already asked this question of its audience and gotten a resounding yes. A very misleading title.
Mods? How is parent a troll?
To be quite honest, I agree with him. It's not that interesting, and I'm already sick of hearing about it. There are plenty more interesting things to talk about on Slashdot.
But they did not. They started a PR campaign against open source. Why they did this we may never know. Perhaps it was just a publicity ploy. Perhaps it was a way to way to raise funds for an expensive fight against IBM. In any case, that is what most found interesting.
IBM may very well have taken code and used it in an unlicensed manner. Who knows. IBM is very big, and can probably get away with stuff like that. MS probably did tweak the API so as to disable Wordperfect. The defense will be that both were on the decline already and were unlikely to survive in any case. Even if IBM or MS loses, the payments are unlikely to significantly hurt the companies. And both will go on following the SOP of doing whatever it takes to make a dollar.
"She's a scientist and a lesbian. She's not going to let it slide." Orphan Black
The love of money is the root of all evil.
Novell is a linux company, they own and develop a distro of linux, so I'd say in this case its safe to say they are linux-friendly.......
Do you even think before you type?
C Pungent
oh come off the zealot wagon for a minute and look how silly you sound.
MS is a corp
corps make money
corps want to keep competitors down (DUH)
does this make MS any better or worse then any other corp that wont play nice with the competition? No it doesn't. (dinga-dong)
take off the tinfoil hats, and stop making up stories and conspiracy theories that just are not there.
If you want to take money away from MS, create something that can compete. MS cannot and would not try to stop you from this. The only reason you don't is fear of failure, ignorence in business, and inability to actualy do what you keep spouting off about.
If MS switched every kernel to BSD based, slashdot would still find a reason to call them evil, and create more FUD just because it's MS.
no the formula is:
women are time and money thus translated in to the equation:
women = time * money
and since time is money
women = money * money or
women = money^2
and since money is the root of all evil
women = (evil^1/2)^2 and thus
women = evil
There you have it pure mathematics, women are evil. And since this is slashdot and of course we know that we are not the evil ones, there are no women on slashdot and we don't associate with their evil kind.
Hmmm... begs the question though, if this holds true, is Bill Gates really a woman?
actually...
j = +-i
(i.e. j = plus or minus i).
So does that mean that being in debt can equate to evil?
Its a question for those of us who were around at the time.
s p
The much anticipated Word Perfect for Windows (6.0) was crap when released. The mass migration to Word was immediate afterwards (especially when Word would import your Word Perfect documents for you).
Word Perfect Corporation (not Novell) at the time claimed it was due to Microsoft's Win32 SDK. They also claimed that the Beta version of the SDK they developed for was different than the production release.
According to Joel Spolsky in this story: http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1759,1726059,00.a
It was due to WordPerfect being written in assembler vs 'C' and the office team could write code faster. I disagree as the owner of DOS, MacIntosh and AppleGS versions of WordPerfect. Two of which are GUI/Event driven prior to the release of the Windows 3.x version. All three versions didn't suck. I don't think they used 100% assembler and I have no proof to back up this comment.
Enter into the true slashdot conversation on this article.
1) Did Microsoft withhold SDK information from competitors in the first release of Windows 3.0?
2) Why did Ashton Tate (dBase), Lotus (1-2-3), and others also have problems with their first Windows 3.0 versions? (Keep in mind, all had GUI/Event driven products for MacIntosh/Amiga etc. at the time).
3) Was Word Perfect and others written in Assembler?
BTW, Novell should let this thing go. Proof will be hard to find. Evidence will be circumstantial at best. Spend the lawyer fees on improving SuSE. The hell with Microsoft. It's a new era and a new playing field.
Lets discuss,
Enjoy.
It's just the normal noises in here.
...for the case to even begin, and destroy the evidence first.
perhaps you should consider what the GPL does for a moment.
the GPL allows for others to change the source code of someone else's work and to distribute that work, as long as the person doing so provides the source code of their changes, and the proper credit to those whose work it was built upon. patents, however do not necessarily allow for such things and are generally used to squelch others from building upon someone's work. most patents tend to be used for closed and proprietary works.
those who would steal IP from GPL'ed products and use it in closed, proprietary products deserve neither the protections of the GPL or any other protection of IP.
I will not be using Plan 9 in the creation of weapons of mass destruction to be used by nations other than the US.
www.ip-wars.net
Be warned: it's long.
1000 SlashDot sigs
Naturally, if the evidence is destroyed, there is no evidence to show that there was evidence, unless someone speaks up.
But, the trouble with this approach is that somebody always saves evidence, either through sloppiness or because something gets written in the margins of a technical manual, etc. Thus, not everything gets shredded, so that this gambit has its risks.
Even as we speak, there may be an MS employee, or former MS employee holding the key to all of this. This is pure speculation of course, but maybe the reason Novell is on this trail is because it knows such a person. Even if that person has signed all the NDA forms in the world, such a person might still be willing to come forward in exchange for some immunity.
what made office the de facto program wasn't anything done by microsoft, but rather what they didn't do. they didn't really pursue pirating of office. they were strict with business workstations, but everyone i know got their copy of office from work. why you think they made officeXP need activation, for the home user, but not the coprorate version. as homer would say, DOH!! at my school disrtrict, there are damn near as many copies of office97 and office2000 burnt cd's as teachers. and it's not even that everyone "knew word", it's the damn file format. and all that crap about business training/retraining is simple. "here's a cd", the rest is history. yeah, there are lots of other reasons, but you can't compete with free, especially when people think they're getting a "steal".
My problem? I was perfectly gruntled, until some numbnuts came by and dissed me.
At least this evil is a much better root than money, and it gets rid of that embarrasment afterwards when you go to pay someone with the evil you just rooted...
I'm going to go and have a lie down now
Dos isnt done until Lotus doesnt run?
DR Dos "activities"?
1) I dont know, but I would not rule out MS playing with the Win32 SDK. It was new, and those outside MS would know the true direction and have access earlier. Those outside would be at a disadvantage. I believe that they did. Proof? Well, nothing except past MS behaviour.
2) See number 1. Also, it was not clear at that time that Windows was going anywhere. The only company that was going to bet the farm on Windows was the author of Windows.
AFA letting go? I would presume that Novell would not be following this up if they did not expect to have a chance to win.
emt 377 emt 4
1) Probably.
2) How were Micrographix, Aldus, Ami, and others able to release high quality first gen Windows programs while the larger shops at Lotus and WordPerfect were unable to? (Honest question, perhaps MS was nicer to the small guys.)
Related question is why Lotus & WordPerfect were also unable to produce a decent Macintosh or OS/2 PM apps.
3) The legend is that Macintosh version of WordPerfect is STILL in assembler. Coding in Assembler was not all that odd in the DOS and Apple II worlds.
Business. Numbers. Money. People. Computer World.
"Its a question for those of us who were around at the time."
Ok, i'll bite.
Not only did i wait on deploying MS Word, i was a "decider" for several large entities that were waiting for the consultant community to pick a winner.
WordPerfect for Windows 6 (WPW6) was a train wreck, but as i remember (reasonably well, i believe), it was primarily a question of DESIGN (i.e. usuability), NOT reliability that pushed me and my customers to MS Word.
The outstanding clarity of design focus that was evident in WordPerfect 5/5.5 was (OBVIOUSLY, IMHO), completely lacking in WPW6.
The WPW6 menus, past the obligatory XWin/Win components were illogical, occasionally misleading and often confusing. As were many of the dialogs.
I would hold that most of this confusion came from the complete departure from the long established Wang meta tag block text markup interface that SSI WordPerfect, UMMM, "adopted" for their own, with two pane screen windows, one for text and one for the markup meta tags.
Though this was available in WPW6, it was awkwardly implemented, and in design terms the "context binding" to the Win32 design approach was very poor.
Interestingly, MS Word for Windows 1.0 ALSO had a pretty horrible implementation of the Win32 GUI, however it was somewhat cleaner, and somewhat faster.
Leading to another observation;
WordPerfect for Windows 6 WAS SLOOOOOW, real, real slow. large document saves were "go get a cup of coffee slow".
WinWord 1 was also somewhat porky (i personally stayed with MS WORD DOS for a LONG TIME, much faster, much more stable, from a BSofD perspective - i also had written nearly 300 macros that really couldn't be translated easily/well to WinWord).
so, if WPW6 was all/mostly written in assembler, -- WPW6 was SO SLOW, i'd guess that it was either badly written, or rather badly optimized -- making me wonder if all/parts were written to the Win32S API (what a train wreck THAT was), and also wondering what assembler WP used????
-- in those days the first round of Win32, the first version or two of MASM wasn't all that much more powerful than "Debug", i still occasionally use MASM 5/6 to knock out quick small drivers and some CODEC work, and as i recall from the time (VERY FOGGILY), IFF TASM was around (and many of MS' competitors wouldn't TOUCH MASM), early TASM never really performed for me (or my friends) on LARGE scale projects (it was VERY nicely fixed after the first/second version).
I also seem to recall that it has already been legally established that MS has in/around this time period did indeed have "non-published" API features, particuarly used by the Excel teams in their "life and death" battle with the then spreadsheet market monopoly holder, "Lotus 1-2-3", and Andrew Schulman has written numerous books and articles on this aspect of early Win development.
Lotus, i believe, having bet BIG on OS2/G (BTW, 1-2-3G ROCKED -- way ahead (2 years) of its time), came late to the Win32 party, and had to rush 1-2-3 Win out the door, using lots of source from OS2/G (not quite a port, but close) and the Oz2 -Win32 APIs were VERY different (Oz2 was in many ways much "cleaner" than the earliest W32 APIs).
Ashcan Fate (down the street from my company) was imploding at the time, between the "religious" problems that were besetting the company's highest management, and the Big Bet (Failed) on Framework and that DTP program they were tussling with Ken Ski over, I would say Ashton-Tate died of self-inflicted wounds.
While i certainly don't know the internals of WPW6, most of the senior corporate developer types i spoke to were not ready to put any large amount of developer resources into Win32 until it was market tested, most people at that time thought Oz2 would wipe Win32 out of the market, and many ISVs put their money down accordingly....
And i completely agree, this suit serves NO ONE but, the attorneys, and Novell should leave it alone.
What next? Should AT&T sue MITS and IMSAI for ripping off the OS approach and command verbs of UNIX????
Ten quid, she's so easy to blind. And not a word is spoken...
I went to a novell conference thing in the city today and I have to say I'm greatly impressed with there current suite of software and the like, I think the're on the right track not only development wise but also this ms stuff and the way there business is run..
Go the big red N
passed some 17 novell tests and am qualified to train, and to the question: "Should We Follow Novell v. MS in Detail", I say.... No.
Spent probably 8 years of my life doing novell, and sorry, but its dead.
Your cheating...
Aldus, Ami, didn't show up to the Microsoft party until after/during Windows 3.11.
Related question is why Lotus & WordPerfect were also unable to produce a decent Macintosh or OS/2 PM apps.
Good question. I don't know the answer though. The Mac interface to Word Perfect was always OK. But the PM/OS2 interface stunk.
Maybe they didn't buy the first SDK?
It's just the normal noises in here.
Don't mean to be rude, but why does little stuff like corporate patent law even matter when we now live in a society where the House Majority Leader can remain in his position even when indicted?
You are joking aren't you, or is this just another attempt to look away from the larger issue that such disputes are now just arbitrated in favor of the highest bidder or are just to be debated into sterility on TV or the internet in a way that diffuses any focused collective effort at intellect? Let's not think, as otherwise we might find out its too late! Great motto, I'll be home with the pretzels eagerly awaiting the rapture.
Can anyone name a successful dialog turning back the Darwinian tide?
Don't you just love how this is all turning out.
Do hope you recover soon.
Remember to pray for those who don't pray for DeLay. After all they are just aiding and abetting aren't they, and to aid and abet a crime is a sin, no? May god have mercy on their souls.
m$ has been in a downward spiral for some time... patent grabs and ip is their greatest hope for securing their revenu stream for the long term... open source is taking a bite out of their model and the move towards non proprietary formats and open source software at some companies cannot be hidden from the view of others... their best bet is to hope and work towards a day when you need to pay a licence fee to use an open source browser that uses a protocol m$ says they invented...
Get your torrents...
On slashdot, it refreshing to hear from someone who knows who Phillipe Khan is.
I don't disagree with anything you wrote. The OS/2 angle is a prime subject for another thread.
I'll bet you $100 spacebucks that Microsoft misses the old days where they only had to fight OS2/Apple/DrDOS/etc.
This Linux movement has thrown them into a frenzy.
Enjoy,
It's just the normal noises in here.
Fast forward to late 2002 when Corel "mistakenly" launched a somewhat successful EOM drive to get WPO preloaded and in December that year MS co-founder Paul Allen's venture capital firm Vector, operated by former MS (and McKinsey) executives, snapped up the MS-owned 20% of Corel shares at absolute giveaway prices and immediately began bullying Corel's management to sell the whole shop...
Corel's CEO Derek Burney was a spineless lackey and their chairman Jim Baillie was a lawyer who's law firm in fact represented the Microsoft's friends Vector in the takeover bid (!!) and by blatantly manipulating the shareholder informing and voting procedure they narrowly won the "vote" and pulled Corel out of the public view and scrutiny during the 2003 summer holidays.
Groklaw folks with their investigative abilities could well have a field day reopening the Microsoft-orchestrated Corel undertaking manoeuvre, especially as Novell is suing Microsoft over their anticompetitive manipulation of the cash-cow segment Office suites market. As most people here know, it was Corel who bought WordPerfect Office from Novell in 1996, inheriting the MS-enemy #1 status along with it.
FWIW, the above-mentioned Jim Baillie was instrumental in Corel's decision not to sue MS after the US government won the closely-related Netscape antitrust trial, as the owners of the then #1 competitor to MS-Office, over unfair antitrust manipulation.
Godspeed Novell. I only hope Corel's kneecapping will help you prove you case and take MS to the cleaners.
Should invading one's peaceful neighbours be opposed, or rewarded with trade deals?
Not really.
You do know the difference between an indictment and a conviction, don't you? Just because he's been indicted doesn't mean he's guilty, just that he's going to have to stand trial. Now, if he retained his position after a conviction, then you'd have a complaint.
Good, inexpensive web hosting
Chris Pratley, a Microsoft insider, recently wrote about the competitive environment, product development and MS Word vs WordPerfect ca. 1995. Take a few minutes to read his http://blogs.msdn.com/chris_pratley/archive/2004/0 4/27/120944.aspx/ blog entry for background.
If you pump money to a moron who does nothing,
what else can you expect from him ???
It's a love-hate relationship.
.sig: Open Source, Open Mind
Yes we should.
Novell takes $2BN and settles the case.
Honestly, the only company that I believe has the resources to see through a case against Microsoft to the bitter end is Oracle.
I've been wondering. Surely the Windows 64bit vaporware / farce has been going on longer than the whole situation with DOS in that case? Microsoft have been saying that 64bit Windows is just around the corner for a long time now, with barely more than a tech beta available. Surely it could be argued by the chip manufacturers (Intel and its Itanic? Compaq and its Alpha? AMD and the Opteron?), if not Linux distros, that people are not buying entry level 64bit chips because there isn't the suitable server software yet, or because Microsoft are 'just about' to release software? Its taken something significant like the AMD64 bit chips, with their very fast 32bit performance to even begin to open up the possible 64bit market, and even then the majority are only being used in 32bit mode.
"Joy is not in things; it is in us." Richard Wagner
"Qualified Education Customers who have acquired licenses through Microsoft's Academic Volume Licensing programs may grant to their faculty and staff the right to use a second copy of a limited selection of products on either a home or portable computer for work-related purposes."
"Work at Home Rights for Campus Agreement and School Agreement customers are available for all application, system, and CAL products at no extra cost." Work at Home Rights (last updated Nov. 11, 2004)
If you don't want to read it then filter it out. Go hide behind you momma's skirt and pretend the world doesn't exist.
Some of us prefer our news raw not limited to avoid upsetting the weak and feeble. Don't like it? Start reading MS websites. Sure you won't find anything about it there.
Microsoft is already going on that rampage. Evidence ripped from this month's headlines: See SPF & (without patents) SCOX.
Microsoft has repeatly stated that they intend to rampage with patents. The only question is should SlashDot document it.
Answer: No.
PJ of Groklaw is a hobby site without any ads. Slashdot isn't. The liability of a suit against /. is much greater than the same suit against PJ. PJ isn't doing it for the money. MS could argue /. is, and would be putting every post under the microscope to crush, coverup, and destroy evey bit of evidence posted to public view. Count on it. If they tried that with GrokLaw, MS couldn't show any monitary advantage to GrokLaw for doing so, and PJ should know enough to avoid posting in a way that would likely result in a suit.
But I don't see any reason why the tender tidbits posted at GrokLaw couldn't be discussed on SlashDot.
Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves.
The republicans made this particular rule to make themselves look more moral at a previous point in time. Now that it turns out that it can be used against one of their own, they are overturning that rule.
This situation really has little to do with the particular categorical imperatives involved. Someone is being treated as if rules don't need to apply to them.
Given what his minions are involved in, he should have stepped down already in order to avoid an appearance of impropriety.
However, we all know that Republican talk of morals is just empty rhetoric only meant to decieve farmers in Montana.
A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
straw man.
Destroying all the evidence is equivalent to killing all your opponents children.... Enacted by [Sir] William of Gates.
.
-Shpoffo
The Republican Response: "Fuck you, it works."
Not money itself. Here's the actual reference:
1 Timothy 6:10 "For the love of money is a root of all kinds of evil. Some people, eager for money, have wandered from the faith and pierced themselves with many griefs."
We may experience some slight turbulence and then...explode. -Capt. Mal Reynolds
I'm not sure how you got modded up with a broken link, but here's the correct link:
0 4/27/120944.aspx
http://blogs.msdn.com/chris_pratley/archive/2004/
-
- - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
...requires a bit more diligence in un-fudging them.
You see, The Canopy Group is the parent company of The SCO Group.
It would be better to save the evidence and have the DoJ just destroy Microsoft.
Do you mean the US Justice Department? This administration uses Microsoft as a role model, dude. If arrogant abuse of power is good for business it's good for politics, right?
- Hail to our fearless misleader! Fool speed ahead!
Got me on the spelling.
The legal definition is the definition I refered to.
the guy who moded this funny actually read the article, can you imagine that.
Anyone seen my jagged little pill?
But, did you look at the article, or just the headline? My comment was just based on the length of the diatribe about the action being taken. I'm sure following this, which was the question, will get just as arduous as reading this first bit. Troll? Why mod as "troll" just because my opinion is "no"? Some people just can't take opposing views. I didn't express anything more than "I'm wiped out from reading what I could muster before I gave up, and therefore don't want to follow it..." Sheesh.
End the FUD
A quick Google indicates that Aldus PageMaker 3.0 was out for Window 2.11 and OS/2 1.3. I used the 4.0 release, it was just as good as the Mac version. I also found a reference to "Samna Word" (later AmiPro) as the only Windows wordprocessor in 1989. (<1471@cfa.cfa.harvard.EDU>)
> The Mac interface to Word Perfect was always OK
The original releases were terrible GUI programs -- if I recall, they were nearly identical to the DOS version. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WordPerfect
Business. Numbers. Money. People. Computer World.