Slashdot Mirror
80% of MS Server Protocols Are Unpatented
perlow writes "ZDNet blogger Jason Perlow and Centrify's Tom Kemp discover that 80 percent of all Microsoft server protocols are un-patented. What exactly then, did SAMBA license? Are Microsoft's patent and intellectual property threats simply the growls of a paper tiger?"
... afterall, to patent them, they would need to describe them :)
Tie two birds together: although they have four wings, they cannot fly. (The blind man)
To keep Ballmer from tossing chairs at Andrew!
"Flyin' in just a sweet place,
Never been known to fail..."
I'd wager dollars to donuts that it isn't patented
Really? I'd be a bit more confident than that. Donuts are pretty expensive compared to the dollar nowadays...
== Jez ==
Do you miss Firefox? Try Pale Moon.
Well that is a weird analogy. Just to play devil's advocate, if someone wanted to license a sewer system, what possible use could they have for accessing the neighborhood toilets, from the direction of the sewer, no less?
Insert self-referential sig here.
Google has the patent on toilets used for a server protocol. See http://www.google.com/tisp/index.html
Now, why would you want to do THAT?
:-)
Interoperating with other clients just leads to other software on your client machines, stuff like OS X, or Linux for instance. Not good for Windows sales. Not to mention that you would have to disclose all the nastiness of the protocols to 'let' them work. Not good.
Not to mention also that you could well be enhancing other server OS makers' market share, say, for instance you were willing to let the Novell Client for Windows actually work properly with your Windows servers. This would just those crazy kids over at Novell to keep at it, improving NetWare and making Windows look less good than it could look.
And interoperating with other servers? Bah! (wiggle your paw here for effect.) Why on earth do you want any other server OS to even *appear* useful? It shouldn't be interoperating with your Windows servers, forsooth! They'll get the idea that other servers are even possible, and customers will start using other servers for special purposes, you know, like print spooling, or simple file sharing, e-mail, web serving, database hosting, even authentication. Why, Windows servers wouldn't even be necessary then...
This was pretty much settled in the 90s. Windows took many opportunities to drive stakes in the hearts of every server OS competitor out there, by breaking their own protocols, not disclosing the accurate APIs of networking with Windows, sometimes even making claims about how some servers 'couldn't' work with Windows.
And you only need to patent the 20% (maybe just 5%) of the core protocols to deny the world any useful interoperability. You know some Windows Server marketing type was lying awake at night knowing how many Server 2000 machines were out there in 'mixed mode', letting all manner of competitors co-exist happily. Arghh!!!
You're not stupid today, just a litle naive. You're not alone, and it doesn't cost too much more to be that way when it comes to servers. I sense you are coming to your senses, a veil is being lifted...
deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
Some of their patents are on extremely useful ideas. For example, a few years back, they patented a method for allowing user processes to perform actions with Administrator privileges. Don't you Linux fans wish that you could license something like that?
He's getting rather old, but he's a good mouse.
OH wait.....
I misread, I thought it said unexplained.
My Bad
I don't know where you live, but in my world the toilets are the first 20% of the sewer system, not the last. I really wouldn't want to have it any other way.
Crumb's Corollary: Never bring a knife to a bun fight.
... what possible use could they have for accessing the neighborhood toilets, from the direction of the sewer, no less?
Uh, "backdoor access"?
You lost me there. Could you please do a car analogy?
-- Make America hate again!