Slashdot Mirror
FSF Attacks Windows 7's "Sins" In New Campaign
CWmike writes "The Free Software Foundation today launched a campaign against Microsoft Corp.'s upcoming Windows 7 operating system, calling it 'treacherous computing' that stealthily takes away rights from users. At the Web site Windows7Sins.org, the Boston-based FSF lists the seven 'sins' that proprietary software such as Windows 7 commits against computer users. They include: Poisoning education, locking in users, abusing standards such as OpenDocument Format (ODF), leveraging monopolistic behavior, threatening user security, enforcing Digital Rights Management (DRM) at the request of entertainment companies concerned about movie and music piracy, and invading privacy. 'Windows, for some time now, has really been a DRM platform, restricting you from making copies of digital files,' said executive director Peter Brown. And if Microsoft's Trusted Computing technology were fully implemented the way the company would like, the vendor would have 'malicious and really complete control over your computer.'"
for this stupid "sins" campaign.
There has already been some uproar about this being a stupid campaign, it'd be nice to see more.
It's time to tell the FSF to stop being stupid about this, stop spreading FUD, and instead *promote* free software instead of just bashing windows.
And then they wonder why noone is taking the FSF seriously. Thankfully, they are not representative of the open source movement.
Thanks Microsoft.. I hope Win7 is as successful as Vista.
How we know is more important than what we know.
Hasn't every previous version of Windows been guilty (or at least accused) of these very same "sins"?
Besides, I would imagine that the majority of Windows users won't ever see or hear of this campaign anyway, your average PC World customer won't have a clue what free software is, what DRM is, and most probably don't even know that there are alternative operating systems available anyway. My parents, parents-in-law, my siblings.....hell just about everybody I know that doesn't work in IT. Perhaps if the FSF could get some TV advertising...
You can advertise in this sig from as little as £99.99 a month!
It's business and usual... because it is profitable to do these things, and so fulfilling MS obligations to their shareholders. Users of the OS are secondary, as long as they keep buying it of course.
I've always wondered if the FSF was actually somehow on Microsoft's payroll. They' sure as hell aren't doing free software/open source any good. If anything, they're making people want to avoid using open source thanks to Rick Stallman's antics.
Wrong. Children learn to work on the platform that's mostly used in Businesses today, giving them the necessary skills to obtain a job.
Wrong. WGA does not "inspect" the users hard drive, it checks the Windows license. It's mostly used to combat fraud done by computer vendors which sell illicit copies for money. Users at home will purchase Windows with their PC and use OEM Activation, which does not need any user interaction. Enthuasiasts upgrading their PC will need to enter a key, but Activation is also quick and painless.
Not true. Microsoft requires vendors to only sell computers with an operating system to qualify for a discount. You can purchase laptops with Ubuntu from Dell, you can purchase ThinkPads running FreeDOS or SLED.
Vendors may also opt to purchase OSB copies at standard pricing, which has zero restrictions.
Support for old software is discontinued everytime, by every vendor. Every Linux vendor and even free distributions like Ubuntu have a support lifecycle.
Well, i'll give them this point. But Microsoft has added support for ODF in Office 2007 SP2, however it was the ODF guys who weren't even able to spec out something basic as formulas in a spreadsheet specification.
If you purchase DRMd content, you know exactly what you're in for. Windows just supports it. It's like a car that can lock the rear doors to children can't open the doors while on the road. Yes, some people may use that feature to kidnap someone, but that doesn't mean that locking rear doors is bad.
This was true until Windows XP SP2, but Microsoft has really improved security since then.
All in all, it's a bunch of stupid FUD by hippies that eat their gunk from their toes.
.... complete control of their employees computers. More lockdown features present in the OS = more power to the IT department = easier for BOFH IT administrators to take away any and all "freedoms" you may think you have when using equipment provided by your workplace.
In other words: What a waste of time sending letters to these companies!
They're sounding ever more rabid, proclaim bizarre things that anyone with a clue can see right through and are frankly counter productive to whatever they are trying to achieve. Once upon a time I had a lot of respect for them in many areas but these days, just seeing FSF in a headline is usually a clue you need to jump to the next new article.
I want a list of atrocities done in your name - Recoil
Windows may be guilty of 7 sins, but its main competitor on the desktop is derived from an OS with a daemonic mascot.
10 PRINT CHR$(205.5+RND(1)); : GOTO 10
I don't know about you, but I can still copy CDs and other DRM-free content pretty fine with Vista.
Those same "sins" can be applied to any proprietary piece of software; heck, some of them can be applied to certain open-source software as well. Now, putting Windows aside, people use proprietary software all the time -- and for some of it there is no FOSS equivalent. Whether it's Windows itself, or Photoshop, Visual Studio, AutoCAD, Mastercam, Office, VMWare, or any of the slew of proprietary pieces of software out there, it's a bad idea to sit there and categorically attack something that many people are either fine with, don't care enough to be against, or ignorant about whether or not they should be against it.
In fact, that's probably the least likely way those people will end up listening to you, and after all, those are the people you're trying to convince.
A lot of people like Windows very much, and even if they could afford an alternative, like a Mac, they choose not to, because they like Windows. Hardcore industry people, like professional photographers using Photoshop, graphic designers using Illustrator, computer-aided manufacturing engineers using things like Mastercam or AutoCAD are so dedicated to their tool-of-trade that they will take umbrage to anything that tries to insult it. After all, doing so may be taken as an insult to their very profession, and thus, to themselves.
So what I'm trying to say is, the strategy of attacking Windows, and proprietary software in general, in order to help bring people to FOSS is going to have the exact opposite effect -- it's only going to solidify people who use proprietary software and alienate them from any thoughts of an alternative. After all, you wouldn't listen to someone telling you you suck, the software you use sucks, and you're an idiot for using it. Now, I'm not saying that's what they outright said, but that's how it's going to be taken by people reading it.
Maybe FOSS should stop being like PETA and, instead, tell people why it's *good* to use FOSS. Why Linux is *better* than Windows, GiMP is *better* than Photoshop, OpenOffice is *better* than MS Office. And maybe people will listen. But if you insult their software and tell them to use something else, they won't be very open to the idea.
Just a thought, anyway.
IMO, this isn't a very smart move of FSF, from what I have heard, Windows 7 is a big improvement over Vista (from an user end of point), do they really think they can convince people to think different? I'm sure that people who really care about those 'sins' would have already switched to another OS long ago.
Guys at FSF, if you want your message to reach the public, take some web design lessons. For example, take a look at your friends at Mozilla.
They could at least try. Every single claim they make is laughable. They make overarching claims such as "inspect users' hard drives", which carries a heavy implication of looking through user data when no such looking occurs. Most of the others (vendor lock-in, security holes) are a decade out of date. Then they use terms like "proprietary Word formats" when all Word formats - both OOXML and DOC - are fully documented, as mandated by federal court.
Finally, they talk about DRM and removing support for older versions when you'd be hard-pressed to find an Open Source vendor supporting products for even a quarter of the lifecycle Microsoft supports its products for and the DRM exists solely to allow playback of HD content (and is nonexistent when such content isn't being played), something with OSS can't do.
Really, the FSF is almost as much of an embarassment to the Open Source community as RMS. If we ever want to see the day of the Linux desktop, we'll have to muzzle both of them first.
And often, going fishing will result in you coming back with no fish whilst at most supermarkets you can pretty much be sure to get a fish.
The difference is, in one case you can get your own fish and the other you keep having to pay every time you want to eat fish.
If we can put a man on the moon, why can't we shoot people for Apollo-related non-sequiturs?
Founded in the mid-1980s by hacker-activist Richard Stallman, the FSF argues that free software and source code is a moral right. It takes pains to distinguish itself from the open-source movement, which advocates sharing of source code but tolerates charging for software.
I find this point rather interesting, as Richard Stallman gave a speech at Otago University here in small old New Zealand last year, and he was quite adamant that there was nothing wrong with charging for software, and took great pains to make the distinction between "free as in freedom" and "free as in beer".
Is Computerworld confused?
This post was made in complete sincere seriousity; as such any attempts to derive humour are doomed to instant failure.
I think the FSF is using some ineffective rhetoric.
The first sin:
1. Poisoning education: Today, most children whose education involves computers are being taught to use one company's product: Microsoft's. Microsoft spends large sums on lobbyists and marketing to corrupt educational departments. An education using the power of computers should be a means to freedom and empowerment, not an avenue for one corporation to instill its monopoly.
I think this rhetoric only works if the reader already is at least somewhat suspicious of Microsoft.
To someone whose only experience with non-MS OSes is watching 90's movies (remember the Apple product placement) and maybe using a Mac at a friend's house once or twice; to someone whose only complaint about Microsoft software is that it crashes a bit too often and thinks this is just the way computers are; to someone who thinks that Windows and Office is the "standard" software and that it's useful to use what everyone else uses; to someone who doesn't think (rightly or wrongly) that the MS monopoly is causing bad things to happen to them---
What is the FSF saying? That schools should teach children how to use another OS that very few people use, and that might not work well together with what everyone uses? "Yeah, sure, monopolies aren't great, but I want my kids to learn something useful instead of what some ideologue thinks is right."
I don't agree with "the common man"'s interpretation, but I think that's what it is.
I think a much more powerful message could be sent by pounding (hard) on the fact that Microsoft is costing you more money that they have to. But they don't make a big fuss out of that:
4. Lock-in: Microsoft regularly attempts to force updates on its users, by removing support for older versions of Windows and Office, and by inflating hardware requirements. For many people, this means having to throw away working computers just because they don't meet the unnecessary requirements for the new Windows versions.
That really hasn't been my experience when I was using Windows: I wanted faster boxes such that I could play better games. How many people have upgraded computers to run newer versions of Windows/Office? In any case, why doesn't the FSF say in big, nasty, red letters: "Microsoft is making you spend money (excessively)!"? [add an OMGBBQROFL and exclamation marks if you think it makes the message more convincing].
Oh well... I think it's good of the FSF to try*, although I doubt the effectiveness of their methods.
[* I happen to use (GNU/)Linux, but if the FSF was advocating Haiku or OpenVMS or $NOT_LINUX as their main Windows alternative, I'd still be happy: I want more competition in the OS market, and a more fragmented platform base that'll encourage software vendors to write portable code; when you ignore 40% of the market instead of 5%, you might rethink not porting. Maybe this'll just shift apps even more onto the web, though...]
From the seven sins, only three of them have any real value (monopoly, lock-in and standards), but the last two are the same topic actually.
Education is not harmed by using commercial closed source software. It's a mono-culture, no doubt, but it would be exactly the same if anyone was using free software only.
DRM does not restrict what people can do with their computers, it restricts them to infringe copyright.
Security is a Windows problem, largely due to its legacy. But it is no way a sin, because if a user secures its Windows machine, then he has no problem.
WGA does not violate privacy.
It's too bad FSF has gotten to that...instead of being a beacon for free thinkers, they have become worst then communists...
... They wanted their web-design pages back.
Is that a BLINK tag I am looking at? Just that makes FSF or whoever else uses it E.V.I.L. (c)
Ubuntu is an African word meaning 'I can't configure Debian'
ChromeOS will just be another way of controlling you really; Google is, in a very MS-like move, intending to use their operating system to leverage people onto their cloud services. How free or not their OS will be irrelevant because its goal is to have you shove all your data off to Google.
To be blunt, you want a free OS you download and install Linux. Yes, Linux can be an absolute pain in the arse, you sometimes need to faff around to get the simplest things to work whereas a whole bunch of features you don't need work out of the box, but no matter how much of a mess it gets, it is always YOUR mess.
As G. B. Shaw said, "Liberty means responsibility, that is why most men dread it"
If you want to be free, be prepared to spend Saturday screwing around on the command line. If its too much hassle, go ahead and place your data in the hands of Google or MS.
If we can put a man on the moon, why can't we shoot people for Apollo-related non-sequiturs?
In terms of a CIO he just wants to eat, he doesn't care if it's fish, burgers or bread. The FSF completely miss the point here, sending what amounts to basically a hate letter to fortune 500 companies is really damaging to free software, it makes FSF look like lunatics which as a knock on effect makes things more difficult for the sales teams of people like Novell and RedHat. If you they are going to send deranged letters at least send a positive message with a clear and honest comparison of the benefits of both open and proprietary software. I wish we could make this windows7sins website go away.
Guys at FSF, if you want your message to reach the public, take some web design lessons.
Do you know and remember the old gnu.org site? You know, the one with black text on white and blue links [probably because that was the browser default]? Where the only document structure was h1 and p, with an em or two thrown about for, well, emphasis?
That was actually a good design (for a particular subset of parameters). It was viewable with any browser (almost including netcat :D), it handled just about any window size well [as well as possible, at least], it was friendly for the colorblind, the structure was quite simple with no sidebars, no top-bars... no clutter.
But then someone went and changed it, and now there are all the colors, and double-column layout (with long columns), and... meh.
... I'm frankly getting sick of the FSF. This latest stupid campaign reads like it was written by some petulant teenager without the first clue as to the realities of life and it tars the rest of us who support (and in my case actually write) OSS with the same idiotic uncompromising brush.
Message to Stallman - close source will be around after you've retired from your cosy ivory tower paid-by-the-taxpayer college job so get over it, learn to live with it and stop making other OSS advocates look and sound like immature fools.
CIOs are generally smart people with the capacity to plan for the future. I sincerely doubt anybody likes vendors lock-in.
If we can put a man on the moon, why can't we shoot people for Apollo-related non-sequiturs?
this is anti-competitive and discriminates unfairly against Naked Computers
I said it before, I'll say it again.
"The all-new Windows 7! What's in the box? "
Starbucks, Harbuckle of Breath.
Is a 600+ DPI version of the file needed to print the trashing-Windows®-logo. It'd make an interesting conversation piece in my office. ^_^
Some days it's just not worth
chewing through my restraints.
Flamebait? Really? The MS workers must've got up early today.
If we can put a man on the moon, why can't we shoot people for Apollo-related non-sequiturs?
I like that quote. It doesn't work in the computer context, though, because from the perspective of functionality and quality, Linux users are the most famished of any individuals doing computing these days.
You're right, the quote doesn't work at all in the context of computer monopoly. Here are some that might apply:
Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.
George Bernard Shaw
After we have calmly stood by and allowed monopolies to grow fat, we should not be asked to make them bloated.
John Griffin Carlisle
We must not tolerate oppressive government or industrial oligarchy in the form of monopolies and cartels.
Henry A. Wallace
Technological progress has merely provided us with more efficient means for going backwards.
Aldous Huxley
Big Brother is watching you.
George Orwell
I don't try to describe the future. I try to prevent it.
Ray Bradbury
Knowledge is power. Information is power. The secreting or hoarding of knowledge or information may be an act of tyranny camouflaged as humility.
Robin Morgan
And here's my favorite:
If you can't make it good, at least make it look good.
Bill Gates
The parent poster is referring to Mac OS, which was derived from FreeBSD - which had a daemon as a mascot. This should be insightful or interesting instead of offtopic.
From the site copy and pasted not re-typed. "the absence of similar antifeatures form some of the easiest victories for free software." I am being lazy and hoping someone with edit on that site reads this. It would be nice if the site at least looked professional rather than a hobbyists project.
They fitted George Orwell's coffin with rollers so he could turn over more easily years ago.
They're starting to sound like PETA
Anyone got a light for my sig?
The whole "sin" thing makes the FSF and by extension all of us look like a bunch of religious loonies. Combine that with the fact that the FSF is being creative with the truth in this campaign and there goes our credibility.
*Poisoning education - Frankly, writing software for Windows is simply easier (or at least was until recently, it's getting better) especially if the bulk of what you're writing is interface work (like, say, educational software). And the argument that people who learn to use computers running Windows will somehow not be able to use anything else is bullshit, as most office productivity software works roughly the same. I do sometimes get annoyed with Linux (no Linux version of [favourite tool] exists - oh well, Wine) and OpenOffice (simply isn't complete yet) but that isn't Microsoft's fault.
*locking in users - The free software community is as much to blame as Microsoft. People will use whatever they need to get the job done. There are quite a few Microsoft applications for which no good alternative exists yet. Getting angry won't help here - start coding instead.
*abusing standards such as OpenDocument Format (ODF) - They didn't abuse the standards (unless you count the formula thing, which I regard as a bug in the standard itself) but the standards bodies by bribing people. This is bad, and it isn't something you're going to convince anyone of using a misleading headline and a lack of references.
*leveraging monopolistic behaviour - Sort of true, and sort of not true. You can get angry at MS for including a browser and a media player with their OS, but every OS should in this day and age ship with those anyway and you can't blame them for shipping their own. You would have done the same in their shoes, not out of malice but since it's the natural thing to do.
*threatening user security - Most Windows malware could easily be ported to Linux. Seriously, the times when the goal of a virus was to stop the system from booting are over. The sociopaths under the virus writers just want to trash your documents (easily done under Linux) and the spammers just want your internet connection (easily available under Linux also - I know this because I've run netgames and file sharing apps (among other things) under Linux).
*enforcing Digital Rights Management (DRM) at the request of entertainment companies concerned about movie and music piracy - Unfortunately for MS no one uses WMA, everyone uses MP3 (or rarely Ogg) for their music and this is how it ends up on the file sharing networks. Maybe it was evil of MS to try to go that route, but it has been scientifically proven that DRM cannot work and all material anyone wants is available without MS's DRM on it, so this is a huge non-issue.
*and invading privacy - Oh, come on. The FSF cites just the WGA thing, and for all the horrid things it may be, it certainly isn't a privacy risk.
Now, I think there's a lot wrong with Microsoft and Windows (being a programmer, it's mostly the myriad of new API's that strike a nerve, I like it when things are stable and I don't have to relearn everything every two years - I think I'll be skipping at least two or three of 'm and maybe I'll never be back - there are other things also) but I don't think starting a FUD campaign is going to do us any good.
"We call such limitations, antifeatures. An antifeature is functionality that a technology developer will charge users to not include"
davecb5620@gmail.com
As G. B. Shaw said, "Liberty means responsibility, that is why most men dread it"
So you're saying you can't have the best of both wordls - an OS as non-messy as Windows 7, and one that is as free as Linux?
Why OpalCalc is the best Windows calc
Slashdotting didn't take it down!? What is the Internet coming to?
I really agree with this point. People learn Excel instead of spread sheets. The problem is, give them another spread sheet, or Excel with a new interface, and their world melts. But also it is a learning computers/programming question. I also think Windows is not as a nutritious platform to learn from. When I was growing up, computers where relatively open, or at least the Acorn was, nearly everything was a mix of BASIC and ARM code. The Acorn was itching to be programmed. A disproportion of programmers I have worked with cut their teeth on the Acorn as a child. Where are our replacements coming from? Uni? I think the problems of learning programming purely from the education system are well documented here, not saying they are all crap, but there is certainly no shortage of those that are. Very few Windows kids seem to come out programmers. Linux is even more nutritious platform, more so then platforms like the Acorn ever where. Not just because everything is open but because of its rich server heritage. The openness is not just in the source, but in documents and books explaining how parts work and why. There are no dark secrets and black boxes, everything is done in the open to those interested. I learnt more in the last few years of playing with Linux at home then I have in the last ten programming on Windows for a living. I think this is why Windows people fear the penguin, if all this is right, it means they are behind where they could be. The big thing I think Windows breaks is your understanding of filesystems. Explaining a virtual filesystem to a Windows (userland only) programmer can melt their mind, explaining the "proc" folder has done that at least a few times. Those who think filesystems don't matter, don't understand how powerful this simple abstraction is. They have never seen a device file, it's hidden from their world, they don't know it's all under their feet. Which goes back to Windows breaking your understanding of filesystems. My kids will be Linux kids and they will know more about computers because of it.
I've yet to see how it would be possible. The degree of hand holding most casual users require seems to me to be fundamentally incompatible with them being truly in control of their own computin experience.
It comes back to MS getting their claws into education; they get to produce generation after generation of computer user to whom anything beyond the basic MS office interface may as well be magic - and that if it goes wrong they must immediately call a wizard to come fix it, because such dark arts are forbidden to them.
If we can put a man on the moon, why can't we shoot people for Apollo-related non-sequiturs?
I almost mistook the FSF for the EFF, and thought to myself; "this seems out of character for them". Realizing, of course, that this organization is run by that lunatic Stallman makes this perfectly understandable. Bullshit, but understandable.
Move sig!
This looks like something written by Stallman himself. And yes, he has a point, but who is he trying to convince?
People are going to be put off by calling them "sins". Learning how to use windows is not "poisoning". And people simply don't care.
Tell people why proprietary software is bad for them, why you don't want to support MS and why you do want to support GNU/Linux. Don't just lay into the "MS is evil" argument. It's too strong. It scares people off.
FSF clearly has Microsoft hate disease to the point it is leaping into the FUD game with claims that are quite a stretch. Talk of 'sins'
Microsoft has previously been the dirty monoploy, but many claims are a stretch, some as good as ficticious. Furthormore things have started to change in Redmond.
DRM is hardly a threat anymore. DRM in WIndows was a flop, it's progressing no further, it's a seldom invoked codepath that somehow got blamed for performane problems, crops failing and stillborn babies in Vista (guess what same DRM is in Windows 7, problems there? No dead babies).
These 'sins' are tenuous at best, and are mostly situations that are improving. FSF: please do not be unhelpful, stick to facts or go beat up on Apple please.
Lock in? Seriously, that's being erroded, Microsofts supposed Lock-in is now as feeble as ever, consumers and developers have long taken matters in to their own hands.
Poisoning education? Maybe previously, but you can actually get Linux qualifications nowadays, and the tremendous growth of Linux in schools and universities is another point.
To the more lawless of individuals DRM is so insubstantial as to be no exsistant. Example:
'Windows, for some time now, has really been a DRM platform, restricting you from making copies of digital files,'
Let me fix that for you, FSF:
'Windows, for some time now, has really been a piracy platform, the OS of choice for pirates, warez, and hell the OS itself is the most pirated OS ever.
I would add, that 'piracy' is a feature of Windows. DRM of any kind has been a failure, people take matters into their own hands and get what they want restrictions be damned
After logging in slashdot still does not take you back to the page you were on. It's been that way for 20 years.
While I whole heartedly agree with the message the FSF is conveying here, I wish that there were some way for it to sound a little less reactionary. People who don't have the technical savvy to smell the raw evil dripping out of every one of Microsoft's products will simply discount this type of thing as the expected response from sore losers instead of the well-intentioned civic effort that it actually is.
Many people in big business whose choice to use Microsoft software hurts them the most would never consider using any other product simply because they feel that the cutthroat, dishonorable, destructive practices must be better than any others because well... who is clearly winning in market saturation and profitability?
Also, just sayin'... being too smug about being right in class often got me beat up on the playground later.
i went to see that page and i found it really horrible. the layout is not professional at all but rather one of those "conspiration page ALIENS ABDUCTED BY GOVERNMENT ZOMG ZOMG" template. the "shocking" attitude that spreading of opinion more like facts rather then .. opinion, which lead to "yes is true" "no it isn't because of this this and that" flamebait debate
the "get linux" .. no really, i've been using linux on all my desktop and server since '98 but i'm aware of the fact that he's still not ready for end user joe the plumber also why not simply saying to look around for other oses ? it's not about windows vs linux it's about freedom of choice; what about freedos, what about bsd ?
If you want to fight for the cause i think fsf should focus on making linux desktop more friendly to end user while keeping a high level of "hackable" for those who know what to do.
I really hate these kind of campaign because they hurt my work and my reputation: when i go to a new client and i propose linux then i get that "you open source taliban yadda yadda yadda" and i have to spend a lot of time weighting sentences and phrases to explain why i proposed that solution based on linux, why it's a good thing for the company because of the less cost, etc. etc.
Now i have a new campaign that will drop out my credibility again: ah you use linux, you're an open source taliban where's you tin foil hat ?
seriously fsf, focus on coding, focus on producing good documentation on how to do "stuff" with linux, help on traslations for multilanguage.
if you want to get rid of that poisoning education help debian-edu to prepare a nice distro that can be easily installed on a school network .
Highlighter yellow on white... I'm colour-blind and that hurts my eyes, god alone knows what kind of pain that would inflict on a colour-sighted person.
I'd suggest that I need some kind of replacement retina implant after viewing that, but no doubt GNU purists would argue that there aren't any available without patents.
Andrew Oakley - www.aoakley.com
Nobody actively likes vendor lock-in, but at the same time you have to be pragmatic about these things.
A good CIO is going to be looking at the whole picture, and operating systems form only a tiny part of that. How about your business applications? Buy something off the shelf? But then your business is locked to that product!
Write it yourself? But then you need to hire a team of developers, it'll take months rather than weeks and it'll be expensive because you've got to pay lots of peoples' salaries. If you buy off the shelf, those costs are spread amongst all the other customers and will be much less.
Hire an outside company to develop it? But then you're likely to be tied to them for ongoing support and if you're their only customer for this product, you're still paying lots of peoples' salaries, albeit indirectly.
This is before you even consider the details like "what platform should the software run on? Java? Should it stick purely to things in relatively early versions of the JDK so the risk of incompatibilities between different JVMs is minimised and in so doing miss out on features? What backend database should we use? Migrating data from one database to another is always a PITA, and that's before we even consider if the application you're using will actually work with more than just one or two different databases....."
There really is very little software out there (even in the F/OSS world) that doesn't make some assumptions about other things they interact with like database engines or operating systems, and in those assumptions ties the user to a whole stack of products. The FSF, however, seems only too happy to cut off its own nose to spite its face.
No, I'm serious. Offer a credible alternative to Outlook in Free Software so that a mobile phone supplier doesn't need it to sync calendar and contacts. Outlook is crap, but there is no credible alternative (don't say "Evolution" because it means you haven't actually *used* it).
Windows SMB has SAMBA as API compliant alternative - no such luck for Outlook. Free loses.
Until you manage this there is *no* chance a business will turn to alternatives. None.
Slightly off-topic, but I am sure that W7 and IE Browsers are "tightly woven" with the Sharepoint portal. You can hardly use the portal without the IE Browsers and Office200x. I never hear much ado about the interaction of all that stuff. Not many Firefox add-ons there, are there? This worries me a bit more than anything FFS is going on about.
Maybe a good "DRM disaster" would teach the world more than any amount of vague handwaving by an unknown bunch of extremists.
No sig today...
If someone mentioned to a Microsoft Sales Exec the phrase "Well we have been considering Linux" or something similar, do you think that Exec's reply will be impartial and FUD-less? Has Slashdot forgotten the 'Get the Facts' campaign and smear-site? Microsoft are probably one of the dirtiest players in the software industry. The FSF will die a martyrs death if they don't drop some ethical pegs in order to level the playing field.
Well for one, plenty of CIO's are stupid.
For another thing while no one likes vendor lock in, vendor lock in has absolutely nothing to do with how much you pay for the software licenses. Investing in serious linux infrastructure is as much a lockin to that vendor as doing the same thing on Windows. License fees just aren't that large a percentage of operational costs. Even if you write your own there's vendor lock-in, you're just the vendor. Getting something else is still expensive and difficult, no matter what you had before.
So it really comes down to what the benefits and costs of being locked into a specific Historically, Microsoft will support whatever version of Windows you choose to use for more than a decade so long as you keep paying them. Generally Linux distributions do not do this. If you lose a staff member, Microsoft techs are a dime a dozen, the same cannot be said for qualified linux techs.
The reality of the situation is that going open source does not automatically solve everyone's problems, it may be the solution, but you're not going to prove that by saying "you should go with us because the alternative is evil". Aside from the fact that evil is probably an overstatement, convincing fortune 500 CIO's that getting paid for your product is fundamentally evil is a hard sell.
The way to sell open source to companies is to understand what they get out of their current product, what they don't get out of their product, and how they might be unhappy with elements of one or the other. Then you show them how your product is better for their needs. Just like every other salesman. Telling them what they're doing is morally wrong might work if they're breaking the law or killing people, but using commercial software just doesn't rate.
We have learnt to to understand our masters. We have identified with their views. We enjoy and love slavery.
Can someone please tell me how most of these problems (except maybe some of the new DRM stuff) didn't apply to XP and Vista? I'm just not seeing what's so special about Win 7 here.
#naabhaprzrag, #sverubfr-000, #agi-fcbafberq, negvpyr[pynff*=' negvpyr-ary-'] { qvfcynl: abar !vzcbegnag; }
don't forget if you're using Linux/FreeBSD, etc, you can download the next full version for free.
Poisoning education
Wrong. Children learn to work on the platform that's mostly used in Businesses today, giving them the necessary skills to obtain a job.
http://xkcd.com/627/ Platform specific education turns people into the "Parents, Grandparents, co-workers, and other 'not computer people'" mentioned in this xkcd. Formal education uses multiple sources and generalizations to assure that students can learn new things after leaving school. If I had gotten a degree in "IT" I would have been stuck in my first job, not doing much beyond MS Windows cloning. Thank God for Computer Science where the only battle is which portable language should be used to teach initial programming concepts.
All in all, it's a bunch of stupid FUD by hippies that eat their gunk from their toes.
Only the king of the hippies eats weird stuff, and it's leftovers from his beard. If you're going to use ad hominem attacks, then you should at least use truthful ones.
I'm so tired of the FUD by these guys.
We've all gone through this before. FSF throws more FUD and causes more issues than MS ever did. I gladly use FOSS if it's around and it looks like it works, but I'm tired of the stupid politics.
I've abandoned Linux and no longer go to any Linux meetings because of the idiots that want to conquer the world. They do exactly what they accuse microsoft of doing.
It is; every mechanism that you come to depend on places you, in part, under the control of the person who controls access to that mechanism.
If we can put a man on the moon, why can't we shoot people for Apollo-related non-sequiturs?
Sorry, the mouse slipped to wrong mod :(
What Google has done is cooperate with the Chinese government in their censorship programs. To me, 'dont be evil' went out of the window right there and then.
In any case, outdated Linux stereotype? Not at all. I love Linux but the fact is it still requires some fiddling, and that is fine with me because fiddling is learning. Anti-libertarianism? Well, I think right-leaning capitalism libertarians are a bit wacky but I didn't express it there. What I was saying is that having a free (libre) computer experience does and will always require some legwork, and some people do prefer ease to freedom. I was certainly not advocating them doing so.
If we can put a man on the moon, why can't we shoot people for Apollo-related non-sequiturs?
"MS getting their claws into education" is a flawed argument. Back in the 90's it was Apple who had a death grip on education. It didn't do much for their market after those people graduated because they would go to work and only see Windows computers.
Is it so bad that fixing a computer is a "dark art"? How many things can the average person fix on their own anyhow? People don't do their own electrical and plumbing work (for the most part). Yet everyone fully expects to be able to control the water coming from the faucet and the electricity powering their stuff. People don't fix their own cars (again, for the most part). Yet everyone fully expects to be able to control their car on the road. If all a person uses their computer for is surfing the web, writing documents, and even the occasional game or two, why do they need an OS where they have to know how to fix and manage everything else? Some distributions, such as Ubuntu, have figured this out. Face it, the only advantage the average person sees in Linux is that it is free and there are plenty of apparent disadvantages (I have to do what to play my new video game?). But then again, Windows and Mac OS X appear free as well since the computers they buy come pre-installed with them.
It IS better in some situations. I'm not going to buy Photoshop for a receptionist that wants to do a single thank you card or something. I've got a few people that often resize and crop enormous TIFF images so they can find points with a digitising program that would choke on the full sized images and doesn't need 300dpi images for enough accuracy anyway. I don't need to buy Photoshop just for that, and besides, it couldn't use the 16GB of memory on the machine the largest images are resized on. For that task it is inferior to gimp, Imagemagik etc due to the limitations of it being software on MS Windows stuck to around 2GB max. It's not all about full on graphic design and I can't justify a Photoshop licence for anyone that wants to do some occasional trivial work on images. Where it's non-trivial work and the colour depth limitations of gimp might possibly matter some day I've shelled out for the thing and a machine to run it as well as it can. Not many people have actually used Photoshop much so the different interface doesn't matter anyway. If someone has actually used Photoshop enough to get confused by the different interface and they need to do something non-trivial with images then that is when the get Photoshop.
Photoshop definitely has improved. When I last posted to a Photoshop newsgroup asking where "undo" was (like in gimp which I used before Photoshop) I ended up being flamed by about a dozen people telling me it wasn't there because true professionals didn't need it. Well, I was definitely not that, and if you are not a true professional graphic artist you really don't need Photoshop, I only used it because it was on that system. Besides, gimp now has far more features than the Photoshop those professionals were using back then.
Amazing... I don't even have to RTFA to find out what the 7 "sins" are. For once the list has been copied into the summary for me.
Alexander Peter Kristopeit bought his basement from his mommy for one dollar.
That's about as concisely and cogently as I have ever seen this premise explained.
A good example is the Google Safebrowsing incorporated in Firefox. I, personally, hate the idea and remove the lot immediately but, that said, I can spot a phishing or malware site a mile off and it's highly unlikely that any such malware will be compatible with my underlying OS anyway. However, for the typical user, this stuff is almost essential regardless of the privacy implications.
Resistance is futile. Reactance buggers it up.
Firstly, Apple used MS office on their computers anyway, and secondly there was no Apple presence in education in the UK at that time - it was all Acorn.
Lots of people can fix their own cars. Lots of people can handle plumbing. Almost everyone can cook, screw in simple fixtures in their home, fit a plug etc. Just because learned helplessness is common in some areas, doesn't mean it is a good thing.
Ubuntu hasn't "figured it out" because as you pointed out making things like games work requires at least the willingness to figure stuff out. I don't think they could figure it out either without compromising the essence of the OS.
If we can put a man on the moon, why can't we shoot people for Apollo-related non-sequiturs?
Why do people insist on demanding Microsoft live up to standards that Apple, and Linux arent asked to live up to?
Windows 7 doesnt even come with an email program now! Linux, and MAC OS come with an email program.
Mac OS comes with quicktime, and Microsoft gets called "anti competitive" because Media Player ships with windows!?
If windows didnt come with a web browser, how would download a competing web browser? ... or any other software option?
APPLE is JUST AS GUILTY if not worse, then any thing Microsoft has done in recent times. But Apple gets a free pass... WHY?
Just admit you hate Microsoft out of spite. It has very little to do with reality, and everything to do with personal bias.
Again... APPLE does far more to keep their users locked into "Apple's way". Apple is extremely closed in its workflow, applications and bundled software. It is Apple or nothing. And you know what... Thats what people like about the Mac!
No wonder Windows is falling so hard lately. They cant even do anything comprehensive without being called a "monopoly".
Microsoft is not a monopoly. Lets get over it. Apple's software runs on the same hardware. If anything Apple is far more closed, and controlling than windows has ever been.
Its really time to stop.
I'm all for making sure competition is fair, but not at the cost of a comprehensive environment / workflow. As long as you can use alternative software... I dont care how or what MS bundles with their OS, or what it builds into its OS. Just as long as its good.
Windows still runs exe's last i checked right?
Good. Then there will be alternatives to MS installed applications.
Ubuntu gets close; it chooses a lot of settings for you, which is why a lot of old timer Linux fanatics are up in arms over its popularity. You still have that good old terminal to change stuff if you know what you're doing, but it's unnecessary to do so.
I think once we get to the point when the audio mess is worked out, package management between distros is standardized and Wi-fi support is better, there won't be too many issues with Linux messes. Someday...
So I guess the only people who are truly free are those who can go out into the world buck naked and completely uneducated, survive, mine and refine their own minerals, build a workshop, build their own computer components in that workshop, assemble them and write their own drivers, OS, and other applications. But wait, they're still dependent on oxygen, water, food, and suitable living conditions.
Not picking on you specifically, damburger, but Anonymous Coward parent does bring up a great point that FOSS advocates often denounce without really thinking about it. If you've got to do everything on your own, you're never going to get anything useful done.
More to the point, the feeling of independence that people get using an OS such as Linux over Windows is an illusion. Are you going to write drivers for every piece of hardware you own? Are you going to write your own applications for everything you need to do? You can depend on Joe Developer or you can depend on the MS Team, but either way you can't get it all done yourself.
mmmm...forbidden donut
Yes, but does the average Joe know that? That was my point.
Try asking a few average computer users.
"'Windows, for some time now, has really been a DRM platform, restricting you from making copies of digital files,'"
Uhhh...excuse me? Does this mean all those mp3 dics I burned for my car in Win7 really didn't work, or the files I copied to my digital music player? All those Netflix and FlexDVD's that hit my Win7 machine really didn't get backed up and really didn't get outputted to a DVD-R? Wow, without the FSF telling me what Windows 7 couldn't do...I was starting to have major misconceptions based on actual working expierence.
While I agree with what most of the FSF does, I think this is just hate mongering. Some of the points they make is ok...but seriously...that kind of thing comes standard with any Windows installtion. FUD? Your fudding right!
But back to the DRM thing since it's what I know about. In no way did I see Windows7 as being any more obtrusive with digital media than XP was. This DRM crap they must be talking about is the same "create protected conetnet" crap they've been putting in to Windows Media Player for years.
Knock Knock ... 'this is the the MAFIAA' open your door and surrender you computer'
Yes, I'm left. You have a problem with that?
Freedom is exactly that, which is why nobody is truly free and its probably a good thing they aren't. However, in general, freedom is better than dependency.
The fact that, if forced to, you CAN do these things though gives you far more freedom than a Windows user.
If we can put a man on the moon, why can't we shoot people for Apollo-related non-sequiturs?
"The fact that, if forced to, you CAN do these things though gives you far more freedom than a Windows user."
No you can't. It is impossible for you alone to do what you are advocating. Even if you write every line of code for your OS, and the drivers, and the apps, etc. You still don't control the hardware unless you design, build, and manufacture it yourself. Which you can't.
The OS you choose has nothing to do with freedom. It is an illusion you grant yourself so you feel like you have some control in your life. Look at me I use linux flavor ABC all my data is safe. Excluding all the really important data which sits in government and corporations databases.
You may want to fiddle with your OS every saturday and if that makes you happy great. On saturday I like to spend time with my family, my businesses, my health, my education, and community services I do.
ChromeOS will just be another way of controlling you really; Google is, in a very MS-like move, intending to use their operating system to leverage people onto their cloud services. How free or not their OS will be irrelevant because its goal is to have you shove all your data off to Google.
To be blunt, you want a free OS you download and install Linux. Yes, Linux can be an absolute pain in the arse, you sometimes need to faff around to get the simplest things to work whereas a whole bunch of features you don't need work out of the box, but no matter how much of a mess it gets, it is always YOUR mess.
As G. B. Shaw said, "Liberty means responsibility, that is why most men dread it"
If you want to be free, be prepared to spend Saturday screwing around on the command line. If its too much hassle, go ahead and place your data in the hands of Google or MS.
One thing MS has never been guilty of is "leveraging people onto their cloud services." This isn't a very MS-like move. This is next-level. With MS, you use the platform but it will always be trivial for a private user to take his data and move it to OSX, Linux, or anything else if he decides to switch operating systems. His data is always on his own machine, under his control. If Windows 9 is released and changes that, he can choose not upgrade and walk away with his data if he wants to move elsewhere.
On Google's servers, if "the cloud" gets a change for the worse regarding data privacy, security, access, or control, there's no chance to see the change, decide it's a problem, and easily remove the data. The data is in Google's control, not the user's. If they want to change the privacy policy they just do it. If there's anything we've learned about Google it's that they believe in "opt-out." If you want to save your data before the cloud undergoes some objectionable change, you'll need to hear about it in advance and take action. When the data is on your local machine and Apple or MS decides to make the next OS scan it for advertising information, you can avoid it by doing nothing.
"I zero-index my hamsters" - Willtor (147206)
1. Poisoning education: They made a easier to use product in which people who work in the field of education found value. WON'T SOMEONE THINK OF THE CHILDREN? 2. Invading privacy: Those jerks don't want to call it Windows Gestapo! Curse their backwards naming!!! 3. Monopoly behavior: See "poisoning education", but this time, for hardware vendors! WON'T SOMEONE THINK OF THE NERDS (5% or less) who don't WANT windows?!? 4. Lock-in: They don't even support their own stuff anymore! By God, I couldn't find ANYONE to help me with my DOS 6.22 install! 5. Abusing standards: Our standards are better than theirs, but they don't agree!! 6. Enforcing Digital Restrictions Management (DRM): They allowed their media player to work with DRM-enabled files, therefore NOT alienating most of their users! What jerks!! 7. Threatening user security: They're popular and people try to hack it! How DARE they? 8. ??? 9. Profit!
I agree completely with you. I absolutely love *nix all around, but the issue for me is that after a long day of working on computers (albiet usually windows) I get a bit burnt out on actually working on my home machine. So I play games (and also fancy myself quite the level designer for FPS's) *nix still has quite a long way to go before games work well, and that includes *nix and the game developers, both have to work together if they want anything substantial to work. Simply put, make every steam game work on *nix, and I would completely drop windows in a heartbeat.
"It's ok, I'm completely secure as long as my iron is off"
...near as worthwhile a target as Windows platforms due to (a) market share...
Someone always trots out the market share argument for the poor security record of windows. It's a poor argument. Anyone with a net connection could find a few hundred windows machines and a few hundred linux machines with nmap in not very much time. If it turns out the windows ones are easier to crack that's in no way because there are more of them.
Give someone with no IT knowledge a windows machine and a ubuntu machine and they will both update themselves with little to no user interaction. The windows one will reboot more often and has still have a higher chance of security problems because microsoft software is written to a lower standard and tested by less people.
Linux is better than windows. That's not to say that linux is perfect, or anywhere near perfect, or that being 'better than windows' is good enough.
Did Stallman, Peace Be Upon Him, really say this? I refuse to click on links like this simply because I don't trust them. And really don't want them in the logs at work.
I have problems with Richard Stallman, Holiness to the Prophet, but I can't believe he'd espouse such an idea.
Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong fix.
They don't. Neither Apple nor "Linux" (which isn't an entity, in the first place) are permitted to use anticompetitive practices to illegally leverage a market position which meets the legal definition of monopoly.
Insofar as is legally relevant, Microsoft has been found to not only be a monopoly but to have been illegally abusing a monopoly position, in various jurisdictions.
Did Microsoft write the article summary? *ducks*
The FSF should definitely stop thinking about (and marketing) software freedom as a religious issue. Drop all these notions of "sin", "purity", and this whole "dogmatic" take to (computing) life. This crap only alienates people, and leads to wackos thinking in terms of faithful and sinners....
When will these idiots realize that the folks that are the most interested in (Free) software (and thus likely to care), are mostly of the technical rational kind. Never, they will keep making a religious purity argument out of FOSS....
How about putting on rational arguments forward? How about having someone in charge that actually is humanly capable of acknowledging a mistake and/or changing its own mind? Otherwise you only attract the "RMS is always right" kind of people.
Companies most of the time do NOT want to support anything on their own. They care about support, total cost, maintainability, stability, and features.
More often than not, the choice of software vendor is determined by name (say, reputation & experience with support, quality, etc), and the quality of the vendor's sales force.
In any case, the FSF is not getting anywhere making a religious issue out of software choice.
that their horrible "design" destroys anything that the good intention created!
Seriously, it looks like an intern did it. Or one of them "web developers" who drove a taxi before that job, and are still in 1999.
Any sufficiently advanced intelligence is indistinguishable from stupidity.
I like the objectivity of the article..."poisoning" is a great verb to use when you are trying to sound authoritative on a subject.
APPLE is JUST AS GUILTY
Actually Apple is "a ninth" as guilty.
You forgot to add balance to your argument - about 9 out of 10 computers sold are windows machines right? So the result of the Microsoft lock-in is NINE TIMES worse than that of Apple - and even worse applies this lock-in to a supposedly neutral platform.
Anyway some of us on Slashdot actually enjoy the vendor lock-in provided by Apple strange as it may seem to you - less configuration, better support etc - so please don't try to spoil a perfectly valid business model for us. Remember if you don't like it there is a competitor that you can choose that is NINE TIMES bigger.
The anticompetition thing Microsoft is going under is for Windows Media Player - not for DirectShow Filters. Quicktime is like a suite of DirectShow filters for the mac. The player is just a frame around that. WMP is much more then that.
Beyond the obvious method of physical distrobution, one can always download a browser through the wonders of wget.
90% of all computers don't come with Mac OS on them.
Right now, I'm wondering if you have some problems with the understanding of what is real or not. How can you say that Microsoft doesn't have a monopoly? Go to any shopping center, it doesn't matter where, and you can go into all the businesses and ask them if they have any computers without windows on them. The few who won't say 'no' are the people who don't even know what you're talking about. You won't find any public school in the US with student computers running anything but Windows (excepting the precious few schools which have been blessed by Apple), and you'll be hard-pressed to find one running servers running anything else.
And how the hell do you think that Apple is more locked than Microsoft? Last time I checked, there's a FOSS Mac OS X core available, but no FOSS Windows core. With Windows, you'll never be able to access the kernel, short of writing hardware driivers. Apple has contributed to the public, while Microsoft has only accepted payments from us. And don't forget, people still think highly of them because of the discounts they give to public education. While switching to a FOSS solution would save everyone billions combined.
Who's fault is it?
Eventually we have to draw the line on responsibility here.
During installation of Windows, you are asked, specifically and explicitly, if you would like to enable "Automatic" updates or configure them manually.
Big window. Only one there. Hard to miss.
This window pops up even on OEM computers during OOBE.
At what point do we start blaming the users for missing the obvious, being naive, or simply not caring? Is it *really* Microsoft's fault they fail at reading one of maybe 4 questions they are asked during setup? Is it really Microsoft's fault they couldn't care less?
...seeing as the only people who will take this campaign seriously are those are ALREADY use Linux. You think yout typical Dell customer is gonna be affected by this?
The price to upgrade from the previous version. If I ever switch to Mac OS, this will be the reason.
What Google has done is cooperate with the Chinese government in their censorship programs. To me, 'dont be evil' went out of the window right there and then.
That's just moral grey area. It's perfectly reasonable to consider obeying the Chinese censorship laws in order to do business there to be bringing more "good" to the people, then pulling out of the country entirely and leaving them with fewer, worse options would.
In any case, outdated Linux stereotype? Not at all. I love Linux but the fact is it still requires some fiddling...
Umm, ChromeOS is Linux. Some cell phones and PDA's are Linux. Linux doesn't necessarily mean a community driven distro distributed by hippies and with no central support.
What I was saying is that having a free (libre) computer experience does and will always require some legwork, and some people do prefer ease to freedom.
Why do you assert that? How much legwork do people have to put in to use a Linux cell phone? The same can be just as true for computers if MS's monopoly power and illegal actions are stopped. There is no reason free software can't be polished and easy to use and tailored to a hardware device by the OEM. The problem is the current market, largely due to criminal actions by MS, makes it uneconomical.
As much as I like and respect Stallman's works, and his fight for digital freedom, I find this little snippet quite disturbing.
What I appreciate about the statement, however, is that he's willing and able to deal logically with an issue which is too often dominated by fear. Most people aren't willing to discuss the issue, because if they come too close to advocating ephibophilia or pedophilia, or even just fail to assert opposition to it, they will be ostracized.
In my opinion, there's a basic problem of establishing consent. Children are not puppets, but it is relatively easy for an adult to manipulate them or silence them through threats or through the authority they hold over the child. From that perspective I agree with the law which says that when you're young enough you simply can't legally consent to various things, including sex. I don't believe any rule like "X years of age or older" will be perfect, erring on one side or other in various cases - I do think it's better to make the error of telling someone they're not old enough to consent when they are ready than to make the error of telling someone they are old enough to consent when they're truly not ready.
With teenagers I think we have a different set of problems: the age at which people are physically and mentally prepared to have sex does not correspond to the point at which they're legally allowed to. We've criminalized natural behavior.
Bow-ties are cool.
I *really* hate how the idea of cloud computing has been perverted to somehow mean your data is stored in "the cloud" ...but anyone who actually understands this technology knows that's not really what it's about.
Undoubtedly many companies look at cloud computing and see it as the customer lock-in strategy that file formats used to be. That said, you're doing the issue a disservice to unjustly imply there are no customer benefits to data stored in the cloud. Being able to get to your word processing document from any internet connected device and being able to collaborate and share that data provides significant benefit to the end user. Additionally, the data backup easily available and affordable and in use by normal consumers, makes the backup capabilities of cloud computing facilities very attractive.
Rather than fight an uphill battle against cloud computing, I think it makes more sense for industry regulators and legislators to step in and mandate privacy protections on user data, (encrypted storage, no access without direct approval of each instance/usage) as well as mandating data portability between "in the cloud" computing services.
Thank you for saying this, I was just going to mod you up, but I thought a reply would emphasize the point further.
I'd feel much better about what the FSF is doing if they weren't so intent on one target. Apple does just as much lock-in as it can and always seems to get a free pass. I seem to remember a new version of OSX is coming out, why no page about it's sins? iPhone? iTunes? Amazon's Kindle?
I'm not the biggest Microsoft fan, and they've been the bunt of many of my jokes, but it's hard to ignore the simple outright hate. From what I understand, the FSF is an organization that supposed to encourage positive growth in open software, not encourage negative hate towards certain companies.
Put this in a netbook form factor, maybe with HD TV out too, and it's the perfect multimedia Linux pocket companion. Getting very close now to what I'm waiting for.
http://74.125.95.132/search?q=cache:kuTSg2WmK0cJ:windows7sins.org/+http://windows7sins.org&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us&client=mozilla
Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
So far i've converted 3 people to Linux, and they are loving it. I'm trying my best...!
you know you can fry stuff putting things into things that dont like the things you put into it...
Why don't they just create some nice Linux on the Desktop ads for TV? Get a bounty going and have users donate to a fund that can be used to hire someone to create the ad even better yet have your users create an ad using tools available on Linux Desktop. I can't see why you couldn't get tons of cool ads that would kick ass on the Apple and MS ads I see on tv.
by TheSpoom (715771) Uncaring Linux user here. I have nothing to add to this but please continue. *munches popcorn*
"Windows, for some time now, has really been a DRM platform, restricting you from making copies of digital files"
There hasn't been ONE GODDAMNED THING preventing me from making copies of ANYTHING. If there is something that's supposed to keep me from copying stuff, it sure as hell isn't working.
Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
Instead of moaning about it , why don't they use their open source knowledge to help STRIP THE DRM OUT OF WINDOWS 7. I know it will be my #1 priority. That and installing a HEAVY FIREWALL to manage or disable Windows 7's collusion and communication with big name software manufacturers.
'i went to see that page and i found it really horrible. the layout is not professional at all'
;)
The use of the lower case first-person singular is a nice touch
davecb5620@gmail.com
Yes, of course it's their fault. It's also their fault for users not patching their systems when it's turned off because they've designed such an insecure operating system.
Interesting.
"I now no longer believe the FUD from the freetard cr .."
..
I stopped reading past the 'freetard' comment
davecb5620@gmail.com
I do believe you're a diehard linux fan... I really do :]
...
"... I'm frankly getting sick of the FSF. This latest stupid campaign reads like it was written by some petulant teenager without the first clue as to the realities of life"
I take it you that you don't disagree that the following is an accurate depiction of Microsoft practices.
Poisoning education, Invading privacy, Monopoly behavior, Lock-in, Abusing standards, Enforcing Digital Restrictions Management (DRM), Threatening user security
"and it tars the rest of us who support (and in my case actually write) OSS with the same idiotic uncompromising brush"
That would be speaking only for yourself and what OSS have you contributed to ?
--
Bill Gates' hurricane stopper
davecb5620@gmail.com
History? Reading? Writing? Spelling? Math? What are you talking about. The U.S. has dumbed down education so badly that the citizenry is becoming illeterate and uneducated even in comparison to a third world nation and the entire reason for this is the fact that our political system has degenerated from the Constitution of "We the People" to "We The Corporations". Not only that but I'm sorry to say that the 4th Reich has managed to assume lots of power in the United States and they've done it through our Educational Process by refusing to teach our kids how to Think for themselves. This is a sorry fact of life in the former United States of America because it the principles that were enshrined in our highest document have been repeatedly and continously violated for both economic and political gain by a few individuals.
Take a breath. Also, are you being ironic?
Interesting.
"The U.S. has dumbed down education so badly that the citizenry is becoming illeterate and uneducated...
It's almost certainly just a typo, but there's just something funny about seeing "illeterate" in a rant about the educational system.
DRM will never be defeated by shooting the messenger.
How about we give it a try a few times and see what happens to the DRM when there are no more messengers?
--bornagainpenguin
Have a Virgin Mobile USA smartphone? Give VMRoms.com a try!
In Western democracies turnout can vary a lot, so if a candidate gets say 51% with 50% turnout he got 25.5% of potential voters.
Hitler, even with a street army intimidating voters, never got more than 33% of the vote (much less the population). He used some "national emergency" political maneuvers to take power and take power and cancel future elections. I think there was a subsequent election, run by the nazis with little opposition and direct intimidation of voters (invisible ink to find out who voted how, fictional counts, etc.) but he certainly did not have a consensus for war and genocide.
Most Germans, certainly most Berliners, were against going to war. They were driven to fight by intimidation and propaganda.
And I'm off topic... Damn Godwin!
You got me into this! You were the ideologue! I'm only a poor assassin! - Twenty evocations, Bruce Sterling
"Just because you're family doesn't entitle you to take-advantage of other members."
In my experience, yes, it kind of does. Certainly one shouldn't go too far overboard, but that's one of the perks - and prices - of being family.
I thought the BSD TCP stack was the reference implementation, hence everyone copied it.
GLaDOS for President 2016! "Well here we are again. It's always such a pleasure." -- GLaDOS, 2011
It doesnt matter than 9 out of 10 computers are microsoft windows machines. Thats user preference. Users do have a choice you know!
No one is forcing me to buy a dell windows pc. I could go to the Apple store and by a MAC, which is the same exact hardware. Not only is it the same exact hardware, you cant service your hardware without bringing it to Apple and they dont allow anyone to sell "mac clones".
It does not matter at all how many people buy a product, if there is a choice in the market place. There will always be a prefered choice by the majority but that does not mean you have a monopoly. ESPECIALLY when the competition is allowed to do what you're not allowed to do. Thats unfair!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Imagine if microsoft made it so that windows only ran on microsoft hardware. Wouldnt that be illegal? Wouldnt dell be pissed off? Wouldnt ALL of the OEM's around the world go ape shit?. Well then why is Apple allowed to LOCK in, its os... to only hardware it sells?
Why is Apple allowed to bundle itunes, safari, mobile me, mail, ichat and many others, and Microsoft is told "you cant".
Why cant my iphone run firefox or opera's web-browser? Why cant I play FLAC in itunes????????
I dont care how many people buy a product. It really does not matter as long as there is competition. If anything it proves that EVEN if you try to lock in people like Apple does... you can still lose to competition.
Apple's entire company is based on them providing you a complete experience/service. They dont want you going outside the Apple walls, and they make it very hard to. Apple is so good at locking its users in to the Apple world, and it is the reason many people buy a MAC in the first place!
"Anyway some of us on Slashdot actually enjoy the vendor lock-in provided by Apple strange as it may seem to you - less configuration, better support etc - so please don't try to spoil a perfectly valid business model for us. Remember if you don't like it there is a competitor that you can choose that is NINE TIMES bigger. "
EXACTLY.. See, there is my point.
BTW. I dont agree at all with the nine times bigger. That doesnt matter. What matters is market competition. MAC vs PC = same hardware, different software. They are two great options.
But anyways you proved my point. APPLE is good at locking people in, and most if not all users who buy Apple, are attracted to that "lock-in" that apple provides, because like you said its less configuration, better support etc.
Apple's all inclusive mentality is attractive! OK... so Why cant Microsoft offer an all inclusive experience?
It's not fair that one is allowed to do one thing, and the other is not. There is no reason to allow Apple an unfair advantage, while people sit around and claim Microsoft has an unfair advantage.
PERSONALLY... like you said... Apple users are attracted to that all inclusive mentality, and guess what... so are PC users but we live in a very fractured software world, where as Apple users live in a very complete software world were it interacts nicely and seamlessly provides a unifying experience. That unifying experience is a value to mac users!
To PC users though, its wrong. Its wrong for us Windows PC users, but not wrong for Mac users? AND its also the very reason many are leaving windows to go to apple.
Microsoft needs to be allowed to do whatever it must, but not at the expense of blocking other companies from writing competing software. That means, Microsoft can ship windows with an email program, but cant design windows in a way that blocks a user from installing a different email program.
JUST because something comes installed with an OS, does not make it prefered or anti competitive. Hell most Dell PC's come pre-installed with garbage i'll never use, and yet they're allowed to do it and microsoft cant.
Microsoft is damned if it does, damned if it does not. I'm tired of MS writing "example software" that ships with its os. By that i mean, software that has its balls cut off because they're terrorfied of being penalized again.
As long as you can still install firefox, eudora, thunderbird, aim... whatever.... MS should be allowed to bundle their software with the OS, and it should be comprehensive software.
LOOK at windows backup. they purposely limit its functionality, so that it ALMOST works as a solution... but it does not provide a solution at all because it's limited to a single back up job with very little options. Compare that with Apple's Time Machine... APPLE GETS AWAY WITH MURDER BECAUSE IT PROVIDES REAL FUNCTIONALITY THAT THE USERS LIKE!
Every peice of software included with windows, is example software. NONE of it has any serious functionality because they purposefully write it in a way that it does nothing useful. This is so the competition feels better about themselves.
Is Norton ghost crying foul at Apple's Time Machine? DOES ANYONE REALLY CARE? I'd rather have a nice solid backup solution built into my OS!!!
Instead we have windows 7 backup, which now allows you to select which files you want to back up, but it only allows you a single back up job. Lets say you only want files A B C to go to back up drive 1, and you want files D E F to go to back up drive 2. You cant do that with windows 7 backup because they're affraid of being called anti competitive.
And it leaves me wishing I owned a MAC with Apple's Time Machine.
SEE the problem?
Windows 7's "Sins"... sounds like it would be a list of problems with Windows 7, yet all but two of the "sins" is about Microsoft or one of their other products.
Also?
"The security of your computer and network depends on two things: what you do to secure your computer and network, and what everyone else does to secure their computers and networks."
-and-
"Unfortunately your browser does not have JavaScript enabled. Please consider whitelisting this site."
Fuck that. I'm not enabling javascript. Fix the goddamned site so it doesn't ask for potential security risks to be enabled if you're that concerned about how secure people's computers are.
"Right now, I'm wondering if you have some problems with the understanding of what is real or not. How can you say that Microsoft doesn't have a monopoly? Go to any shopping center, it doesn't matter where, and you can go into all the businesses and ask them if they have any computers without windows on them."
Go to an Apple store, do you see any Apple computers with windows on them?
Go to best buy, do you see any windows PCs with MAC OS on them? No, because Apple refuses to allow that to happen.
Apple in many ways keeps itself out of the PC world by strictly controlling its products!
Apple does not allow MAC OS to be installed on non-Apple PC hardware. Apple does not allow Mac Clones. The only thing stopping windows PC users from installing Mac Os on their Pc hardware... is Apple and not Microsoft.
I have no problem understanding what is real or not. I'm just capable of seeing the bigger picture, which others are not. I dont break down the PC market vs the Mac market. They are the same personal computer market. You have a choice, buy a Windows pc, or an Apple pc. They run on the same hardware. Oddly enough Apple's software only runs on hardware they strictly control. Imagine if Microsoft did that? Your head would explode in anger. And yet why is Apple allowed to dictate the hardware it runs on?
You see... Windows became popular because it ran on PC compatibles. That is why Apple lost historically. Apple makes a very nice product, but they're very strict about where you buy it, and what it runs on. They make sure you pay through the ass for something that PC compatibles do just as well, but cheaper.
Apple's small market share, is their own doing. Not Microsoft's.
There are two ways of looking at the PC market. 1, is it just a windows market, or is it a windows, mac os, linux market?
I say its a 3 way market. Yes Windows has the majority share, but so what? Crayola crayons has a majority share too. There will always a greater percentage of something, but that does not mean there is a monopoly.
Microsoft's greatest mistakes were with the API tricks they pulled and rightfully so they were penalized. However this has gone too far. People just hate microsoft and they cant admit it. At this point, most people dont even know why they hate micrsoft. I hate them too for many reasons, mainly though for writing incomplete software, and i suspect thats due to fear of being called "anti competitive"
Cutting the balls off, so that Apple can get away with murder and raise its market share... is not fair.
When i grew up, my highschool had commadore 64's and Apple computers. They did eventaully get PCs though. Its my understanding that Apple was the only thing available in most schools back then. Back then it was less clear as to whom would be used by everyone. Today thats clearer, and both systems are quite similar if not the same now. I learned Word, on a Mac in high school.
That has nothing to do with it. The core? The kernal? it has nothing to do with this. Thats like saying if Ford invented a brand new engine type, they must tell their competitors how it works, and produce it for free. Its silly. A company can make a product as it sees fit.
We're talking about bundled features with the OS and strict control over hardware, software and service.
Apple is allowed to do what Microsoft wishes they could.
I'm glad you posted rather than mod me up. You added something to this that i failed to do so...
I wasnt even thinking about OSX Snow Leopard coming out. Thats very interesting. FSF is out to criticize Windows 7 which will be released very shortly, but not the new version of OSX which comes out around the same time?
I guess Apple does no evil?
Its clearly hatred. Its unfair and bitter. Its become cliche to attack Microsoft.
Microsoft deserves a lot of criticism but they dont deserve to be hated so blindly. Apple gets away with murder... and mainly because Apple users like that "lock in". They enjoy that all inclusive experience because its different than what microsoft offers. Ironically Microsoft cant offer it, because they will be slaughtered by governments and bitter critics all around the world.
So Apple gets a free pass.
Its not right. Frankly I think we stand for freedom a bit more universally, or at least be fair to microsoft and allow them to compete with Apple, using Apple's style of "all inclusive experience".
I'm not the biggest Microsoft fan either. Sometimes i think they're out of touch and provide poorly designed software because they lack vision... and other times i think "If only Microsoft were allowed to write software that has full features, rather than "just enough" features to keep them from getting sued by the anti competition/microsoft haters"
Microsoft is not perfect.
Windows 7 is very nice btw.
Mac OS is also very nice.
I enjoy both platforms, but i see the hypocrisy for its as clear as day.
I'm not against Free Software, and I actually like Linux a hell of a lot. I love that people are so dedicated to the cause, and their work... so much that money doesnt even matter... and that the ideals do matter more than anything. I LOVE that. Its passion, its generous, and its a wonderful thing we should promote...
but not at the cost of being mean and spiteful.
Yet, it is precisely TC that enables those applications to restrict your freedoms; without TC, there would not be such restrictions.
This is the same reason certain other classes of items are subject to regulation: weapons, encryption, chemicals, etc. It is not the thing itself that is problemmatic -- the trouble comes from what other people do with that thing.
Cheers,
"What in the name of Fats Waller is that?"
"A four-foot prune."
At $BIG_GROCERY_CHAIN they recently changed their customer discount cards to a new style for reasons I never really questioned. The ink on the new card (keychain style) scratched off in my pocket within a week. The old card lasted nearly five years without issue. Unfortunately the old card is no longer supported.
I know it's a stretch and I'll probably get voted off-topic, but I thought it was an interesting comparison.
This signature intentionally left blank.
convincing fortune 500 CIO's that getting paid for your product is fundamentally evil is a hard sell.
Getting paid for your product is not fundamentally evil.
There are plenty of other things which are, however, and Microsoft does quite a few of them. Some of them are listed in TFA. "Charging for its software" is not on that list.
-- The Wanderer
According to the FSF's site, "This page is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-No Derivative Works 3.0 License.
Ahem.
... and then they built the supercollider.
All OK about DRM and Windows. Recently i helped a new MACBook-User to "move" her music .....
First step: All music on the ipod was deleted.
They treat their customers like criminals !
FSF: Please investigate also the MAC-DRM so people are informed.
I think Apple is worse regarding DRM than Windows. You won't find so many "workarounds".
Greetings from Switzerland
Quite a funny combination:
The IE standard support can't be beaten, I guess... Pity you don't have support for Firefox or anything on the OS you're a "fanboi" for. :-)
Thanks for the deep insight into monopoly economics and behaviour, like actively destroying standard compliance as a business practice.
Karma: Excellent (My Karma? I wish...:-( )
I'm afraid it goes much further than that. There was no warning whatsoever about the facial hair shown in the video. I had to get up 3 times last night to calm down my daughter. She happened to sit next to me when I played the video.
Riiiiight.
So, it's Microsoft's fault people don't update because it's an insecure Operating system. Uh-huh. Sure. Ok.
*backs away slowly*
>>>>>"He just kept saying "But Vista's the latest and bestest program..."
>>I'm sure he wanted the "bestest". I'll tell you what's annoying - reading people who semi-quote others by dumbing down their language to make them look incompetent or clueless... I maintain that if you lie about "how" they said something...
>>>
No need. He really talks like that.
He also says things like,
"I stopped by but youse weren't home."
"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
We agree :P I was just trying to illustrate the absurdity that many people here claim; damned if you do, damned if you don't.
Interesting.
The needs of the people outweigh the rewards of hard work and creative output.
Where have I heard this crapola before?
Using the word "leveraging" like this is a sin.