Slashdot Mirror
Did Microsoft Borrow GPL Code For a Windows 7 Utility?
Goatbert writes "Rafael Rivera over at WithinWindows.com has found evidence that Microsoft has potentially stolen code from an open source/GPL'd project (ImageMaster) for a utility made available on the Microsoft Store to allow download customers to copy the Windows 7 setup files to a DVD or USB Flash Drive. If Rivera's evidence holds up, this could be some serious egg in the face for Microsoft at a time when they're getting mostly good press from the tech media."
Why? I don't get it. Sure, Windows 7 is about 100x better than Vista, but it's still buggy, unstable, a late copy cat of other superior OSes that have been out for a while (Mac/Ubuntu), and worst of all: Horribly prone to viruses.
In the last two months I've done 20 reformats and OS installs. Of the 20, 10 were Windows 7 installs, and 7 were Linux Mint installs, and the other 3 were stock Ubuntu. Of the 7 Mint installs, I have gotten NO tech support calls. Not one. Every customer is happy and going about their business happily watching YouTube, making docs in Open Office, and IMing in Pidgin. Literally, not ONE tech support call. I got one tech support call for Ubuntu, the client didn't know how to install flash. I should've done that before I "finished" the job. Kind of my fault.
No less than 5 of the Windows 7 installs have had to be REDONE. 5 of the clients got viruses within the first week, and needed a reformat. I switched 3 of them to Ubuntu 9.10. The other 2 I gave extremely stern lectures about Firefox, and bookmarked redtube on the bookmarks toolbar.
I don't understand why everyone is all over MS in a good way for Windows 7. It is still under-featured, bloated, prone to viruses, slow to boot, and lacking in stability compared to almost every Linux distro out these days. The ONLY reason I install Windows is for gamers. And even for some of them I setup dual boot with Ubuntu or Mint and try to make them boot to Linux for everything BUT gaming.
I hold very few opinions. I hold information based on observation and fact. If you wish to disagree, please use facts.
Wow, did you even look at the current example? You must be braindead if you don't realize there is a common origin.
You mean other than the format specs? Dumbass.
"His name was James Damore."
I used to think Lotus Notes was painful, bloated and clumsy.
And you don't now?
After the ease of Lotus, the support for on/off/unknown network states realize how ungrateful I was.
Maybe your company should have just fixed the network. Of course, Outlook works just fine in offline mode too, so really I have absolutely no idea what your trying to suggest here.
The *ease* of Lotus? Notes is the antithesis of "ease."
I miss the Lotus and easy synchronization.
You miss "the Lotus." Are you still in 3rd grade, by chance?
And yeah, easy synchronization. Like how you have to buy additional software to get Notes to synchronize to... well, basically *any device at all*. And how it'll then corrupt that device's database by various means-- my favorite was when it tried to enter meetings that ended before they began into a Palm. (Admittedly, the Palm should have rejected the meeting instead of corrupting itself, but still-- how the holy hell does Notes even *allow* meetings to end before they begin?)
Then the business unit I was in was sold to a Microsoft Exchange company.
I may have the opposite problem. My company's been sold to a company that, I understand, uses Notes. If they try to force me onto Notes, I'm quitting. And yes, I *do* feel that strongly about it.
Comment of the year
You are clearly an idiot. Quote from me:
"What I said is "Microsoft" probably didn't know about, authorize or condone the use of (GPL)open source code. That does not mean it is OK that it did happen."
Yeah, that sounds like I clearly think MS should be in the clear. By me saying MS is a victim it implies I think they are still liable for what happened. You are also continuing to prove my point by throwing around the "their actions." statement. Microsoft employs almost 100,000 people, mistakes or slip ups by small number or individuals does not equate to corporate sponsorship or policy which. Corporate policies or attitudes can be refereed to as 'their'. You don't say McDonalds is a dick company that promotes being dicks because one time you had a dick drive through operator.
Surely if a open source developer slipped MS code in a project that *individual* would be the one to blame, not the project or the whole open source community? Correct?
You are displaying irrational MS hating behaviors. This is a situation where Microsoft could clearly be legally liable but that doesn't mean the corporation meant to do what they did nor does it mean they are evil. It means a few people didn't do their jobs and will likely lose their jobs IF it even turns out they copied anything.