Slashdot Mirror
MS kills Linux demo at PIII launch
An anonymous reader writes
"Spencer F. Katt has written a piece that among other
things describes how
Microsoft
forced Gateway and Micron to demo their PIII machines
running NT intead of Red Hat as had been planned. Nice to
see the DOJ case is teaching them nothing. "
What happened to all the "ZDNet spreads FUD" posts? A bunch of fair-weather friends it appears. A good number of slashdotters cry FUD if it is against Linux, but claim it must be true if it is for Linux.
My comments are not in agreement or disagreement with the article.
Sean Farley
Part of the problem with the moderation is how the moderation function has been implemented. What non-moderators can't see is that, at the bottom of each comment, there are five radio buttons to change the comment's score. These are labelled --, -, 0, +, and ++, and they allow the moderator to increase or decrease the score. The page works like a big form, so the moderation entry does not take effect until one reaches the bottom of the page, and hits the "moderate" button.
The problem is the following. Say a moderator decides that a comment has some minor problems (say it's repetitive), such that he feels it should only have a score of zero. He thus enters a '-' to lower its score by one, and continues reading down the page. The problem is that by the time he reaches the bottom, and enters his change, three other moderators may have done the same thing, such that the message ends up with a score of -3.
Another problem is that, as a moderator, I am reluctant to second guess the choices of other moderators, and start a one-up-one-down bidding war.
I would like to suggest the following changes:
1. Set a lower limit of -2, so that AC's don't have too far to go to reach the bottom. We don't really need anything beyond 0 (nothing special), -1 (lame), and -2 (MEEEP/really obnoxious).
2. Replace the +/- system with one that allows a target score to be entered. The moderator can enter a large or small number, but his entry will only change the score by +/-1. If the message is already at the target score when the request is entered, then the entry does not reduce the moderators vote count.
3. Consider replacing the current system (one-up, one-down, limited votes) with one that averages the first x (say 20) votes for each message. This could be implemented by attaching a vote segment to the message, and storing up to x (say 20) vote+moderator# pairs. Moderators would have unlimited votes, but would be limited to one vote for a given message.
4. The display of the radio buttons seems to really slow down the browser for a large (e.g. flat) page. I don't really have a solution for improving it, but you might consider replacing the radio buttons with a link to a moderator voting page. Right-clicking the link would allow immediate entry for the moderator, without leaving the comments page. The link would carry the cid# to the voting form.
Regards,
An Anonymous Moderator
This latest stunt (it would be *wonderfull* if the DOJ could confirm it and use it as evidence during THE trial) is just Yet Another Facet of M$'s Grand Plan to maintain absolute control over the market.
First, you lock the competition out of the most convenient distribution channels: hence the pre-loading agreements. (This also has the convenient side effect of garanteing (sp?) you a constant incoming flow of cash, while the competition has to sell its wares through stores... but how do you compete against something that's already loaded and perceived to be free?)
Second, you prevent your competition from getting any exposure whatsoever. Hence killing this demo, or preventing NetScape from appearing (sp?) on the desktop.
This was not just a simple childish fit on M$'s behalf. This is preventing the unwashed masses from learning that there is something else than M$ out there. As long as Joe Schmoe Consumer is unaware of the existence of alternative, he will not think of asking for an alternative.
Get it?
If VA research could get in the conference and demo oracle8 and redhat in the next booth it might make quite an impression.
If oracle/linux blew away gateway and micron servers both MS and GW/micron would look bad.
Chuck
all they need to do is hit "frappe" and it's all
over. I don't think that Gateway or Micron could
survive having their license prices for Windows
jacked up.
I mean, do you let the kids keep eating or do you
gamble it because you have to push Linux right
now? Besides, we can wait. Staying power is the
OSS movement's biggest advantage.
----
Every year during my review, I just pray the words "slashdot.org" aren't mentioned.
to prove what sort of monopoly control Microsoft
has.
Besides, I don't think the OSS community ought to
get involved in the marketing sham that is the
PIII. I don't have anything against Intel anymore,
they're not the monopoly they used to be, but this
chip looks like a slightly souped up PII that
they're selling for hundreds more and using to
change sockets yet again...
I wonder if, in the long term, all this socket
changing will hurt them instad of their
competitors. I mean, AMD asking for their own
socket a few years ago would have been suicide,
but now....
----
Every year during my review, I just pray the words "slashdot.org" aren't mentioned.
While I wouldn't be surprised if BillyG and the boys did something like that, what sort of supporting evidence is there? Articles like this seem to be so much hearsay, wishful thinking and hype. Does anyone have any more concrete references?
I sent messages to three journalists, asking them to investigate.
Stephen Shankland of c|net (stephens@cnet.com)
Andy Patrizio of CMPnet TechWeb (apatrizi@cmp.com)
David Berlind of ZDNet (david_berlind@zd.com)
err, there was nothing in the article to suggest 'force'. maybe microsoft just said 'please' nicely.
(the author said 'thumbscrews' but he was clearly lying)
nice touch, to see someone checking and verifying what appears to be an uncredited article.
I'm somewhat cautious in commenting until there are more substatiated confirmation. I read the article. I could not see any news source quoted here. I could not see any journo's name credited.
it's often said the first casulty of war is the truth....interested to see what the journo's report
peterrenshaw ~ Another Scrappy Startup
"Microsoft still has the OEM's nuts in a blender; all they need to do is hit "frappe" and it's all over. I don't think that Gateway or Micron could survive having their license prices for Windows jacked up."
Hard to disagree with that.
OTOH, Microsoft might be in for some interesting discussions with its licensees in the next few months. From what I could read in theregister and the WSJ, several of those vendors had "most favored nation" clauses in their Windows9x contracts, such that no other vendor should have been able to get a lower price. Given that most of the hard data is still under seal, it still appears that Microsoft may have violated some of those agreements, promising several vendors a different, "lowest" price.
Unlike the antitrust lawsuit, this would be quite easy to demonstrate in court, and compensatory damages easy to figure. If a Dell or Gateway hits Microsoft with a breach of contract suit for $1b or so, M$ could find itself in real trouble.
sPh
Seriously, though, I think raising these second hand rumours to the level of a /. headline is probably uncalled for and unproductive. People who would believe it already hate MS/Borg, and people who won't believe it are already totally supportive of MS, the last defender of innovation in the computer marketplace.
When I want slanted news stories and unsubstantiated rumours presented as fact, I already know where to go. (Hint: Starts with 'ZD'.)
"The only good windmill is a tilted windmill."
The article doesn't mention how MS coerced Gateway and Micron into switching the demo. Until I hear more details I'm just as cheesed off at them for caving as I am at Microsoft for applying pressure.
Y'know, if this is more than just a
rumor, any OEM could thwart MS's tactics
rather easily, especially with DOJ
looking so interested:
"What? You want us to run NT instead
of Linux? Well, before we do that, we'll
need to get it on tape. Be sure to state
your name and your employee ID, okay?"
-----
".sig,
What we really need (though I don't expect it will arrive any time soon) is collaborative moderation.
When reading comments, you can say 'I like this comment' or 'I don't like this comment'. Then Slashdot will match your likes / dislikes against other people with similar tastes, and will guess on your behalf which comments to show, based on what others with the same tastes as you have chosen. That way, there is no central moderator for people to be pissed off with. Occasionally, Slashdot would show a comment even if it thought you might not like it; if it turns out you do like it, that signals that your preferences have changed from what Slashdot thought.
Kind of like Amazon.com's recommendations: 'other people who liked this comment also liked these comments'.
-- Ed Avis ed@membled.com
Suppose you are the manager for a project of this sort -- a demonstration that will sell hundreds, thousands, etc. of new processors and new software, the success of which will directly impact your marketing program. You are going to want to make sure EVERYTHING works as promised. So at this point there are two options:
1. Gateway and Micron were in on the FUD program with MS and just gave an appearance of Linux loyalty.
2. Gateway and Micron were pressured into folding by MS.
Option 1 falls apart for Gateway because of their past commitment to Linux. I don't know Micron's stance. But option 1 also gets Gateway into a lot of trouble with any demo attendees who were expecting Linux, if they deliberately lied all along.
Nothing worth doing is worth doing today.
I have a suggestion that you may or may not abide by. As a moderator, you have been given oversight power here at /. You should therefore not respond to these types of comments as then you become part of the issue. Your role as a moderator means (to me at least) that you should exercise self-constraint in the face of postings dealing with moderation. I also feel that you comment about stop whining was inappropriate. It might have been okay if I had said it, but from you, no.
Good luck in your thankless but important role as moderator.
And please, don't respond to this.:-)
Once upon a time, there were a group of about 22 people known as Slashdot moderators. Within the last week, CT decided to give every registered user with a positive score moderator status, too. That added almost 460 new moderators.
This first week or two is going to be filled with many more moderated comments, whether moderated correctly or not.
Don't think people are intentionally being "censors", but the vast majority of moderators are greenhorns. Just give it time to work itself out.
Just so you know...
I'm running RH5.9 (Starbuck) and it includes both Gnome 1.0 and KDE 1.1. RH has hired a couple KDE developers onto it's staff to port it to QT 2.0 as well.
Also, if running xdm, gdm, or kdm on 5.9, you can select which desktop you want to run on every login. Current choices are Gnome, KDE, AnotherLevel, and Default (last picked). I'm sure this will be configurable.
All I'm saying is that while going with Gnome for the default, they're also supporting KDE and various WMs, and making it easy even for a pure newbie to experiment... trying each one till they figure out what they like. And not just enabling choice, but making it pretty darn easy.
I think that is a good thing. I like gnome, and that's what I use. (Well, usually. For the most part, I run whatever I feel like, whenever I feel like it.) But I like choice more. (Choice meanining picking out whatever you wish, be it good or evil, or whatever your point of view, and living with the consequences either way. Remember Clockwork Orange? That's what I mean.) And I'm very happy to see these recent developments for the upcoming 6.0.
My two bits, for whatever they're worth...
As if it weren't obvious before, now it is even more so. Anyone that can stand and say with a straight face that microsoft does not hold monopoly power has got to be blind. I'm wondering if a few thousand plesant emails from the slashdot community to Micron and Gateway would be enough to change their minds. I'm sending them each a message and encourage everyone else to as well.
--
``Money certainly is cool. That's why I traffick children. Now, I love children, and wouldn't myself do anything to hurt them--but hey, business and business, and I have to eat! Most of the children don't have much of a future anyways. They're so easy to round up and they do fetch a good price--$50 a head on the open market. You can find some deals of mine on eBay, and please be sure to leave me some good feedback.''
Please, please, please, don't be one of those people who live for stock prices. It hurts everyone involved, and the stock price does eventually come down. I personally could make lots of money by spending my life doing Windows NT coding for a product that doesn't yet have any NT port. The product is currently suffering, and I do believe I could go in and ``fix it''. But I don't want to. I'm also torn--I could get a good foot in the door in this company, and might even get them to use Linux. But I don't want to do NT coding if I don't have to.
This reminds me of coder(at)ibm.net's policy: he's been a profitable SI valley consultant for 20 years, and he won't even go near a machine using any Microsoft software. He goes so far as to block all mail from a Microsoft-controlled domain (*@*.msn.com; *@*.hotmail.com). Even I don't go that far.
<sigh> This is a bit of a rant. Go ahead and moderate it, people.
Cheers,
Joshua.
--jon. Postel is dead. May we all mourn his, and our, loss.
I know for a fact that Oracle for Linux beats NT, AND Solaris.
I'm not so sure about this. Certainly Oracle for NT sucks and they ought to be ashamed that they even release the product and call it an enterprise solution. Between Solaris and Linux... I use both (and Oracle on Digital UNIX) and it's a tough call. I can't really pit Oracle for Linux up against my Sparcs because it's hard to draw a hardware comparison that's truly fair.
I do think that the Linux solution is just as good for mid-volume applications. And it's definitely cheaper. But, Solaris scales up WAY past what you can currently do with Oracle on Linux. As Oracle continues to support Linux, you may see that change. But for now, Oracle for Linux remains my first choice for personal projects, and Oracle for Solaris remains my first choice when I need a very-high-volume-and-uptime solution. And when spending a large corporation's money.
What a crybaby.
/. I was quite pleased with the way things are handled. And yes, I have my threshold set down so far I can pretty much see anything that's being said. However, people who don't want to see flamebait, statements made on behalf of idiots, OT comments, etc., can for the most part, whisk it away.
/. is very simple, it gives you choice. I can choose to see comments made by people that several moderators have rated. I can choose to see it to varying degrees, or even read only the best comments. I can always pull out all the stops and read whatever comments I want.
/. would be akin to forcing someone to watch only one channel on their TV. I want variety, I want to be able to see what I want, and I want my neighbors to have that choice too.
Doesn't matter much to me what a post is set at. I can see them all. I've seen other "systems" in which they try to maintain anonymity & freedom for people to say what they want, and it goes down the tubes anyways. Guess what, they either tend to lose the anonymity side, they start censoring things, or they turn into such a useless forum everyone stops using it (except people spamming in their url's).
When I first started reading
Certainly, moderators are going to give things improper ratings at times. Its all a part of being human. But then again, let he who is free of sin cast the first stone.
I'm not saying be blissful and ignorant of mistakes. However, if you think you will accomplish anything by giving snide comments, well, its not going to work, welcome to life. If you perhaps, suggested a solution, it might.
Moderation on
Pulling this type of moderation on
PS: If I get moderated down, great, I was continuing an off-topic thread anyways. But at least I have the *freedom* to write that, and people can choose whether they want to read something not relevant to the topic or not.
MS cites Linux as evidence that it doesn't have an OS monopoly. By "convincing" OEMs not to demo Linux on their machines, MS surely gives the appearance that it does have an OS monopoly. How does it want to be perceived - as a company which has a monopoly, or not?
We all need to remember that it's the dire prospect of simply not making as MUCH money that has the m$ board of trustees and associated bigwigs worried.
When you're so rooted in an industry as to almost be considered a utility rather than a company, you don't just suddenly go bankrupt one day. Look at the dinosaurs of IBM and AT&T--cut into pieces, forming new divisions and discarding old ones, but still unshakeable.
It could be reasoned that the only way the m$ entity could screw things up for itself is by ruining the trust the Public seem to have in it. As more and more of what has been going on in the DOJ proceedings comes to light (or is supressed, whatever the case may be), MicroSoft is becoming less like the Big Brother you play catch and drink beer with and more like the Big Brother from a George Orwell novel.
This is just another example of m$ demonstrating that it doesn't really deserve that trust. If they don't feel that the Public have enough sense to make intelligent buying descisions, or even have the right to see competing products outperform and surpass their own on an even playing field--then where does that leave us?
Oracle for Linux kicks the crap out of Oracle for NT, and that's what they're afraid of. When everyone starts seeing how good Linux is at running serious enterprise solutions, they'll switch. We should get some real numbers out on the web... I know for a fact that Oracle for Linux beats NT, AND Solaris.
excerpt from MS vs. DOJ trial transcripts 1999.01.14.pm, Dean SCHMALENSEE, economist, top Microsoft witness, makes the following sworn statement on record (quoted transcript in capital letters): BOIES quotes Gates: 'POPULAR NEWCOMERS SUCH AS LINUX POSE NO THREAT TO WINDOWS. LIKE A LOT OF PRODUCTS THAT ARE FREE, YOU GET A LOYAL FOLLOWING EVEN THOUGH IT'S SMALL. I HAVE NEVER HAD A CUSTOMER MENTION LINUX TO ME,' Then BOIES asks SCHMALENSEE: 'IS [this] CONSISTENT WITH YOUR UNDERSTANDING OF THE INDUSTRY?' answer: 'YES'. Uhm, gonna be interesting for him to explain recent Microsoft actions ... (he is being called back for rebuttal)
--Coke