True, but telling someone that they can get a copy of band "XYZ"'s new song "123" at the following URL is hardly a generic statement. And that's basically what a Bittorrent tracker is doing.
Telling someone to break the law may not be illegal, but if someone did what you told them to do, then you can be held as an accessory to the crime. If you plan a bank robbery, but stay in the get away car instead of going into the bank, you're still part of the crime.
Now, saying linux violates their patents isn't the same as saying Ubuntu linux violates it. Ubuntu isn't linux even though it uses linux. Now, Ubuntu has said that it doesn't violate any of Microsoft's patents, so if Microsoft were to take their word for it, then they aren't "in the know" perse as your scenario would suggest. Microsoft has specifically said that the Linux Kernel and OpenOffice.org (and others I don't remember) both infringe on their patents, both of which are a part of the default Ubuntu installation. It's also hard to not be "in the know" when you distribute something who's source code is readily available. That said, this isn't a case of distribution, just promotion, and even then Microsoft was quick to remove it from their site.
Maybe MS is attempting to fool some people into making those claims and suing MS so it can open a can of whip ass or something. I don't know. It seems almost certain that WindowMarketplace is simply copying the contents of C.net's download.com software listing, which has an nearly identical listing for Ubuntu is a nearly identical category. Nobody was trying to do anything here, it was a humorous situation caused by automation, that's all.
No, you misunderstand. Since it is in the "Product Details" section, read it like this:
Product License Type - Free (True enough, GPL is a free license) Product Limitations - No Limitations (Now Ubuntu does have some limits, but the flattery is still nice)
You're right that the GPLv2 would only require that they stop distributing GPLv2 code. However, if they did not take immediate action to stop distribution GPLv2 code (which they did, good for them), then they would have a remarkably harder time suing anybody for infringement of those patents in their use or distribution of the same software.
Even if they were distributing, wouldn't that only require that they make the source available on request? IIRC, it doesn't actually require that the source code be hosted by you at all time, but it's sufficient if you note that it's licensed under the GPL and offer to make code available upon request. It would be important in the sense that you cannot distribute, or even actively promote the distribution of, a product that you know violates one or more of your patents, and then in the future try to sue people for patent infringement based on their use of that product. It's the patent equivalent of entrapment. If they can be legally deemed as having distributed Linux, either for this or their Novell vouchers, they would lose any patent suit against any code that was a part of that distribution.
They did not distribute it, their site merely promoted it. Therefore they are not bound by the GPL distribution requirements, they didn't even have to accept the GPL as a license.
Now, if your BitTorrent tracker points to a source of illegal music distribution, you can still be held liable for copyright infringement because you are promoting violation of copyright. Microsoft was in no way promoting violation of the GPL.
So basically this doesn't hurt Microsoft (other than we all get a good laugh at their expense), and it doesn't help illegal file sharing. And since Microsoft was diligent about removing the page after it was brought to their attention, they can't even be accused of actively promoting the use of Ubuntu, so it wouldn't even be patent entrapment.
So the long and short of it is this: It was funny, but doesn't change anything.
The same could be said of Java though. You can host it on Windows, I'm not sure its done very often, just like you can host an Asp.Net app on a Unix like OS (via Mono). Yes, but there are at least a dozen different J2EE servers available, free and commercial. You can run them on Windows, Linux, Solaris, HP-UX, AIX, whatever. I've run Tomcat on Windows with no problems, in fact I did that for years before switching to Linux.
So are most MS developers as well (C++ to.Net). True that there are more bad VB developers out there, but that doesn't mean the majority are bad developers. Being that AWT was what most users saw of Java I'm not sure you can seperate them. Technically you are right.. does it matter if the UI is just slow as hell though? MS would be bashed endlessly if WPF performed as badly as AWT initally did. True, but their MFC framework is perhaps the worse I've seen from a developer's perspective. Both SWT and Swing have vastly improved the Java desktop experience, I've seen people using Java programs without even knowing they were Java. Swing can be tough to grasp if you're coming from a VB background, but once you get a handle on it you can make some extremely nice interfaces.
Its odd then that you'd quickly forget the name of an IDE you likely used. I actually only ever used Visual Studio while I was in school (7 years ago), because I had to buy it and because it was discounted with the text book. After I graduated, I used a series of different IDEs and editors which were free or very low cost. Now I work for a company that has VS 8 installed on every workstation and I still use Eclipse.
I build software to earn a living though, so I don't really expect to be awash in free frameworks or libraries, I understand others need to do the same as well. Even with the huge number of free/open source frameworks and libraries available for Java, it is consistently one of, if not the most demanded skill on job listings. Obviously those frameworks aren't keeping Java developers from making money. They just make money writing software that achieves a business objective instead of rewriting frameworks and libraries that thousands of other developers have done before. It's the difference between building a car, and machining the screws.
Says the user with a 7 digit id.. Yeah, I noticed that, I was being ironic. Maybe too subtle.
Well, if you don't even know the name, perhaps you're not qualified to make any statements about the product & related technologies. Yeah, I just because I don't remember the name (Microsoft Visual Studio.Net Premium Ultra Hyper whatever edition) doesn't mean I don't know what it is, or that I haven't seen how it has influenced people's decisions on what languages and servers to use. You can't tell me that someone who uses VS.NET isn't going to buy a Windows based server to host his web apps.
Yes I have. And I remember said program leaking memory all over the place because SUN botched the Windows JVM. See I never had that problem, even with Sun's Windows JVM. You must have been using some portion I wasn't. Even the Microsoft VM didn't give me memory issues.
Your arrogance is very irriating. You really believe that those that target MS platforms only know VB? Actually I was implying that most C/C++ developers were plenty capable of writing Java apps that were just as good as their C/C++ apps, if a little slower (now Sun's JVM is actually faster on some long-running processes). Most of the user noticable problems with Java was not the language or the JVM, it was AWT which I will very much agree sucked.
Careful, you almost said something good about an MS product. You might have your fanboy status revoked. I have nothing against Microsoft, I've used and coded for Windows for years. My Microsoft certification only recently expired. But SharpDevelop is the exception to the.NET ecosystem, not the rule. I have had several people tell me how frustrated they are about the lack of free.NET libraries and frameworks, and I'm not even talking open source. It's just a different community, that's all, and I prefer Java's.
Wow, that's one of the most ignorant comments I've ever read here. You must be new.
First, there's no such thing as Developer Studio. Visual Studio, you'll forgive me for not keeping up with the names of products I don't use.
Second, ASP has nothing to do with ActiveX. Are you seriously telling me that a VB ActiveX control and VB ASP pages didn't promote code reuse? Or did you guys just not bother with that? I'm sorry if I'm wrong here, I just assumed that if you're writing client-side VB, then your server-side VB would reuse as much code as possible, and vice versa.
Java was holding Java back, being slow, buggy and 'write once, test everywhere.' Did you ever even write a Java program? I wrote fast stable "write once, run anywhere" Java applets in Java 1.2. It was possible, it just required a little more skill than most VB programmers had.
Also, given the choice between.Net and Java for web development, I find I much prefer.Net. C# seems like a good language, and Microsoft is trying hard with the.Net framework, but there is just simply not enough third-party resources available to make me ever consider switching from Java. If you're happy with a single vendor, few choices and expensive add ons, that's your business.
On the contrary, every example you gave was profitable to Microsoft in the long run.
If IE had not become the dominant browser, nobody would have used ActiveX. If nobody used ActiveX, few people would have used Developer Studio, fewer people would have used ASP and, if few people used ASP, fewer would have used IIS and Windows servers.
If Microsoft had not put Java adoption back 5 years, nobody would have wanted.NET or Developer Studio.NET and, if nobody was programming in.NET, nobody would want to use IIS and Windows servers.
You can bet that Google looks the same way to Microsoft, if they can't get dominate online search market they'll lose more than just the online search business.
"OSX supported hardware" is not a market, it's a product. You can legally have a monopoly on a product (patent, copyright, trademark), but you can not (unless otherwise specified) have and use a monopoly on a market (Desktop computing) to give you an unfair advantage in another market (Internet Search).
Here Microsoft is using their Desktop monopoly to boost their online search business and (this is the illegal part) restricting their monopoly product from using someone else's online search business.
How do you teach an agent to support hardware when they don't know the operating system it's running. Do you think any of those agents know how to support hardware in Windows without following a script? Even if they did, do you think they would be allowed to deviate from the script? I've had tech support literally tell me that they knew the script was wrong, but if they didn't follow it they would be fired.
So basically in order for their tech support to support hardware on Ubuntu as well as they do on Windows, they just need a different script to follow. Just like they will have different scripts for the different versions of Windows (you didn't think all their agents knew how to support hardware in Vista when it was released, did you?).
So, you mean he should move to a new building? A new city? State? If you mean he should buy from somebody besides Dell, you are misusing the word "literally." I think you're misusing the word "business". In this case it's clearly in the category of "Thank you for your business" or "You have no business being here", and not "What is the name of the business you work for?".
The topic was that the Inuit's hunting was only for sustainability, they did not over hunt and they used traditional methods, not bomb lances. The topic was about the number of whales killed, not how they were killed. The Inuit could be using satellite mounted super lasers, but if it resulted in the same number of whales killed annually, then the sustainability argument is not changed. Only the number killed matters to sustainability, not the method.
The tradition argument is only important when talking about why the Inuit specifically are allowed to hunt, and not some other group. I've purposely stayed away from that argument.
Your water analogy is fairly ridiculous. Of some jerks screwed up a portion of my reservoir, and reduced the amount of water available to the entire county, I wouldn't be outside hosing down the driveway. I'd be forced to change my water consumption, regardless of whether or not I was to blame for the shortage. But what if there was enough water left for you to continue your daily habits without causing any further shortage of water? That is the case here, other cultures came in and caused severe damage to the whale populations. But if it's just the Inuit hunting at a sustainable rate, it won't cause any more problems if we let them do it. So the question is, should they stop their _sustainable_ hunting because we stopped our _unsustainable_ hunting?
How efficient can this really be though? Has anyone paid so much as lip service to the energy costs associated with trucking this stuff around, plowing, harvesting, processing it? These are not trivial expenditures. True, and right now Ethanol does not provide a positive energy return, I know. But it's easier to make one plant 80% efficient than make 100 plants 50% efficient, that's where the savings come from.
It's great that we can turn sugar into energy. But how much energy does it take to turn some dirt, air and water into sugar? Quite a bit, luckily the Sun provides us with the energy to do that, and plants provide an cost-efficient mechanism for gathering and concentrating that energy into a small amount of transportable material. Think of them as solar power concentrators and storage containers.
However there is nothing intrinsically "sustainable" about the Inuit approach here. Extend their hunting pattern and the number of whales taken to a larger population (say the rest of the world) Um, the whole reason it is sustainable is because we DON'T extend it to a larger population. No resource is sustainable if you expand the consumption enough. It's sustainable because the number of whales killed relative to the number of whales born is low enough to not endanger the population. If we increase either without the other, of course it would be unsustainable. But I never advocated that, did I?
Wasn't claiming it would be. You'll notice I never said they should or should not be hunting whales, I said their actions are not what made them endangered, but you are asking them to live with the same punishment as those who are guilty.
As for the Inuit people, I'm sorry but traditionalism is no excuse for maintaining something that is this destructive. I'm sorry, but the Inuit's tradition of hunting whales is not what made them an endangered species. In fact, the Inuit's practice is an example of sustainable hunting, they do not kill enough to endanger the population. You are blaming the Inuit for not giving up their tradition just because other cultures have destroyed the balance of their ecosystem.
If someone came into your house and opened every water faucet for 23 hours of the day, then suddenly turned them off, and then had the audacity to tell you to conserve water by not drinking any, would you accept that?
Slashdot Mirror
True, but telling someone that they can get a copy of band "XYZ"'s new song "123" at the following URL is hardly a generic statement. And that's basically what a Bittorrent tracker is doing.
Telling someone to break the law may not be illegal, but if someone did what you told them to do, then you can be held as an accessory to the crime. If you plan a bank robbery, but stay in the get away car instead of going into the bank, you're still part of the crime.
Yeah, but he still won didn't he?
He wanted to free India, not live forever.
No, you misunderstand. Since it is in the "Product Details" section, read it like this:
Product License Type - Free (True enough, GPL is a free license)
Product Limitations - No Limitations (Now Ubuntu does have some limits, but the flattery is still nice)
You're right that the GPLv2 would only require that they stop distributing GPLv2 code. However, if they did not take immediate action to stop distribution GPLv2 code (which they did, good for them), then they would have a remarkably harder time suing anybody for infringement of those patents in their use or distribution of the same software.
They did not distribute it, their site merely promoted it. Therefore they are not bound by the GPL distribution requirements, they didn't even have to accept the GPL as a license.
Now, if your BitTorrent tracker points to a source of illegal music distribution, you can still be held liable for copyright infringement because you are promoting violation of copyright. Microsoft was in no way promoting violation of the GPL.
So basically this doesn't hurt Microsoft (other than we all get a good laugh at their expense), and it doesn't help illegal file sharing. And since Microsoft was diligent about removing the page after it was brought to their attention, they can't even be accused of actively promoting the use of Ubuntu, so it wouldn't even be patent entrapment.
So the long and short of it is this: It was funny, but doesn't change anything.
Nah, that would be irrational. :)
Ok, mod me down.
On the contrary, every example you gave was profitable to Microsoft in the long run.
.NET or Developer Studio .NET and, if nobody was programming in .NET, nobody would want to use IIS and Windows servers.
If IE had not become the dominant browser, nobody would have used ActiveX. If nobody used ActiveX, few people would have used Developer Studio, fewer people would have used ASP and, if few people used ASP, fewer would have used IIS and Windows servers.
If Microsoft had not put Java adoption back 5 years, nobody would have wanted
You can bet that Google looks the same way to Microsoft, if they can't get dominate online search market they'll lose more than just the online search business.
"OSX supported hardware" is not a market, it's a product. You can legally have a monopoly on a product (patent, copyright, trademark), but you can not (unless otherwise specified) have and use a monopoly on a market (Desktop computing) to give you an unfair advantage in another market (Internet Search).
Here Microsoft is using their Desktop monopoly to boost their online search business and (this is the illegal part) restricting their monopoly product from using someone else's online search business.
So basically in order for their tech support to support hardware on Ubuntu as well as they do on Windows, they just need a different script to follow. Just like they will have different scripts for the different versions of Windows (you didn't think all their agents knew how to support hardware in Vista when it was released, did you?).
http://www.ubuntu.com/support/paid
Unless you're talking about a deal with Dell to supply business support, in which case you may be right.
http://mw1.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/busines
I don't know about several-hundred-gigabyte, but Linux's smbfs does pretty good caching, better than NFS in my experience.
I guess the same thing we're conserving whales for.
The tradition argument is only important when talking about why the Inuit specifically are allowed to hunt, and not some other group. I've purposely stayed away from that argument.
Wasn't claiming it would be. You'll notice I never said they should or should not be hunting whales, I said their actions are not what made them endangered, but you are asking them to live with the same punishment as those who are guilty.
If someone came into your house and opened every water faucet for 23 hours of the day, then suddenly turned them off, and then had the audacity to tell you to conserve water by not drinking any, would you accept that?