Well don't you realize that if Bill gates would conduct a interview today with the same statements, he would create a big mess ?
And why would we all suddenly believe that what he said in that interview in 1995 is not valid anymore? Remember latest security flaws on the microsoft platform, and on what massive scale it today happens? That costs fortunes while the legal department of MSFT allows Bill Gates to walk away with a smile.
So Intel and RedHat (well lets call it here the Linux kernel community) agreed to have the ACPI driver source inside the linux kernel tree to have 2 licenses. the GPL and the BSD. Because its GPL we as Linux people are happy. And because its also BSD licensed, Intel is also happy, because parts of its open-source project can be extracted as BSD licensed code. That code can then be implemented inside binary only commercial software concerning ACPI. How briljant. It sure is a way commercial OS vendors really can benefit from that open-source project.
Now the only question remains : Who pays the Linux kernel programmers doing ACPI? and if they are not payed , do they feel ripped off when contributing to ACPI functionality inside the Linux kernel ?
Robert
detante : 007 : "if i won't get it , neither will you". and the painting is destroyed. reverse detante : "if you will get it, then i want it too!". and the source code is copied.
What i have seen you ran your laptops on win3.11 and win95. Are you today running win XP or do
you prefer e.g. linux?
Do you now feel like a Count of Monte Cristo who just left prison?
At a first glance i can't see why these slides would be a bad thing from microsoft. As a matter a fact if SUN Microsystems would be the used banner, no-one would have even blinked their eyes.
So whats wrong here? IMHO the fact that today microsoft is still a monopoly in software land, and the fact that US law is not abided by the current surpreme court. The sherman act to be more precisely.
With Wireless LAN broadcasted by a accesspoint a intruder is by default root on your 802.11b network. Its like he logged on as root on your switch. the switch being the wireless LAN. Actually a wireless LAN is more like a HUB. And then start waiting for one of the trusted party's on it to spill a readable password or so.
Re:.. and in the darkness bind them
on
More on Longhorn
·
· Score: 1
No way that microsoft has all the rings. My association of LOTR is currently this scenario:
One clone-master to rule em all. Somewhere the first human being is about to be cloned. Its creator will be for the first time not God but the owner of the clone factory. The human clones are not only to obey their creator, but are not allowed to have their own will. If this happens we as a human race are lost. The human race will be then a despicable joke.
In an "assasin" movie, after caught by the government after a deadly drugstore robbery, a women is sentenced to death by lethal injection. The injection is a fake, so she lives, but now she is doomed for life, cause she is forced to become an assassin for the government. she has no free will of her own, and is forced to kill people. If she objects to the killing, she will be shot immediatly. its despicable.
I don't want my mobile phone upgraded with a BSOD quality OS. Even dialing 911 will become something that sometimes doesn't work? What about security vulnerabilities showing up? I just can't imagine that phone companies can take this one seriously.
When do company's get the clue, that money alone won't save their ass. What we would get is mobile phone company obliteration. How long would it take for microsoft also dictating call rates to Vodaphone? The best product doesn't always come from the company with most cash in their wallet.
This can't be a coincidence. Yet another major Editorial by a senior Tech-Writer from an important country-wide newspaper, and Richard M. Stallman's Gnu Public License gets wrongly named.
A story from such a source which can't even get the names right? I guess they must be really afraid for this RMS dude.
In Ashcroft's opposing brief (Government brief opposing Supreme Court review: gov-opp-cert.pdf) He basicly says, hey we've preambled copyright in the past and so what about today?
Page 14:
" To the extent the Copyright Clause itself imposes those limits, they would more logically stem from the body of the Copyright Clause, which authorizes Congress to grant to "Authors and Inventors" the "exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries". The use of the possessive form - "their" writings -- together with the words "Authors" and "Inventors" might be thought to preclude copyright protection from works that are not original or that are in the public domain; in such cases, the individuals seeking protection might not be considered the "authors", and the work might not be considered "theirs".
("An author's 'Writing' or an inventor's 'Discovery' can, in the constitutional sense, only extend to that which is his own. It may not be broadened to include matters within the public domain."). Because Congress in the CTEA extended copyright only for orginal works that are not already in the public domain, the origin or scope of the requirement that works be "original", or of any prohibition on removing works from the public domain, is not at issue here. "
Congress in the CTEA extending copyright time after time beyond the life-time of the orginal author of the works or invention, is a tricky thing. The orginal Author has exclusive rights on his work. Authors die. Somehow then the copyrights fall into other hands, maybe auctioned at eBay. When the orginal author was just an employee, the copyrights are inside the hands of a company. The company wich holds those copyrights might be takenover by a merger or so, and the new company has the copyrights.
So its possible that copyrights fall into hands of people/company's who might have the slightest idea what its all about. I'm not even questioning if the new copyright holder even can extend or improve the orginal works. And i'm not even thinking about people or company's whose single purpose is to get hold of the copyrights solely to extinct the orginal works or inventions.
So actually the problem is, the orginal Author died and he cannot give his advise from his grave. Maybe by testament a sortof agreemant can be made. What i want to point out here, is that when the orginal Author dies, basicly extending copyrights is a tricky thing to do. Its questionable.
When a orginal Author dies , his original work/invention is still around. Aschcroft talks about works inside the public domain are not at issue here, only works which are not. Regarding such works/inventions i would suggest that if the orginal author has not made an arrangement like through a testament or so, the new owner of the copyrights must proove that the orginal Author has agreed to that, either by testament or whatever. If such papers cannot be given, then by default the work should be candidate for the public domain or better just like asset's go over into ownership by the government.
I sent this email :
Date: Thu, 3 Oct 2002 18:20:38 +0200 (CEST)
From: Robert M. Stockmann
To: sup-manager@redhat.com, than@redhat.de
Cc: bero@redhat.com, bero@redhat.de, kalle@kde.org, granroth@kde.org, bero@berolinux.org, bero@kde.org
Subject: KDE desktop on RedHat 8.0 messy?
Hi,
An ex-employee bero aka Bernhard Rosenkraenzer recently resigned from RedHat because he doesn't want to work on crippling KDE.
Well KDE being messy on RedHat 8.0 remains to be seen. So i made a fresh install of RedHat 8.0 and here's what i found:
My setup here is a Matrox G400 32Mb dualhead, with two 21" monitors.
Furthermore to get the +xinerama option running i installed the beta driver mgadrivers-2.0.tgz from matrox.com on top of XFree86 4.2.0.
I created 2 users , stock (running KDE) and foobar (running GNOME). I attached two desktop shots from both freshly initialized desktops. As you can see with the KDE desktop the icon subtitles are shifted to the screen on the right. With the GNOME desktop nothing is wrong.
Now i really would like to buy RedHat 8.0, but if my xinerama test fails at home, how am i possibly going to buy the new Redhat 8.0 box? Any clues as how KDE fails and GNOME succesfully runs +Xinerama?
a real sign of greedy marketing: "VeriSign DNS in Trouble"..
In the oll days (internic , networksolutions) one had to roll its own DNS servers, today by default a verisign domain can only be started
using VeriSign's own DNS servers. After that a tiresome DNS server move has to be done to
your own DNS servers.
It smells like most people forget that last step, and after a while verisign has overloaded DNS servers. Anyone who has
info on what type DNS servers Verisign is
using?
Robert
Re:Linux isn't ready for many companies.
on
Red Hat Desktop Edition
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
Americans say , "put your money where your mouth
is", and "money talks".
Well now, if your wallet is empty, and you
want to continue your business, people
get inventive. Linux is the lumber and wood
lying around (for free) to make it happen.
The claim that all my tools, spreadsheets,
documents are in ms office format, and thus
i can't switch overnight is true. But company's should really focus on platform
independant formats instead.
number 1 rule was/is still , never have your
computing stuff tied into a single ICT company/supplier. Many company's still alive
today took the wise decision in the past to
just buy the custom made package including
its source code. In such a position no software company in the world can stall your
business.
Robert
desktop brand test?
on
KDE Gets The Hat
·
· Score: 1, Interesting
As it is a beta, they might want to find a objective way to have beta testers choose between KDE or GNOME... like the coca cola vs pepsi test...
However if the final release won't show the About info, it then *is* a one microsoft way of approaching their product... they have a rats ass respect for KDE or Gnome coders.
If a new company presents a business plan to their potential investers, then the investors decide if its a healthy business plan, and either say yes or no. If a business plan is actually a vapourware plan, like most.COM startups were, then these same investors should have said that its a nogo.
So today these same investers are loosing a rather large amount of money. Now who is to blame in then end?
I installed a fresh WinXP professional last week on someone's PC. The lady wanted http://www.msn.nl/ as her home-page. So i did, and started loading that page. IE complained that it couldn't display the page correctly and asked with a pop-up windows if it could download a JVM to correctly display it. I installed it and after that i was amazed. I had a WinXP Prof machine with a JVM installed. I tested some nasty java test-websites, and XP's new JVM passed all tests.
So again microsoft is spreading FUD to us, while in practice Java is running just fine on XP.
A interesting audio speech about this matter can be heard here:
Richard M. Stallman's speech, Copyright vs. Community in the Age of Computer Networks given at Queen Mary University London.:
http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/audio/#QMUL2002
RMS apparantly has seen the current troubles and questions seen coming long time ago. Although lotsa people in the past just ignored RMS and the things he was talking about, to me his viewpoints become more valid and interesting today.
How about an extra feature on some-ones xs4all email box, that basicly says "Welcome, but unsollicited spamlike email not wanted". Lotsa dutch people have just the same sign on their snailmail mailbox.
The story , although presented as a scientific paper, has some interesting points. They devide between class II and class III devices. Typically class II devices are showing flashes or blinking lights (whatever) which are linearly related to the ammount of traffic being transported though the device. There is no possible way that one can snoop e.g. login/password combinations from lets say a used bandwidth logging.
Typically class III devices show more life data, the most vulnerable devices of course the ones which show a blinking LED for a transported 1 and swithed off LED for a transported 0. To my knowledge i can't think of such modems or routers or whatever who show LED activity on a binary basis.
To be more specific, the two authors classify for instance all analog 9600 and 14400 baud modems to display life data. That part of the story must be treated as a hoax.. Anyone who is into the older modem technology knows that the 9600 and 14400 baud speeds are obtained by modulation through a carrier signal. So to extract a binary bitstream out of a video camera logging of blinking modem light is impossible. The story differs when the same modems are applied to send/receive faxes.
The cisco 4000 and 7000 routers with a serial TD indicator are supposedly also class III vulnerable devices. I think thats only valid again if the LEDS show a binary bitstream.
What a total fuckup do these low-life morons from/. make...
damn... there's no story posted about the AMD Athlon/Linux CPU bug,
but instead they post this : "Buy John Romero's Ferrari On EBay".
Those anal fuckers suck.
I guess the LPRng programmer introduced
to much crap. As a result LPRng is too
diffecult for the ordinary linux user.
I myself even have the feeling LPRng contains bugs. I couldn't sort it out, and backported all the printing tools like printtool and lpr and rhs-filter from the source RPM's from redhat 5.2 , with
rpm --rebuild lpr-0.33-1.src.rpm
etc. Installing the resulting lpr-0.33-1.i386.rpm and also printtool and rhs-filter made me happy again.
printing now works as easy and solid as my older redhat 5.2 box.
I was trying to get a decent browser to run on my Linux desktop.
I tried Opera 5 for Linux and its indeed a very neat browser.
However if i open www.microsoft.com and move my mouse over the
download button, the well-known pull-down menu does not appear.
This turns out to be some ActiveX feature that only the microsoft
browsers like Internet Explorer 5 support, and only when run on
a Microsoft desktop. As far as i can see, there is at the moment no
browser for the Linux desktop which supports this feature.
Even more it seems like its a closed feature.
Perhaps that is one reason why many give up with Linux,
and return to windows. Just do it the easy way and just take
that microsoft desktop. Saves you from all those nasty tricks.
Now the opera developers could make them selves real angry and
develop a opera 6 for Linux which would have a reversed engineered
embedded ActiveX inside the browser. But i bet that wouldn't last long
because, when Microsoft releases a new Service Pack for IIS, immediately
opera's ActiveX would stop to function. This is the dirty trick game
which Microsoft plays. Just ask the samba developers what happened
on their journey to reverse engineer a full functioning Domain Controller
for UNIX.
If the US government don't do something against these Microsoft monopoly
tricks, we are doomed. Its all tricks to tie the Internet into a
microsoft controlled environment. A organization like W3C or IETF
or even IANA should stand up and say : "The Internet is a public place
where all public accessible services like web, multimedia sites etc.
should obey public standards, and not the closed standards of Microsoft."
Microsoft is earning loads of money in a very easy way, like they
have never done before. If one looks inside some magazine for hardware
and software, what do I see ? office 2000 prof costs $500.- US dollar,
a matrox G450 dual-head costs only $ 100.- . Its absolutely stupid that a
software package costs way more as a high quality video card. Well if you
look at the actual production costs of reproducing both items.
It should not be this way.
So what can we do to stop this illegal monopoly? I don't think much,
We now really need an honest independent Referee to get this straight.
Slashdot Mirror
And why would we all suddenly believe that what he said in that interview in 1995 is not valid anymore? Remember latest security flaws on the microsoft platform, and on what massive scale it today happens? That costs fortunes while the legal department of MSFT allows Bill Gates to walk away with a smile.
Robert
Now the only question remains : Who pays the Linux kernel programmers doing ACPI? and if they are not payed , do they feel ripped off when contributing to ACPI functionality inside the Linux kernel ?
Robert
detante : 007 : "if i won't get it , neither will you". and the painting is destroyed.
reverse detante : "if you will get it, then i want it too!". and the source code is copied.
What i have seen you ran your laptops on win3.11 and win95. Are you today running win XP or do you prefer e.g. linux?
Do you now feel like a Count of Monte Cristo who just left prison?
So whats wrong here? IMHO the fact that today microsoft is still a monopoly in software land, and the fact that US law is not abided by the current surpreme court. The sherman act to be more precisely.
Robert
http://crashrecovery.org/usa-v-zm-email.htm
cheers
Robert
heh your gf with her windows laptop wants to
access something quickly on the network. there you go.
enough said.
Ok go ahead, and hide in these rat holes.
One clone-master to rule em all. Somewhere the first human being is about to be cloned. Its creator will be for the first time not God but the owner of the clone factory. The human clones are not only to obey their creator, but are not allowed to have their own will. If this happens we as a human race are lost. The human race will be then a despicable joke.
In an "assasin" movie, after caught by the government after a deadly drugstore robbery, a women is sentenced to death by lethal injection. The injection is a fake, so she lives, but now she is doomed for life, cause she is forced to become an assassin for the government. she has no free will of her own, and is forced to kill people. If she objects to the killing, she will be shot immediatly. its despicable.
I don't want my mobile phone upgraded with a BSOD quality OS. Even dialing 911 will become something that sometimes doesn't work? What about security vulnerabilities showing up? I just can't imagine that phone companies can take this one seriously.
When do company's get the clue, that money alone won't save their ass. What we would get is mobile phone company obliteration. How long would it take for microsoft also dictating call rates to Vodaphone? The best product doesn't always come from the company with most cash in their wallet.
Robert
This can't be a coincidence. Yet another major Editorial by a senior Tech-Writer from an important country-wide newspaper, and Richard M. Stallman's Gnu Public License gets wrongly named.
A story from such a source which can't even get the names right? I guess they must be really afraid for this RMS dude.
Robert
In Ashcroft's opposing brief (Government brief opposing Supreme Court review:
gov-opp-cert.pdf) He basicly says, hey we've preambled copyright in the past and so what about today?
Page 14:
" To the extent the Copyright Clause itself imposes those limits, they would more logically stem from the body of the Copyright Clause, which authorizes Congress to grant to "Authors and Inventors" the "exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries". The use of the possessive form - "their" writings -- together with the words "Authors" and "Inventors" might be thought to preclude copyright protection from works that are not original or that are in the public domain; in such cases, the individuals seeking protection might not be considered the "authors", and the work might not be considered "theirs".
("An author's 'Writing' or an inventor's 'Discovery' can, in the constitutional sense, only extend to that which is his own. It may not be broadened to include matters within the public domain."). Because Congress in the CTEA extended copyright only for orginal works that are not already in the public domain, the origin or scope of the requirement that works be "original", or of any prohibition on removing works from the public domain, is not at issue here.
"
Congress in the CTEA extending copyright time after time beyond the life-time of the orginal author of the works or invention, is a tricky thing. The orginal Author has exclusive rights on his work. Authors die. Somehow then the copyrights fall into other hands, maybe auctioned at eBay. When the orginal author was just an employee, the copyrights are inside the hands of a company. The company wich holds those copyrights might be takenover by a merger or so, and the new company has the copyrights.
So its possible that copyrights fall into hands of people/company's who might have the slightest idea what its all about. I'm not even questioning if the new copyright holder even can extend or improve the orginal works. And i'm not even thinking about people or company's whose single purpose is to get hold of the copyrights solely to extinct the orginal works or inventions.
So actually the problem is, the orginal Author died and he cannot give his advise from his grave. Maybe by testament a sortof agreemant can be made. What i want to point out here, is that when the orginal Author dies, basicly extending copyrights is a tricky thing to do. Its questionable.
When a orginal Author dies , his original work/invention is still around. Aschcroft talks about works inside the public domain are not at issue here, only works which are not. Regarding such works/inventions i would suggest that if the orginal author has not made an arrangement like through a testament or so, the new owner of the copyrights must proove that the orginal Author has agreed to that, either by testament or whatever. If such papers cannot be given, then by default the work should be candidate for the public domain or better just like asset's go over into ownership by the government.
Robert
I sent this email :
Date: Thu, 3 Oct 2002 18:20:38 +0200 (CEST)
From: Robert M. Stockmann
To: sup-manager@redhat.com, than@redhat.de
Cc: bero@redhat.com, bero@redhat.de, kalle@kde.org, granroth@kde.org, bero@berolinux.org, bero@kde.org
Subject: KDE desktop on RedHat 8.0 messy?
Hi,
An ex-employee bero aka Bernhard Rosenkraenzer recently resigned from RedHat because he doesn't want to work on crippling KDE.
Well KDE being messy on RedHat 8.0 remains to be seen. So i made a fresh install of RedHat 8.0 and here's what i found:
My setup here is a Matrox G400 32Mb dualhead, with two 21" monitors. Furthermore to get the +xinerama option running i installed the beta driver mgadrivers-2.0.tgz from matrox.com on top of XFree86 4.2.0.
I created 2 users , stock (running KDE) and foobar (running GNOME). I attached two desktop shots from both freshly initialized desktops. As you can see with the KDE desktop the icon subtitles are shifted to the screen on the right. With the GNOME desktop nothing is wrong.
Now i really would like to buy RedHat 8.0, but if my xinerama test fails at home, how am i possibly going to buy the new Redhat 8.0 box? Any clues as how KDE fails and GNOME succesfully runs +Xinerama?
Regards,
Robert
and here are the URL's to the screenshots:
http://crashrecovery.org/xinerama-gnome-rh80.jpg
http://crashrecovery.org/xinerama-kde-rh80.jpg
a real sign of greedy marketing: "VeriSign DNS in Trouble" ..
In the oll days (internic , networksolutions) one had to roll its own DNS servers, today by default a verisign domain can only be started using VeriSign's own DNS servers. After that a tiresome DNS server move has to be done to your own DNS servers.
It smells like most people forget that last step, and after a while verisign has overloaded DNS servers. Anyone who has info on what type DNS servers Verisign is using?
Robert
Americans say , "put your money where your mouth is", and "money talks".
Well now, if your wallet is empty, and you want to continue your business, people get inventive. Linux is the lumber and wood lying around (for free) to make it happen.
The claim that all my tools, spreadsheets, documents are in ms office format, and thus i can't switch overnight is true. But company's should really focus on platform independant formats instead.
number 1 rule was/is still , never have your computing stuff tied into a single ICT company/supplier. Many company's still alive today took the wise decision in the past to just buy the custom made package including its source code. In such a position no software company in the world can stall your business.
Robert
As it is a beta, they might want to find a
objective way to have beta testers choose
between KDE or GNOME... like the coca cola
vs pepsi test...
However if the final release won't show the
About info, it then *is* a one microsoft way
of approaching their product... they have a rats
ass respect for KDE or Gnome coders.
Robert
If a new company presents a business plan .COM startups were,
to their potential investers, then the investors
decide if its a healthy business plan, and either
say yes or no. If a business plan is actually
a vapourware plan, like most
then these same investors should have said that
its a nogo.
So today these same investers are loosing
a rather large amount of money. Now who
is to blame in then end?
Robert
Thats true, however your mileage may vary:
I installed a fresh WinXP professional last week
on someone's PC. The lady wanted
http://www.msn.nl/ as her home-page. So i did,
and started loading that page. IE complained that
it couldn't display the page correctly and asked
with a pop-up windows if it could download a
JVM to correctly display it. I installed it
and after that i was amazed. I had a WinXP Prof
machine with a JVM installed. I tested some
nasty java test-websites, and XP's new JVM
passed all tests.
So again microsoft is spreading FUD to us, while
in practice Java is running just fine on XP.
Robert
A interesting audio speech about this :
:
matter can be heard here
Richard M. Stallman's speech,
Copyright vs. Community in the Age of Computer
Networks given at Queen Mary University London.
http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/audio/#QMUL2002
RMS apparantly has seen the current
troubles and questions seen coming long time ago.
Although lotsa people in the past just
ignored RMS and the things he was talking
about, to me his viewpoints become more
valid and interesting today.
Robert
How about an extra feature on some-ones xs4all email box, that basicly says "Welcome, but unsollicited spamlike email not wanted". Lotsa dutch people have just the same sign on their snailmail mailbox.
Robert
The story , although presented as a scientific
paper, has some interesting points. They devide
between class II and class III devices.
Typically class II devices are showing flashes
or blinking lights (whatever) which are linearly
related to the ammount of traffic being transported
though the device. There is no possible way that
one can snoop e.g. login/password combinations
from lets say a used bandwidth logging.
Typically class III devices show more life data,
the most vulnerable devices of course the ones
which show a blinking LED for a transported 1
and swithed off LED for a transported 0.
To my knowledge i can't think of such modems
or routers or whatever who show LED activity
on a binary basis.
To be more specific, the two authors classify
for instance all analog 9600 and 14400 baud
modems to display life data. That part of the story
must be treated as a hoax.. Anyone who is into
the older modem technology knows that
the 9600 and 14400 baud speeds are obtained
by modulation through a carrier signal.
So to extract a binary bitstream out of a video
camera logging of blinking modem light is
impossible. The story differs when the same
modems are applied to send/receive faxes.
The cisco 4000 and 7000 routers with a serial
TD indicator are supposedly also class III vulnerable devices. I think thats only valid
again if the LEDS show a binary bitstream.
Robert
What a total fuckup do these low-life morons from /. make...
:)
damn... there's no story posted about the AMD Athlon/Linux CPU bug,
but instead they post this : "Buy John Romero's Ferrari On EBay".
Those anal fuckers suck.
Yeah moderate this up, if ya dare
and here's why :
/usr/lib/gcc-lib/i386-redhat-linux/3.01/specs
imagine this :
$ gcc -v
Reading specs from
gcc version 3.01 20030731 (Red Hat/AOL Linux 8.0 3.01)
I would eat my redhat
I guess the LPRng programmer introduced to much crap. As a result LPRng is too diffecult for the ordinary linux user.
I myself even have the feeling LPRng contains bugs. I couldn't sort it out, and backported all the printing tools like printtool and lpr and rhs-filter from the source RPM's from redhat 5.2 , with
rpm --rebuild lpr-0.33-1.src.rpm
etc. Installing the resulting lpr-0.33-1.i386.rpm and also printtool and rhs-filter made me happy again.
printing now works as easy and solid as my older redhat 5.2 box.
Robert
I was trying to get a decent browser to run on my Linux desktop.
I tried Opera 5 for Linux and its indeed a very neat browser.
However if i open www.microsoft.com and move my mouse over the
download button, the well-known pull-down menu does not appear.
This turns out to be some ActiveX feature that only the microsoft
browsers like Internet Explorer 5 support, and only when run on
a Microsoft desktop. As far as i can see, there is at the moment no
browser for the Linux desktop which supports this feature.
Even more it seems like its a closed feature.
Perhaps that is one reason why many give up with Linux,
and return to windows. Just do it the easy way and just take
that microsoft desktop. Saves you from all those nasty tricks.
Now the opera developers could make them selves real angry and
develop a opera 6 for Linux which would have a reversed engineered
embedded ActiveX inside the browser. But i bet that wouldn't last long
because, when Microsoft releases a new Service Pack for IIS, immediately
opera's ActiveX would stop to function. This is the dirty trick game
which Microsoft plays. Just ask the samba developers what happened
on their journey to reverse engineer a full functioning Domain Controller
for UNIX.
If the US government don't do something against these Microsoft monopoly
tricks, we are doomed. Its all tricks to tie the Internet into a
microsoft controlled environment. A organization like W3C or IETF
or even IANA should stand up and say : "The Internet is a public place
where all public accessible services like web, multimedia sites etc.
should obey public standards, and not the closed standards of Microsoft."
Microsoft is earning loads of money in a very easy way, like they
have never done before. If one looks inside some magazine for hardware
and software, what do I see ? office 2000 prof costs $500.- US dollar,
a matrox G450 dual-head costs only $ 100.- . Its absolutely stupid that a
software package costs way more as a high quality video card. Well if you
look at the actual production costs of reproducing both items.
It should not be this way.
So what can we do to stop this illegal monopoly? I don't think much,
We now really need an honest independent Referee to get this straight.