The False CNet Bill Joy has a chin butt, piercing eyes and no glasses, while the 3 above URL's show the real Bill Joy with _no_ chin butt , no piercing eyes and all 3 of them with glasses. Did some fake dude show up at CNet's, faking as Bill Joy (commiting identity theft) and possibly tell some false rumours?
Mister Speaker, members of congress and fellow linux users.
I have come here to make a statement. Today, now for more as a year, McBride stands for corporate scandals, recession, stock market declines, blackmail, burning with hot irons, mutilation with electric drills, cutting out tongs, terror, massmurder and rape.
McBride has planted false information and evidence to insite fear amongst linux users for corporate terrorism. We cannot show contempt for McBride. He defies the Linux community, we can only act appropiate.
McBride is only building a culture of corporate terrorism. McBride's purpose is more than to follow a process, it is to achieve a result : the end of the civilized world.
Tonight i have a message for McBride: go home and die.
Date: Wed, 3 Sep 2003 12:39:17 +0100 (BST) From: Arlene McCarthy To: stock@stokkie.net Subject: Response to your correspondence regarding the draft EU directive
on patentability of computer-implemented inventions.
Dear Robert M. Stockmann,
Thank you for your correspondence concerning the draft directive on the patentability of computer-implemented inventions.
The European Parliament's Legal Affairs Committee has voted on my report on the directive and there will be continuing debate and further democratic scrutiny before the directive becomes law.
At this early stage of legislative process, it is nonetheless important to establish the facts about what the draft EU directive and what I, as the Parliament's rapporteur, are aiming to achieve in the amendments tabled to the Commission proposal.
It has been suggested that the Parliament's report will for the first time allow the patentability of computer-implemented inventions. This is simply not true. The patenting of computer-implemented inventions is not a new phenomenon. Patents involving the use of software have been applied for and granted since the earliest days of the European Patent Office (EPO). Out of over 110,000 applications received at the EPO in 2001, 16,000 will have dealt with inventions in computer-implemented technologies. Indeed, even without an EU directive, these patents will continue to be filed, not only to the EPO but also to national patent offices.
As you will be aware, in the US and increasingly in Japan, patents have been granted for what is essentially pure software. Some EPO and national court rulings indicate that Europe may be drifting towards extending the scope of patentability to inventions which would traditionally have not been patentable, as well as pure business methods. It is clear that Europe needs a uniform legal approach which draws a line between what can and cannot be patented, and prevents the drift towards the patentability of software per se.
My intention is clear in the amendments tabled and in a new Article 4 in the text, to preclude; the patentability of software as such; the patentability of business methods; algorithms; and mathematical methods. Article 4 clearly states that in order to be patentable, a computer-implemented invention must be susceptible to industrial applications, be new, and involve an inventive step. Moreover I have added a requirement for a technical contribution in order to ensure that the mere use of a computer does not lead to a patent being granted.
Furthermore, the amended directive contains new provisions on decompilation that will assist software developers. While it is not possible to comment on whether any patent application would be excluded from the directive, the directive, as amended, would not permit the patentability of Amazon's 'one-click' method. As far as software itself is concerned, it will not be possible to patent a software product. Software itself will continue to be able to be protected by copyright.
With an EU directive, legislators will have scrutiny over the EPO and national court's decisions. With, in addition, the possibility of having a definitive ruling from the European Court in Luxembourg, thus ensuring a restrictive interpretation of the EU directive and a greater degree of legal certainty in the field of patentability of computer-implemented inventions.
Some concerns have been raised that the directive may have an adverse effect on the development of open source software and small software developers. I support the development of open source software and welcome the fact that the major open-source companies are recording a 50% growth in world-wide shipment of its products.
In the amended proposal, I have imposed a requirement on the Commission to monitor the impact of the directive, in particular its effect on small and medium s
Date: Mon, 1 Sep 2003 06:50:11 +0200 (CEST) From: Robert M. Stockmann To: arlene.mccarthy@easynet.co.uk Subject: Re : "Small fry patently need protection" (fwd)
Dear Miss McCarthy,
Here i write again to you, 1.5 months later. Sofar i haven't received a response to the below email message yet. Today the EUROPEAN Law on Software Patents is to be passed. Well i can only say one thing here:
YOU HAVE BEEN WARNED, AND NOT ONLY BY ME:
If you as Labour MEP member just implement rulings and laws which are not supported by a majority of the people, things might turn real bad for you. Maybe not today but in the future.
you wrote:
"Numerous people from small to medium-sized enterprises have written to me
in support of my proposal. "
Well i have worked for several smaller and medium-sized software and programming companies. NONE OF THESE HAD LAYWERS ON THEIR PAYROLL.
Getting Patents on Software is something only BIG CORPORATIONS will be able to achieve.
Today , Monday 1 September 2003, I ask you again to reconsider your proposal, and admit that SOFTWARE PATENTS only SUSTAIN the POWER of BIG SOFTWARE CORPORATIONS. Oh i forgot: In the current ICT World allmost all software is created by SOFTWARE CORPORATIONS from the USA. I sure hope you realize we are talking about SOFTWARE PATENTS regulations inside the EU.
Do you realize there are no NO BIG SOFTWARE CORPORATIONS inside the EU?
Thank you for your attention.
Regards,
Robert -- Robert M. Stockmann - RHCE Network Engineer - UNIX/Linux Specialist crashrecovery.org stock@stokkie.net
---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Sun, 15 Jun 2003 01:00:49 +0200 (CEST) From: Robert M. Stockmann To: arlene.mccarthy@easynet.co.uk Subject: Re : "Small fry patently need protection"
Dear Miss McCarthy,
In your article in the Guardian "Small fry patently need protection": http://www.guardian.co.uk/online/story/0,3605,9 751 26,00.html
you write this:
"Numerous people from small to medium-sized enterprises have written to me
in support of my proposal. "
Well show us the letters I would say.
Robert -- Robert M. Stockmann - RHCE Network Engineer - UNIX/Linux Specialist crashrecovery.org stock@stokkie.net
it reads : "Sobig.F obtains the UTC time through the NTP protocol, by contacting one of several possible servers on port 123/udp (the NTP port)."
I then would expect the following screnario : Very likely most netgear router users have used its nifty builtin dhcp server. cisco also has such embedded dhcp servers and does SMC barricade. So far nothing special. However if the embedded dhcp server of the netgear router also has dhcp option "option ntp-servers ip-address" configured, using the UWisc Time Server ip-number then the following most probably has happened :
W32.Sobig.F@mm is released on the Internet and hits hard. It spreads through email. upon storing itself on the NT4, win2k, winxp PC, it asks for UTC time through the NTP protocol. If the dhcp client has through dhcp already a configured ntp-server, that one (The UWisc one) will be used. If no ntp-server is configured only then the virus will try to reach the ntpservers listed on the symantec security response description for W32.Sobig.F@mm.
Is a mouseclick a authorative legal proof of signing an EULA ? Like one signs a contract with a signature? And shouldn't have Microsoft received a fax-ed or snail-mailed copy of the EULA contract with your signature in blue Ink, before they are legally allowed to play around with their customers ?
Until then, everyone needs to make a buck and if big IT houses are willing to take it up the backside, so be it.
Well thats where the real problem is. Sofar big IT houses are not really willing to completely go down the Linux path. Well at least thats my opinion here. As long large IT consultancy company's only want to earn the easy fat cash for overrated Microsoft products, Services and most important thinks like support helldesks revenue's, Anti-Virus/Worm revenue's and other alike peoples cash grabbing, nothing will happen.
And suddenly the Linux "company's" are starting to charge also in a cash grabbing way for stable versions of their Linux server OS distibutions. Thats the surest way to indeed have Microsoft survive in the corrupt IT business.
After watching the monday broadcast of 18 august 2003 on cspan, where Kyle McSlarrow, Deputy Energy Secretary, discusses the U.S. Energy Policy, i can only conclude that this whole drama is yet another mass media cover-up of how big corporations are failing to deliver essential services. On CNN a interesting time-line of the power outage is given :
One thing is clear : the timely coincidence between MSBLAST and power blackout is certainly _there_. The following postings on securityfocus.com shows that the SCADA systems run on Windows 2000/XP and some are connected to the internet.
"
I believe that the outage was caused by the MSblaster, or its mutation, which was besieged upon the respective vulnerability in certain control and monitoring systems (SCADA and otherwise) running MS 2000 or XP, located different points along the Grid. Some of these systems are accessible via the Internet, while others are accessible by POTS dialup, or private Frame relay and dedicated connectivity.
"
The following is very interesting : http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/cybe rwar/view/
its a Documentary about cyberwar and its impact on America after 911, and brought online on apr. 24, 2003. Inside video #4 and #6 Gen. Clark from the Pentagon and other government security officials clearly state that Cyberwar Criminals (El-Queida members are named as possible candiates) can takedown large parts of the American Powergrid.
So when Mr. McSlarrow talks about things like: "we must extensively investigate the cause of power fallout here, and new power bill de-regulations must be introduced", i can only think of yet another mass media attempt to distract the attention in other directions. Why does No-One mention the failing of Microsoft's software? Why does No-One mention that the Government should disallow using Microsoft software for essential services, like power-grid, healthcare, airport flight navigation etc.?
"Microsoft Windows: the electronic version of the Hindenburg".
I seriously suspect Microsoft of deliberately allowing their software to "burn" like this, to give todays internet a bad reputation.
The establishment and corporate giants were really disturbed to wake up and find out in 1993/1994 that this thing called internet was no hoax. Even Bill Gates first reaction was that it better go away. Windows 95 was released and the game was started. Rulers and establishment today find them in uncomfortable positions. They have 2 options :
Take over the complete world, so then rule and control the complete internet.
Remove the internet, or severely restrict it by technology, which is not tied by the constitutional borders of countries. Think of Software Patents, DMCA and Palladium.
I don't know, but i reckon, also heard from other people, that the current rulers/establishment really hate internet, when they cannot totally control it. This is key point in the new world arena.
Well i can only hope, that you are the one
who will be forced to shutdown your 200 node linux cluster because you lack $350K. Maybe then you start to understand what is going on here.
We linux prorammers/geeks/hackers created the material from which RedHat assembled redhat Advanced Server. If RedHat thinks that they can arrogantly charge $1500,= for a install cdrom + shrinkwrapped box, they are wrong.
Why?
did redhat create the linux kernel ? no
did redhat create apache? no
did redhat create mysql? no
did redhat create php? no
did redhat create perl? no
did redhat create gcc? no
did redhat binutils ? no
did redhat create KDE? no
did redhat create GNOME? no
did redhat create bind? no
did redhat create samba? no
Will redhat create and contribute to those projects in the future? no
So if all people condamn SCO, they also should condamn RedHat for absurd high fees for their stable products. Certainly if people just want the product and not their support.
Last year Caldera Inc. changed its Company name into a new Company name
called "The SCO Group Inc." In 2000 Caldera Inc. publicly announced to donate
their UNIX stuff into the Linux 2.4 kernel. That was just after Caldera Inc.
had bought the orginal SCO Inc. company.
bottom line : "The SCO Group Inc." today has no rights whatsoever to charge $699,= for a Linux License
IMHO , i would say that the only Intellectual Property idea which Microsoft actually came up with themselves is the infamous BSOD a.k.a. Blue Screen Of Death.
The rest of their software and stuff is mainly IP and Copyrights of other Company's software which Microsoft first led to starvation after unfair competition and then is bought at a dumpster price.
Oh maybe one exception should be mentioned. Former Digital Equipment Corporation (DEC) VMS Engineer and Guru David Cutler was hired by Microsoft, which gave Microsoft their Windows NT 3.51.
Wow! That is indeed the best democracy money can buy!
Robert
The test report is misleading
on
DVD Burner Round-up
·
· Score: 2, Informative
The Plextor is max 4x burning speed with
DVD+R recordables.
The Pioneer is max 4x burning speed with DVD-R recordables.
The Panasonic is max 2x burning speed with DVD-R recordables.
So the panasonic already lost even before the shootout was started. All of these drives do either only + or - burning but not both. So if i was looking for a new DVD burner today i would leave these drives inside the shop.
I would opt for the NEC 1100A or the Pioneer DVR-A06 as they burn both + and - media. It seems however that Plextor also will bring a dual-burn (+ and - burn capabilities) drive shortly.
So if your looking for a DVD burner which should last for some time, don't buy any drive from the report. If you want a cheap reliable drive and don't mind the burning format , take either the Pioneer DVR-A05 or the Plextor PX-504A.
oh my goodness : " Microsoft admits critical flaw in nearly all Windows software "
"The announcement came one day after the Department of Homeland Security announced that it awarded a five-year, $90-million contract for Microsoft to supply all its most important desktop and server software for about 140,000 computers inside the new federal agency."
Someone posted it was more like a Hobbyist shakedown :
"Currently there are about 300 commercial web-sites that use the name Commodore or Commodore 64 without having a license from Tulip. Tulip will not allow unauthorized use of the Commodore brand."
For sake, Commodore 64, thats old stuff. Its retro gaming stuff. Why sue people for reviving old retro games? Tulip won a major case last month, worth the amount for about $100 million. I guess they have tasted the Lawsuit Greed Virus like SCO's McBride has demonstrated. Tulip's legal dept. is probably larger than their sales dept.
This has got to stop. A company can go start shopping for a brand name and then start sue-ing the shit out of it. Thats a solid example of ABUSE of Trademark
Names.
Slashdot Mirror
Here's the official FCC Veto Advice letter to the White House :
FCC-veto.pdf
Robert
On my last a job a junior admin was running around along all kinds of windows servers. The bumpersticker on his car read :
"I read your e-mail"
I guess he was right :))
I think something very fishy is going on here. CNet did a small interview with Bill Joy :
http://news.com.com/2100-1012_3-5073205.html?tag=f d_top
however the guy in the picture certainly ain't Bill Joy. Here's some URL's which show defintely other pictures identifying Bill Joy :
http://www.counterbalance.net/bio/joy-frame.htmll
m l
http://java.sun.com/features/1999/07/bill.joy.htm
http://www.sun.com/executives/perspectives/joy.ht
The False CNet Bill Joy has a chin butt, piercing eyes and no glasses, while the 3 above URL's show the real Bill Joy with _no_ chin butt , no piercing eyes and all 3 of them with glasses. Did some fake dude show up at CNet's, faking as Bill Joy (commiting identity theft) and possibly tell some false rumours?
Robert
I have come here to make a statement. Today, now for more as a year, McBride stands for corporate scandals, recession, stock market declines, blackmail, burning with hot irons, mutilation with electric drills, cutting out tongs, terror, massmurder and rape.
McBride has planted false information and evidence to insite fear amongst linux users for corporate terrorism. We cannot show contempt for McBride. He defies the Linux community, we can only act appropiate.
McBride is only building a culture of corporate terrorism. McBride's purpose is more than to follow a process, it is to achieve a result : the end of the civilized world.
Tonight i have a message for McBride: go home and die.
Thank you mister speaker
Nice to see a person like Maddog still being able to have a bright view from a distance on Linux.
Robert
Got Maddogs picture captured too :)
:)
he's the Gandalf of Linux?
http://crashrecovery.org/MD/modules.php
Robert
Date: Wed, 3 Sep 2003 12:39:17 +0100 (BST)
From: Arlene McCarthy
To: stock@stokkie.net
Subject: Response to your correspondence regarding the draft EU directive
on patentability of computer-implemented inventions.
Dear Robert M. Stockmann,
Thank you for your correspondence concerning the draft directive on the
patentability of computer-implemented inventions.
The European Parliament's Legal Affairs Committee has voted on my report
on the directive and there will be continuing debate and further
democratic scrutiny before the directive becomes law.
At this early stage of legislative process, it is nonetheless important
to establish the facts about what the draft EU directive and what I, as
the Parliament's rapporteur, are aiming to achieve in the amendments
tabled to the Commission proposal.
It has been suggested that the Parliament's report will for the first
time allow the patentability of computer-implemented inventions. This is
simply not true. The patenting of computer-implemented inventions is not
a new phenomenon. Patents involving the use of software have been applied
for and granted since the earliest days of the European Patent Office
(EPO). Out of over 110,000 applications received at the EPO in 2001,
16,000 will have dealt with inventions in computer-implemented
technologies. Indeed, even without an EU directive, these patents will
continue to be filed, not only to the EPO but also to national patent
offices.
As you will be aware, in the US and increasingly in Japan, patents have
been granted for what is essentially pure software. Some EPO and national
court rulings indicate that Europe may be drifting towards extending the
scope of patentability to inventions which would traditionally have not
been patentable, as well as pure business methods. It is clear that
Europe needs a uniform legal approach which draws a line between what can
and cannot be patented, and prevents the drift towards the patentability
of software per se.
My intention is clear in the amendments tabled and in a new Article 4 in
the text, to preclude; the patentability of software as such; the
patentability of business methods; algorithms; and mathematical methods.
Article 4 clearly states that in order to be patentable, a
computer-implemented invention must be susceptible to industrial
applications, be new, and involve an inventive step. Moreover I have
added a requirement for a technical contribution in order to ensure that
the mere use of a computer does not lead to a patent being granted.
Furthermore, the amended directive contains new provisions on
decompilation that will assist software developers. While it is not
possible to comment on whether any patent application would be excluded
from the directive, the directive, as amended, would not permit the
patentability of Amazon's 'one-click' method. As far as software itself
is concerned, it will not be possible to patent a software product.
Software itself will continue to be able to be protected by copyright.
With an EU directive, legislators will have scrutiny over the EPO and
national court's decisions. With, in addition, the possibility of having
a definitive ruling from the European Court in Luxembourg, thus ensuring
a restrictive interpretation of the EU directive and a greater degree of
legal certainty in the field of patentability of computer-implemented
inventions.
Some concerns have been raised that the directive may have an adverse
effect on the development of open source software and small software
developers. I support the development of open source software and welcome
the fact that the major open-source companies are recording a 50% growth
in world-wide shipment of its products.
In the amended proposal, I have imposed a requirement on the Commission
to monitor the impact of the directive, in particular its effect on small
and medium s
Date: Mon, 1 Sep 2003 06:50:11 +0200 (CEST)
:
:
:
:9 751 26,00.html
:
From: Robert M. Stockmann
To: arlene.mccarthy@easynet.co.uk
Subject: Re : "Small fry patently need protection" (fwd)
Dear Miss McCarthy,
Here i write again to you, 1.5 months later. Sofar i haven't received
a response to the below email message yet. Today the EUROPEAN Law on
Software Patents is to be passed. Well i can only say one thing here
YOU HAVE BEEN WARNED, AND NOT ONLY BY ME
If you as Labour MEP member just implement rulings and laws which are
not supported by a majority of the people, things might turn real bad
for you. Maybe not today but in the future.
you wrote
"Numerous people from small to medium-sized enterprises have written to me
in support of my proposal. "
Well i have worked for several smaller and medium-sized software and
programming companies. NONE OF THESE HAD LAYWERS ON THEIR PAYROLL.
Getting Patents on Software is something only BIG CORPORATIONS will be
able to achieve.
Today , Monday 1 September 2003, I ask you again to reconsider your
proposal, and admit that SOFTWARE PATENTS only SUSTAIN the POWER of
BIG SOFTWARE CORPORATIONS. Oh i forgot: In the current ICT World allmost
all software is created by SOFTWARE CORPORATIONS from the USA. I sure
hope you realize we are talking about SOFTWARE PATENTS regulations inside
the EU.
Do you realize there are no NO BIG SOFTWARE CORPORATIONS inside the EU?
Thank you for your attention.
Regards,
Robert
--
Robert M. Stockmann - RHCE
Network Engineer - UNIX/Linux Specialist
crashrecovery.org stock@stokkie.net
---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Sun, 15 Jun 2003 01:00:49 +0200 (CEST)
From: Robert M. Stockmann
To: arlene.mccarthy@easynet.co.uk
Subject: Re : "Small fry patently need protection"
Dear Miss McCarthy,
In your article in the Guardian "Small fry patently need protection"
http://www.guardian.co.uk/online/story/0,3605,
you write this
"Numerous people from small to medium-sized enterprises have written to me
in support of my proposal. "
Well show us the letters I would say.
Robert
--
Robert M. Stockmann - RHCE
Network Engineer - UNIX/Linux Specialist
crashrecovery.org stock@stokkie.net
http://securityresponse.symantec.com/avcenter/venc /data/w32.sobig.f@mm.html
it reads :
"Sobig.F obtains the UTC time through the NTP protocol, by contacting one of several possible servers on port 123/udp (the NTP port)."
I then would expect the following screnario : Very likely most netgear router users have used its nifty builtin dhcp server. cisco also has such embedded dhcp servers and does SMC barricade. So far nothing special. However if the embedded dhcp server of the netgear router also has dhcp option "option ntp-servers ip-address" configured, using the UWisc Time Server ip-number then the following most probably has happened :
W32.Sobig.F@mm is released on the Internet and hits hard. It spreads through email. upon storing itself on the NT4, win2k, winxp PC, it asks for UTC time through the NTP protocol. If the dhcp client has through dhcp already a configured ntp-server, that one (The UWisc one) will be used. If no ntp-server is configured only then the virus will try to reach the ntpservers listed on the symantec security response description for W32.Sobig.F@mm.
Robert
Is a mouseclick a authorative legal proof of signing an EULA ? Like one signs a contract with a signature?
And shouldn't have Microsoft received a fax-ed or snail-mailed copy of the EULA contract with your signature in blue Ink, before they are legally allowed to play around with their customers ?
Robert
Well thats where the real problem is. Sofar big IT houses are not really willing to completely go down the Linux path. Well at least thats my opinion here. As long large IT consultancy company's only want to earn the easy fat cash for overrated Microsoft products, Services and most important thinks like support helldesks revenue's, Anti-Virus/Worm revenue's and other alike peoples cash grabbing, nothing will happen.
And suddenly the Linux "company's" are starting to charge also in a cash grabbing way for stable versions of their Linux server OS distibutions. Thats the surest way to indeed have Microsoft survive in the corrupt IT business.
Robert
http://www.cnn.com/2003/US/08/16/blackout.chron.ap /index.html
One thing is clear : the timely coincidence between MSBLAST and power blackout is certainly _there_. The following postings on securityfocus.com shows that the SCADA systems run on Windows 2000/XP and some are connected to the internet.
http://www.securityfocus.com/archive/1/333505/2003 -08-13/2003-08-19/0
" I believe that the outage was caused by the MSblaster, or its mutation, which was besieged upon the respective vulnerability in certain control and monitoring systems (SCADA and otherwise) running MS 2000 or XP, located different points along the Grid. Some of these systems are accessible via the Internet, while others are accessible by POTS dialup, or private Frame relay and dedicated connectivity. "
http://www.securityfocus.com/archive/1/333513/2003 -08-13/2003-08-19/0
SCADA manuals : http://www.automationtechies.com/sitepages/pid641. php
The following is very interesting : http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/cybe rwar/view/
its a Documentary about cyberwar and its impact on America after 911, and brought online on apr. 24, 2003. Inside video #4 and #6 Gen. Clark from the Pentagon and other government security officials clearly state that Cyberwar Criminals (El-Queida members are named as possible candiates) can takedown large parts of the American Powergrid.
So when Mr. McSlarrow talks about things like: "we must extensively investigate the cause of power fallout here, and new power bill de-regulations must be introduced", i can only think of yet another mass media attempt to distract the attention in other directions. Why does No-One mention the failing of Microsoft's software? Why does No-One mention that the Government should disallow using Microsoft software for essential services, like power-grid, healthcare, airport flight navigation etc.?
Robert
"Microsoft Windows: the electronic version of the Hindenburg". I seriously suspect Microsoft of deliberately allowing their software to "burn" like this, to give todays internet a bad reputation. The establishment and corporate giants were really disturbed to wake up and find out in 1993/1994 that this thing called internet was no hoax. Even Bill Gates first reaction was that it better go away. Windows 95 was released and the game was started. Rulers and establishment today find them in uncomfortable positions. They have 2 options :
-
Take over the complete world, so then rule and control the complete internet.
-
Remove the internet, or severely restrict it by technology, which is not tied by the constitutional borders of countries. Think of Software Patents, DMCA and Palladium.
I don't know, but i reckon, also heard from other people, that the current rulers/establishment really hate internet, when they cannot totally control it. This is key point in the new world arena.Robert
http://www.cnn.com/2003/US/08/16/blackout.chron.ap /index.html
The timely coincidence between MSBLAST and power blackout is certainly _there_.
http://www.securityfocus.com/archive/1/333505/2003 -08-13/2003-08-19/0 3 -08-13/2003-08-19/0 . php
http://www.securityfocus.com/archive/1/333513/200
http://www.automationtechies.com/sitepages/pid641
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/cybe rwar/view/
aspecially watch video #4. Just after 911 a cyber terroristic attack againts the powergrid was warned for by Gen. Clark from the Pentagon and other cyber security officials.
Robert
There's Lies, there's damn Lies and finally there are benchmarks.
Robert
We linux prorammers/geeks/hackers created the material from which RedHat assembled redhat Advanced Server. If RedHat thinks that they can arrogantly charge $1500,= for a install cdrom + shrinkwrapped box, they are wrong.
Why?
did redhat create the linux kernel ? no
did redhat create apache? no
did redhat create mysql? no
did redhat create php? no
did redhat create perl? no
did redhat create gcc? no
did redhat binutils ? no
did redhat create KDE? no
did redhat create GNOME? no
did redhat create bind? no
did redhat create samba? no
Will redhat create and contribute to those projects in the future? no
So if all people condamn SCO, they also should condamn RedHat for absurd high fees for their stable products. Certainly if people just want the product and not their support.
Robert
search for caldera
Caldera's details
Search for SCO Group
SCO Group #1
SCO Group #2
I made a html page of the results just in case : sco_group.html
Robert
Last year Caldera Inc. changed its Company name into a new Company name called "The SCO Group Inc." In 2000 Caldera Inc. publicly announced to donate their UNIX stuff into the Linux 2.4 kernel. That was just after Caldera Inc. had bought the orginal SCO Inc. company.
bottom line : "The SCO Group Inc." today has no rights whatsoever to charge $699,= for a Linux License
Robert
The rest of their software and stuff is mainly IP and Copyrights of other Company's software which Microsoft first led to starvation after unfair competition and then is bought at a dumpster price.
Oh maybe one exception should be mentioned. Former Digital Equipment Corporation (DEC) VMS Engineer and Guru David Cutler was hired by Microsoft, which gave Microsoft their Windows NT 3.51.
Robert
The President veto-ing againts a 400 to 21 vote??
Wow! That is indeed the best democracy money can buy!
Robert
The Pioneer is max 4x burning speed with DVD-R recordables.
The Panasonic is max 2x burning speed with DVD-R recordables.
So the panasonic already lost even before the shootout was started. All of these drives do either only + or - burning but not both. So if i was looking for a new DVD burner today i would leave these drives inside the shop.
I would opt for the NEC 1100A or the Pioneer DVR-A06 as they burn both + and - media. It seems however that Plextor also will bring a dual-burn (+ and - burn capabilities) drive shortly.
So if your looking for a DVD burner which should last for some time, don't buy any drive from the report. If you want a cheap reliable drive and don't mind the burning format , take either the Pioneer DVR-A05 or the Plextor PX-504A.
Robert
San Franciso Gate article
Robert
"The announcement came one day after the Department of Homeland Security announced that it awarded a five-year, $90-million contract for Microsoft to supply all its most important desktop and server software for about 140,000 computers inside the new federal agency."
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/ne ws/archive/2003/07/16/national1725EDT0732.DTL
that last quote is on the bottom..
Robert
"Currently there are about 300 commercial web-sites that use the name Commodore or Commodore 64 without having a license from Tulip. Tulip will not allow unauthorized use of the Commodore brand."
For sake, Commodore 64, thats old stuff. Its retro gaming stuff. Why sue people for reviving old retro games? Tulip won a major case last month, worth the amount for about $100 million. I guess they have tasted the Lawsuit Greed Virus like SCO's McBride has demonstrated. Tulip's legal dept. is probably larger than their sales dept.
This has got to stop. A company can go start shopping for a brand name and then start sue-ing the shit out of it. Thats a solid example of ABUSE of Trademark Names.
Robert