1. Arrange a deal with msft to fud linux for big money. 2. Launch strategic litigation doomed from start - but "winning" is not the point. 3. Accept $17 million directly from msft - and $12 million directly from Sun. 4. Accpet $50 million in msft arranged "loan." 5. Stock price skyrocket 6. Some Execs dump insanely inflated stock - then resign 7. Execs that are left give themselves extremely generous pay and bonus for over 5 years 8. Profit! (for those in on the scam) 9. Reality sets in 10. Stock takes a dump 11. Loss! (for the suckers left holding the bag)
Stock price, scox profits, etc, are just a distraction. The real point of the scox-scam is to put a legal cloud over linux. Msft wants everybody to know that if you contribute to linux, you better have $50 - $100 million to fight msft in 5 year long bogus lawsuit.
Since a federal judge has already ruled that scox does not own unix, the lawsuit is now officially a joke. Which means that scox is no longer useful as a fud tool for msft. Scox has not been a real company since the msft sponsored scam began. Scox was nothing but a msft PR stunt.
Considering that scox officially does not own linux, and that scox has filed for bankruptcy, and scox has been delisted, and msft doesn't need scox: yeah, I think we can stick a fork in it.
1) scox doesn't own the UNIX code, scox only sells Unix for novell, and scox keeps a 5% kickback.
2) even if scox did own unix, there are numerous contracts (HP, IBM, Sun, etc.)that forbid the open sourcing of UNIX.
3) UNIX has already been open sourced, for the most part. There is very little, if any, UNIX code left that has been open due to AT&T v Berkeley.
4) if there is any UNIX that has not been open sourced, it isn't worth anything technically. Open sourcing UNIX may help stop the bogo litigation, but that's it.
> Those dastardly songwriters have too long been taking unfair advantage of the RIAA's clients. They take a whopping 8% of royalties just for creating the product!
Considering that a druggie, slut, no-tal, like Britney Spears, makes $750K a month; maybe the recording industry has been too generous. Rap "artists" don't sing, compose, or play instruments yet they can afford these amazing "cribs." Where would these marginally talented hillbillies and gangsta thugs be with the recording industry?
Msft can lock users into windows because sw/hw makers will only support windows, because windows owns 95% of the market.
But, yahoo? It's a bit of a pain to change email, but you are certainly not locked in.
So, IMO, you are exactly right. It is no problem to change web portals. Much of the market share, that msft thinks they are buying, will just transfer to google.
I bet google has a company-wide party the day msft acquires yhoo.
Anybody, except for emotionally disturbed msft execs, can see that such a merger would weaken both companies: yhoo would suck even worse, and $20 billion in cash is not pocket change - even for msft.
Even Micheal Moore admits to that. Last time Hillary made a big fuss over healthcare, she dropped the issue for about $850K. So how much is she holding out for this time? $1.5 million?
How could anybody even consider voting for somebody who takes bribes to vote against her own issues and ideals? Hillary does not care about the USA, she just wants more money in her bank account. Bill and Hillary have been selling influence for the 35 years.
I don't care if other politicians do the same thing, I would never vote for a known sell-out.
Didn't the same thing happen with the airlines? Huge government bailout so people could keep their jobs, then the airline execs pocketed the money and fired everybody anyway?
At least, that is what I remember from watching South Park.
>Actually, yes. There is a great deal of controversy around the Kenyan national response.
Actually no. I read the blog post, and the response. Apparently this "controversy" is nothing more than a rumor. A rumor started, and perpetuated by msft zealots.
"In reality, we should be pissed at both Microsoft and IBM; they're both subverting a process that is soposed to be for the good of the consumers."
Care to explain exactly what IBM did to the subvert the process? Was IBM involved in ballot stuffing or bribing? Did IBM try cheat it's way into pushing a proprietary standard through the system, and calling that standard open?
According to msft, all ibm did was oppose the standard. In deverence to what msft shills may think, there is nothing improper about voicing opposition to msft's lying and cheating.
I don't see msft accusing IBM of "dirty" campaigning.
The problem is that another company may be campaigning at all. I mean, how friggin *dare* they! Doesn't IBM know that msft has a sacred right to all PC OSes and office products?
IBM has already shown itself to have the unmitigated gall to donate IBM's own code to Linux. This prompted msft to fund caldera to file a bogus lawsuit against IBM. According to the original lawsuit, caldera owned UNIX, and therefore anything that ever touched UNIX was also owned by caldera.
Yet, it spite of being punished, IBM has still not learned their lesson. To do anything that might obstruct msft is an absolute sacrilege! Msft is understandably appalled. Msft will not accept this horrible injustice silently. Msft wants the world to know just how completely unethically IBM is behaving.
I mean, to try and compete with msft! Of all the bloody nerve
Maybe this is emerging F/OSS business model?
on
Nokia Buys Trolltech
·
· Score: 1
Make a product that is widely accepted, and get bought out by a major company. Linux magazine predicted that Alfresco may be bought out.
* Nokia has bought Trolltech. * Sun bought MySQL and StarOffice * Yahoo bought Zimbra * Snort was bough out * Novell bought SuSE
When you buy Vista, you will hate it so bad that you will have to upgrade to msft's newest new-and-improved pos-os. Kah-Ching!
Msft always promises that nirvana is just one upgrade away. When msft's products disappoint, msft will say "next time for sure" and everybody will buy again.
I write a book, you make, and distribute, illegal copies of that book. Your actions cost me X number of sales, so you have to compensate me for those damages. That makes sense.
I write a cease-and-desist letter, you make, and distribute, illegal copies of that letter. But you have not cost me any sales, so what are my damages?
It sure does not seem like it. I am seeing a lot of criticism of the Motley Fool Article, posted by people who apparently did not read the article. In deference to what the slashdot blurb would have you believe, the MF article is actually very fair and balanced.
I am no great fan of the MF, but you seem awfully silly bashing an article that you did not even read.
> Major purchasing decisions are not taken by people live with their parents in Wyoming [penny-arcade.com]. They are taken by grown ups who have mortgages and orthodentist bills to pay, and those people recommend, and will continue to recommend, Microsoft because nobody ever got sacked for doing so.
I take it you have never heard of: IBM, SAP, Oracle, or Sun Microsystems. You may be surprised to learn that, to many people who are serious experts in enterprise level system, it's microsoft that's the joke.
Yes, msft rules the weenie desktop market, but microsoft does not rule anywhere else.
IMO: those who think that IT systems start and end with desktop PCs have no business posting about "major corporate purchases." Frankly, you don't know what you're posting about.
A few examples of characteristics associated with cultic groups:
* Subservience to the leader or group requires members to cut ties with family and friends, and radically alter the personal goals and activities they had before joining the group.
* The group is preoccupied with bringing in new members.
* Members are expected to devote inordinate amounts of time to the group and group-related activities.
* Members are encouraged or required to live and/or socialize only with other group members.
* The most loyal members (the "true believers") feel there can be no life outside the context of the group. They believe there is no other way to be, and often fear reprisals to themselves or others if they leave (or even consider leaving) the group.
Can you honestly tell me that every large, established, religion require all that?
>>Vista logged less than half the vulnerabilities that Windows XP did in its first year, according to the Microsoft report.
1) Does that mean than Vista *has* half the vulnerabilities of XP?
2) The title reads "Flaws" but the article only seems to discuss "security vulnerbilities" are there not other types of flaws?
3) Is there an accounting for the degree of vulnerbility?
4) What exactly is msft calling a "security vulnerbility?" For example, is likelyhood of virus infection considered a security vulnerability? Or is msft only measuring things like open ports?
5) Is there any reason to belive msft? Call me a linux zealot, or whatever, but msft has been caught red-handed in *numerous* lies and scams, i.e. fake video testimoney to the US-DoJ, fake "independant" benchmarks, fake TCO studies, letters from dead people campaign, paid shill journalists, bribing and ballot stuffing to push MS-OOMXL through ISO process, and so on.
I have seen this work. I worked for a company that hired a big-shot IT manager for a huge salary. Among many other accomplishments, he claimed to be an expert UNIX administrator. Within his first day there, I found that he did not know simple commands like "ls" or "grep." But he kept his job. I'm the one who got fired, it was one of the first things he did.
> That's why every job posting I've seen for a managerial position says "must have X years of managerial experience to apply." They all have that requirement.
True, but most management postions are never advertised. Usually, a hirer up manager think's joe is a good guy, so joe gets the job.
Slashdot Mirror
More like this:
1. Arrange a deal with msft to fud linux for big money.
2. Launch strategic litigation doomed from start - but "winning" is not the point.
3. Accept $17 million directly from msft - and $12 million directly from Sun.
4. Accpet $50 million in msft arranged "loan."
5. Stock price skyrocket
6. Some Execs dump insanely inflated stock - then resign
7. Execs that are left give themselves extremely generous pay and bonus for over 5 years
8. Profit! (for those in on the scam)
9. Reality sets in
10. Stock takes a dump
11. Loss! (for the suckers left holding the bag)
Stock price, scox profits, etc, are just a distraction. The real point of the scox-scam is to put a legal cloud over linux. Msft wants everybody to know that if you contribute to linux, you better have $50 - $100 million to fight msft in 5 year long bogus lawsuit.
Since a federal judge has already ruled that scox does not own unix, the lawsuit is now officially a joke. Which means that scox is no longer useful as a fud tool for msft. Scox has not been a real company since the msft sponsored scam began. Scox was nothing but a msft PR stunt.
Considering that scox officially does not own linux, and that scox has filed for bankruptcy, and scox has been delisted, and msft doesn't need scox: yeah, I think we can stick a fork in it.
1) scox doesn't own the UNIX code, scox only sells Unix for novell, and scox keeps a 5% kickback.
2) even if scox did own unix, there are numerous contracts (HP, IBM, Sun, etc.)that forbid the open sourcing of UNIX.
3) UNIX has already been open sourced, for the most part. There is very little, if any, UNIX code left that has been open due to AT&T v Berkeley.
4) if there is any UNIX that has not been open sourced, it isn't worth anything technically. Open sourcing UNIX may help stop the bogo litigation, but that's it.
Scox was dead before the scam. If not for the scam, scox would have gone belly up three years ago. All that msft money is all that kept scox alive.
No matter, plenty more b!tches where they came from. Now msft is using novl and acacia to continue fudding linux.
> Those dastardly songwriters have too long been taking unfair advantage of the RIAA's clients. They take a whopping 8% of royalties just for creating the product!
Considering that a druggie, slut, no-tal, like Britney Spears, makes $750K a month; maybe the recording industry has been too generous. Rap "artists" don't sing, compose, or play instruments yet they can afford these amazing "cribs." Where would these marginally talented hillbillies and gangsta thugs be with the recording industry?
Msft can lock users into windows because sw/hw makers will only support windows, because windows owns 95% of the market.
But, yahoo? It's a bit of a pain to change email, but you are certainly not locked in.
So, IMO, you are exactly right. It is no problem to change web portals. Much of the market share, that msft thinks they are buying, will just transfer to google.
I bet google has a company-wide party the day msft acquires yhoo.
Anybody, except for emotionally disturbed msft execs, can see that such a merger would weaken both companies: yhoo would suck even worse, and $20 billion in cash is not pocket change - even for msft.
Can't Zimbra be forked?
Even Micheal Moore admits to that. Last time Hillary made a big fuss over healthcare, she dropped the issue for about $850K. So how much is she holding out for this time? $1.5 million?
How could anybody even consider voting for somebody who takes bribes to vote against her own issues and ideals? Hillary does not care about the USA, she just wants more money in her bank account. Bill and Hillary have been selling influence for the 35 years.
I don't care if other politicians do the same thing, I would never vote for a known sell-out.
IMO: this deal will weaken both msft and yhoo. People will use yhoo even less. Msft will have spent way too much.
They expect their employers to train them, then they expect these huge salaries starting from their first day in outer space.
NASA really had no choice. Either NASA had to get around the H1-B laws, or hire illegal alian astronuts. And Sigourney Weaver advised against that.
Didn't the same thing happen with the airlines? Huge government bailout so people could keep their jobs, then the airline execs pocketed the money and fired everybody anyway?
At least, that is what I remember from watching South Park.
>Actually, yes. There is a great deal of controversy around the Kenyan national response.
Actually no. I read the blog post, and the response. Apparently this "controversy" is nothing more than a rumor. A rumor started, and perpetuated by msft zealots.
"In reality, we should be pissed at both Microsoft and IBM; they're both subverting a process that is soposed to be for the good of the consumers."
Care to explain exactly what IBM did to the subvert the process? Was IBM involved in ballot stuffing or bribing? Did IBM try cheat it's way into pushing a proprietary standard through the system, and calling that standard open?
According to msft, all ibm did was oppose the standard. In deverence to what msft shills may think, there is nothing improper about voicing opposition to msft's lying and cheating.
Or am I missing something?
I don't see msft accusing IBM of "dirty" campaigning.
The problem is that another company may be campaigning at all. I mean, how friggin *dare* they! Doesn't IBM know that msft has a sacred right to all PC OSes and office products?
IBM has already shown itself to have the unmitigated gall to donate IBM's own code to Linux. This prompted msft to fund caldera to file a bogus lawsuit against IBM. According to the original lawsuit, caldera owned UNIX, and therefore anything that ever touched UNIX was also owned by caldera.
Yet, it spite of being punished, IBM has still not learned their lesson. To do anything that might obstruct msft is an absolute sacrilege! Msft is understandably appalled. Msft will not accept this horrible injustice silently. Msft wants the world to know just how completely unethically IBM is behaving.
I mean, to try and compete with msft! Of all the bloody nerve
Make a product that is widely accepted, and get bought out by a major company. Linux magazine predicted that Alfresco may be bought out.
* Nokia has bought Trolltech.
* Sun bought MySQL and StarOffice
* Yahoo bought Zimbra
* Snort was bough out
* Novell bought SuSE
Do you want Steve Ballmer to go broke?
When you buy Vista, you will hate it so bad that you will have to upgrade to msft's newest new-and-improved pos-os. Kah-Ching!
Msft always promises that nirvana is just one upgrade away. When msft's products disappoint, msft will say "next time for sure" and everybody will buy again.
I write a book, you make, and distribute, illegal copies of that book. Your actions cost me X number of sales, so you have to compensate me for those damages. That makes sense.
I write a cease-and-desist letter, you make, and distribute, illegal copies of that letter. But you have not cost me any sales, so what are my damages?
It sure does not seem like it. I am seeing a lot of criticism of the Motley Fool Article, posted by people who apparently did not read the article. In deference to what the slashdot blurb would have you believe, the MF article is actually very fair and balanced.
I am no great fan of the MF, but you seem awfully silly bashing an article that you did not even read.
> Major purchasing decisions are not taken by people live with their parents in Wyoming [penny-arcade.com]. They are taken by grown ups who have mortgages and orthodentist bills to pay, and those people recommend, and will continue to recommend, Microsoft because nobody ever got sacked for doing so.
I take it you have never heard of: IBM, SAP, Oracle, or Sun Microsystems. You may be surprised to learn that, to many people who are serious experts in enterprise level system, it's microsoft that's the joke.
Yes, msft rules the weenie desktop market, but microsoft does not rule anywhere else.
IMO: those who think that IT systems start and end with desktop PCs have no business posting about "major corporate purchases." Frankly, you don't know what you're posting about.
cult (n): A small, unpopular religion.
religion (n): a large, popular cult.
Not true. A cult has many other characteristics.
Here is a checklist:
http://www.csj.org/infoserv_cult101/checklis.htm
A few examples of characteristics associated with cultic groups:
* Subservience to the leader or group requires members to cut ties with family and friends, and radically alter the personal goals and activities they had before joining the group.
* The group is preoccupied with bringing in new members.
* Members are expected to devote inordinate amounts of time to the group and group-related activities.
* Members are encouraged or required to live and/or socialize only with other group members.
* The most loyal members (the "true believers") feel there can be no life outside the context of the group. They believe there is no other way to be, and often fear reprisals to themselves or others if they leave (or even consider leaving) the group.
Can you honestly tell me that every large, established, religion require all that?
SouthPark spoofs on Jews, Catholics, LDS, Islam, atheists, Scientologists, and everybody else. Guess which one group gets all pissy about it?
What other religion, or even cult, has led a massive, organized, campaign against a website that is critical to them?
Not only does Scientology try to sell their teachings, Scientoloy gets all pissy about outside who reveal their teachings.
CoS teachings may not be any crazier than the teachings of any other religion, but CoS is sure touchy about discussion of their beliefs.
>>Vista logged less than half the vulnerabilities that Windows XP did in its first year, according to the Microsoft report.
1) Does that mean than Vista *has* half the vulnerabilities of XP?
2) The title reads "Flaws" but the article only seems to discuss "security vulnerbilities" are there not other types of flaws?
3) Is there an accounting for the degree of vulnerbility?
4) What exactly is msft calling a "security vulnerbility?" For example, is likelyhood of virus infection considered a security vulnerability? Or is msft only measuring things like open ports?
5) Is there any reason to belive msft? Call me a linux zealot, or whatever, but msft has been caught red-handed in *numerous* lies and scams, i.e. fake video testimoney to the US-DoJ, fake "independant" benchmarks, fake TCO studies, letters from dead people campaign, paid shill journalists, bribing and ballot stuffing to push MS-OOMXL through ISO process, and so on.
>>A good manager with a track record: priceless.
Well yeah, but the question is: how do you get started? How do you break in?
If you are already a well established manager (or whatever) then there is nothing to do - you are already there.
I don't know why so many people on slashdot miss this, but I see it all the time, i.e.:
Q. how do I become a DBA?
A. first get five years professional experience as a high level DBA.
At least msft is consistant.
I have seen this work. I worked for a company that hired a big-shot IT manager for a huge salary. Among many other accomplishments, he claimed to be an expert UNIX administrator. Within his first day there, I found that he did not know simple commands like "ls" or "grep." But he kept his job. I'm the one who got fired, it was one of the first things he did.
> That's why every job posting I've seen for a managerial position says "must have X years of managerial experience to apply." They all have that requirement.
True, but most management postions are never advertised. Usually, a hirer up manager think's joe is a good guy, so joe gets the job.