Well, it's very interesting to see a fellow canuck here trying to argue that this doesn't apply to us and that we aren't about to enact the same type of legislation up here. Perhaps you've heard of WIPO - Canada is a founding member. How about the Wassenaar Arrangement?
Seems to me we're already in bed with the Americans when it comes to IP policy. Not to mention that we are not a major producer of high-tech consumer goods (even ATI barely does any noticable business north of the border now) and therefore have practically no leverage on this issue. As always, we'll get whatever the Americans get, because their market is worth at least 10 times ours.
And don't be counting on our Asian friends to help us - even China is fast-tracking to join WIPO, and anyways it's unlikely that even if unprotected equipment is manufacturered in the Far East, it will be impossible to effectively import any reasonable quantities here without major political backlash from the Americans.
I hate having to sit on the sidelines everytime this kinda thing starts up in the States, knowing that us Canadians will be taking in from behind without even being able to "write our congressmen" and try to stop it.
===
"When are people going to learn - democracy doesn't work!" - Homer J. Simpson.
===
Yes yes, it's true once again - MS is the one true evil and their only purpose in life is to lie/cheat/steal their way into the hearts, minds and wallets of the public! Too bad we have such a gutless administrationin Washington these days (no problem with bombing dirt-poor Afghans back into the 3rd century, but whoa if you want to put a stop to a multi-billion dollar IP scam). Alas, welcome to Western-style Freedom in the 21st century!
P.S. - Hi Aum, long time, no see!
--> move along, move along, nothing more to see here...
Those are the only two words that I can possibly apply to this settlement. As hard as the international IT community have tried to believe that the US DoJ would finally rein in their worst offender, the change of federal government has proven that in the US, Politics is more powerful that Law. If the American Justice system had any respect around the world, it has lost it today because of this settlement to the largest and most pivotal legal case on globalization and comemrcialization in history.
Ok, I just can't let this one go by without pointing out how seriously
ridiculous some of your arguments are.
1. Learning Curves
I am sick of hearing this argument. You DO NOT need to
learn to use the *nix CLI to use any modern system, including Solaris,
Linux, AIX, etc. Any properly configured *nix network with X-terms
or even full blown PC workstations uses a graphical display manager and
can be manipulated ENTIRELY WITH A GUI environment by the average user.
Unless you're prepared to provide hard evidence that the Windows GUI is
provably better or easier to learn and/or use than KDE, GNOME, CDE, or
MacOS/X, then please drop this argument already. If you still believe
this, go read the last 10 years of ACM SIGCHI proceedings and find me a
single article about the benefits of the Windows GUI. And BTW, no
blonde bimbo will ever have to recompile her kernel any more than she will
ever have to manually edit her Registry!
2. Interaction with Users Outside the Office
This is another completely unfounded rant. First of all,
in any company I've ever worked with, NO end user ever does their own network
configuration. Show me the last time an average corporate user mapped
a drive or printer themselves instead of relying on a login script / user
profile / call to the HelpDesk. As for the OfficeXP issue, you admit
that it doesn't even work with Office2000 (itself based on Office97 formats),
and yet you criticize OpenOffice for this? How about this - find
me a SINGLE Fortune 500 corporation that has converted entirely to OfficeXP?
The major reason is that the OLD file formats are still the standard everywhere.
This is specifically why you need to use something like StarOffice/OpenOffice/KOffice
instead of a REAL *nix wordprocessor, because of the NEED to have good
input and output filters for the most popular file formats, namely MS Office
97/2000! As for a conversion tool, this is crazy because you know
as well as anyone that the average user will NEVER accept this as a day-to-day
solution, and if they would then they would just as easily accept it in
the *nix Office case as in the MS OfficeXP case.
3. Support Costs
In fact, I've spend my entire career building and running corporate
networks, and I can tell you honestly that NO MATTER HOW MUCH YOU PAY in
support costs, no vendor I've ever worked with has issued a software patch
for their system by COB next day, no matter how critical it was.
I SERIOUSLY doubt you can provide a single documented case of Microsoft,
Sun, Novell or any other OS vendor ever doing this for any partner that
isn't paying them over $100 million a year in licensing! If anything,
I can provide
many documented cases of Linux users getting
this kind of support immediately, because they often DO have direct access
to the guys who WROTE the software in question, and for little or no cost.
Finally, as to your summary about corporations having people dedicated
to saving money and having looked into this in detail, I think you are
glorifying the job of most bean counters and are blissfully ignorant of
the impact vendor marketing and more importantly IT consultancy have on
these decisions. Today, Linux's biggest problem is the lack of people
who think they will make tons of money off of pushing it, and therefore
no big consulting firms are trying seriously to convince major corporations
to switch. In spite of this, even firms like Gartner, Anderson, EDS,
etc. are starting to realize that they can no longer continue to provide
this kind of profit-motivated IT consulting advice (i.e. use MS IIS for
all public servers, or adopt Win2K AD now, move the company to OfficeXP
immediately), otherwise their clients will simply stop taking them seriously
AND THEY WILL LOSE MONEY! To believe that just because companies
are using Windows MEANS they are somehow saving money on it is a seriously
flawed argument.
Katz is on crack if he's going to claim that all of the success of the G4 will be because of the ultra-hyped processor power of Motorola's newest CPU. Face it Jon, both current Alphas (21264) and Althons (K7-650) can run circles around the G4, regardless of what Apple would have us believe.
Yes, I agree that it's cool that MacFans can buy a 450 MHz system for under $4K, but let's not forget the other great advance that Jobs and Co. learned the hard way at NeXT -- you need a good OS, and not just a pretty GUI face! MAC OS X is the biggest news in the history of Apple, and the press is glossing it over. For anyone who didn't already know: OS X is UNIX! Yes, the NeXT OS is not dead, and it is the real reason Apple will thrive in the months and years ahead.
Anyone who remembers AU/X knows how badly Apple screwed this up, and any professional programmer knows that MacOS's ridiculous design is the major factor keeping REAL(tm) computing applications off the Mac. I'll bet I can count the number of existing scientific / engineering / medical apps developed specifically for the Mac on one hand. If Jobs really wants to tout the G4 as a supercomputer, let's see it running an app someone might want a supercomputer for, not just a really fast Gaussian blur in PhotoShop!
Jon, as always a nice bit of prose but I think you really missed the mark on this one. Good luck next time.
Hmmm, this according to a company that wants to sacrifice their newly acquired Alpha chips at the holy Intel altar. Seems like I read something from Compaq before the DEC merger promising to keep supporting the Alpha.Alphas make great DB servers, even under a broken OS like NT. And they scream with a REAL OS like {insert your favourite penguin flavour here} Linux.And I though the SEC said mergers were always good for competition;-)
Wow, I'm really impressed that our government, especially a regulatory arm that consists mostly of ex-monopoly Bell employees, chose to "do the right thing" and keep their hands off the Internet (for now). Seems to me that everytime I start slipping into the pit of political apathy, along comes a glimmer of hope. Now if only we could resolve this idiotic tariffing situation with the Broadcasting and Telecommunications Acts, we could really get some convergence happening...
Ok, before this discussion gets out of hand and becomes a country bashing love-in, let me just inform you all that according to the terms of the Wassenaar Arrangement (which I believe is the apparant source of this peculiar requirement), software like GNU/Linux is specifically excluded from the "Dual Use List" (i.e. goods or technologies which can be used for the production of conventional weapons systems as well as other, non-military applications). To quote from the "General Software Note" section on page 3 of [WALIST(98) 1]: The Lists do not control "software" which is either: 1.... 2. "In the public domain". Hence I believe that none of this applies to a GNU/Linux system, and is therefore not an export problem. IMNSHO. Check here for the gory details. P.S. - Personally, I wouldn't deal with Iran, and I'm a peace-loving Canadian! At least, until the 'Net becomes it's own nationality...
Slashdot Mirror
Well, it's very interesting to see a fellow canuck here trying to argue that this doesn't apply to us and that we aren't about to enact the same type of legislation up here. Perhaps you've heard of WIPO - Canada is a founding member. How about the Wassenaar Arrangement?
Seems to me we're already in bed with the Americans when it comes to IP policy. Not to mention that we are not a major producer of high-tech consumer goods (even ATI barely does any noticable business north of the border now) and therefore have practically no leverage on this issue. As always, we'll get whatever the Americans get, because their market is worth at least 10 times ours.
And don't be counting on our Asian friends to help us - even China is fast-tracking to join WIPO, and anyways it's unlikely that even if unprotected equipment is manufacturered in the Far East, it will be impossible to effectively import any reasonable quantities here without major political backlash from the Americans.
I hate having to sit on the sidelines everytime this kinda thing starts up in the States, knowing that us Canadians will be taking in from behind without even being able to "write our congressmen" and try to stop it.
==="When are people going to learn - democracy doesn't work!" - Homer J. Simpson.
===
Yes yes, it's true once again - MS is the one true evil and their only purpose in life is to lie/cheat/steal their way into the hearts, minds and wallets of the public! Too bad we have such a gutless administrationin Washington these days (no problem with bombing dirt-poor Afghans back into the 3rd century, but whoa if you want to put a stop to a multi-billion dollar IP scam). Alas, welcome to Western-style Freedom in the 21st century! P.S. - Hi Aum, long time, no see! --> move along, move along, nothing more to see here...
Those are the only two words that I can possibly apply to this settlement. As hard as the international IT community have tried to believe that the US DoJ would finally rein in their worst offender, the change of federal government has proven that in the US, Politics is more powerful that Law. If the American Justice system had any respect around the world, it has lost it today because of this settlement to the largest and most pivotal legal case on globalization and comemrcialization in history.
1. Learning Curves
2. Interaction with Users Outside the Office 3. Support Costs Finally, as to your summary about corporations having people dedicated to saving money and having looked into this in detail, I think you are glorifying the job of most bean counters and are blissfully ignorant of the impact vendor marketing and more importantly IT consultancy have on these decisions. Today, Linux's biggest problem is the lack of people who think they will make tons of money off of pushing it, and therefore no big consulting firms are trying seriously to convince major corporations to switch. In spite of this, even firms like Gartner, Anderson, EDS, etc. are starting to realize that they can no longer continue to provide this kind of profit-motivated IT consulting advice (i.e. use MS IIS for all public servers, or adopt Win2K AD now, move the company to OfficeXP immediately), otherwise their clients will simply stop taking them seriously AND THEY WILL LOSE MONEY! To believe that just because companies are using Windows MEANS they are somehow saving money on it is a seriously flawed argument.Yes, I agree that it's cool that MacFans can buy a 450 MHz system for under $4K, but let's not forget the other great advance that Jobs and Co. learned the hard way at NeXT -- you need a good OS, and not just a pretty GUI face! MAC OS X is the biggest news in the history of Apple, and the press is glossing it over. For anyone who didn't already know: OS X is UNIX! Yes, the NeXT OS is not dead, and it is the real reason Apple will thrive in the months and years ahead.
Anyone who remembers AU/X knows how badly Apple screwed this up, and any professional programmer knows that MacOS's ridiculous design is the major factor keeping REAL(tm) computing applications off the Mac. I'll bet I can count the number of existing scientific / engineering / medical apps developed specifically for the Mac on one hand. If Jobs really wants to tout the G4 as a supercomputer, let's see it running an app someone might want a supercomputer for, not just a really fast Gaussian blur in PhotoShop!
Jon, as always a nice bit of prose but I think you really missed the mark on this one. Good luck next time.
Hmmm, this according to a company that wants to sacrifice their newly acquired Alpha chips at the holy Intel altar. Seems like I read something from Compaq before the DEC merger promising to keep supporting the Alpha.Alphas make great DB servers, even under a broken OS like NT. And they scream with a REAL OS like {insert your favourite penguin flavour here} Linux.And I though the SEC said mergers were always good for competition ;-)
Wow, I'm really impressed that our government, especially a regulatory arm that consists mostly of ex-monopoly Bell employees, chose to "do the right thing" and keep their hands off the Internet (for now). Seems to me that everytime I start slipping into the pit of political apathy, along comes a glimmer of hope. Now if only we could resolve this idiotic tariffing situation with the Broadcasting and Telecommunications Acts, we could really get some convergence happening...
Ok, before this discussion gets out of hand and becomes a country bashing love-in, let me just inform you all that according to the terms of the Wassenaar Arrangement (which I believe is the apparant source of this peculiar requirement), software like GNU/Linux is specifically excluded from the "Dual Use List" (i.e. goods or technologies which can be used for the production of conventional weapons systems as well as other, non-military applications). To quote from the "General Software Note" section on page 3 of [WALIST(98) 1]: The Lists do not control "software" which is either: 1. ... 2. "In the public domain". Hence I believe that none of this applies to a GNU/Linux system, and is therefore not an export problem. IMNSHO. Check here for the gory details. P.S. - Personally, I wouldn't deal with Iran, and I'm a peace-loving Canadian! At least, until the 'Net becomes it's own nationality...