Ok, you concentrated in an evident mistake I made. Here is what I would change:
From:"In the GPL, there is NOTHING they can do, that is not in another distro."
To: "In the GPL, there is NOTHING they can do, that can not be done in another distro."
I think the general argument still stands: there is no real "interoperability" feature that exists in Novell's Suse and nowhere else. That can be done in ANY linux distro (if you feel such inclined).
Therefore, their campaing is full of BullShit (TM)
If you were going on the free (as in really free-free) side of the ecuation, youd have done a lot better in centos,scilinux, mandriva, debian or ubuntu.
In particular Mandriva's conf screens beats the ---- out of yast any day of the week and twice on sunday.
One thing is to thank Novell for their contributions (which I do at least), and another thing is not looking at their "differentation through interoperability" strategy as the outright damned lie it is.
THey are saying that because they have this deal with MS, they are MORE interoperable than other linuxes.... which is an EVIDENT LIE.
In the GPL, there is NOTHING they can do, that is not in another distro.
While I m at this, I thank novell for their contributions, but i dont HAVE TO from any ethical standpoint. They contribute, but not because its fun to do it, or because it feels nice to, but because there is money in it for them.
So perhaps they should thank Linus Torvalds and the main team for them building a kernel and providing a free ecosystem where they can rescue their long forgotten company.
Novell is Microsoft's Trojan Horse against Linux and thats ALL it is.
They are selling their "differentiation through interoperability" so that they appear as a Microsoft friendly Linux.
A complete lie, of course, because if there is one thing true about the GPL, is that they cannot do anything without giving it back. Particularily in samba.
While I agree generally that one cannot dismiss microsoft's enormous product line with a "cant deliver" argument, you picked the WORST possible examples of this:
"IIS7 has gotten excellent; it's on par with Apache. Exchange blows the doors off anything that OSS has. Sharepoint is unparalleled in the OSS world."
IIS SUCKS, IIS7 Sucks a little less, but it has NOTHING against apache. Its a little mouse besides the great apache. Its a piece of shit when it comes to comparing it to apache. I fucking hate IIS7 and i have to work with it regularly.
Exchange is a PIECE OF SHIT as an MTA, as a mail store, it barely supports SOME mobile devices and cannot talk to anything non-microsoft, doesnt scale worth a DAMN. Its a pain in the ass to backup or restore it unless you fork out unjustifiable ammounts of cash for what is a damned email server. In any case, feature wise, we have EXCELENT collaboration servers in the opensource world for more situations than what exchange could ever hope to provide. As drop in examples: scalix and zimbra (and i like this second one the most).
Sharepoint is not only paralleled but WAY, WAY, WAY surpassed by MANY DMS'S and CMS platforms we have. Hell, weve had doc indexes for ages here in fossland and a gigantical advantage against sharepoint that can only talk, again, with microsoft's CRAP servers.
Youre looking in the wrong place. Best suited for your inquiry (or however one should write that), is groklaw.
For a short blurb: 1) MS has been the past few years under some pressure from big customers, particularly governments, to use a non-binary more open format for office documents. 2) It got to the point of some of this clients mandating that the office software they bought should support an open, ISO sanctioned standard for storing office documents. 3) Microsoft responded to this attempting to create an ISO standard, FUDdigly called Office Open XML (in an obvious attempt to thwart an already existing standard, whose reference implementation is Open Office, called Open Document Format, that was alaready sanctioned by ISO) 4) We (as in we, the open source zelots), got really mad at this position because its not tennable from many standpoints:
a) [most important] The submited documentation for supporting OOXML proved to be pretty lame, basically the document "standard" reflected implementation details of the MS Office product line. Such speciffic details are not welcome in any "standard" that should be usable by all.
b) The quality of the proposed standard was also very questionable because, first of all, there is no reference implementation of it. Not even MSOffice supports the documented standard in their docX, pptX..etc. files.
c) There is ALREADY an open standard, the one openoffice uses, called ODF, and it is non-patent-encumbered. COnversely, MS's proposal, was IP encumbered (meaning that they purpoted to keep control of it and reserve the right for them to make proprietary extensions to it and still call it an ISO standard). Additionally the ISO organization traditional stance is that they do not accept competing standards. If there is already one standard, then thats the Office Document ISO standard and none other.
d) In any case, the process to get this thing approved is lengthy and i cant get into it now. Suffice it to say that microsoft bribed many officials GLOBALLY and stalled the proceedings to get their "standard" aproved.
Brasil does NOT appeal OOXML decission but only PROTESTS against it because a Microsoft SHILL within their standards body imposed his/her view over even the FIRST NO vote of brasil regarding the standard.
I mean, I saw "multitouch" with compiz a while back at some demo or another. I dont think it does a lot for usability. I think that what theyve shown so far is that the best they can offer are BADLY DONE copies of what REAL innovators (Linux, Apple) do.
I know this crazy bunch of people that call this "...constantly keeping on top of money grubbing politicians and beaurocrats...", Participative Democracy.
No no no, do NOT get all international on what constitutes democratic values and the philosophy where they derive from.
Sure, i too can get tolerant and accept that the Indian people have the right to institute in their laws things like hitting people for expressing their thoughts and then making people eat from the shithole.
There is nothing we can or should do to stop the Indians from doing whatever the hell they feel like with their own laws.
NOW, an AMERICAN company, HELPING a foreign government to do exactly what i depicted above, is NOT DOING A NICE THING.
They are doing an EVIL thing if we judge them from occident we can say certaintly and ethically say, we SHOULD say: fuck google and the horse they rode on.
A total and complete thought crime. I find this the most offensive thing that corporate america has ever done to the democratic values of the country that leads the occidental civilization.
"Do no evil"? Google, you FUCKING JERKS (and i hope youll index my finger).
And the number of black people in jail is vastly superior to the number of white people in it.
What does this prove? Well, it may prove one of two things: 1) African american people are inherently evil or 2) WASP america is still terribly discriminative and consistently violates the human rights of black people. or 3) As black (or latinos, why dont we throw em in as well), are generally poorer people than WASPs, that may explain their extra proneness to violate the law as there just arent any jobs they can do cause they dont have enough dough to get the same education and fill the same economic niches as white people. or 4) Man, im getting tired, but i could put a 100 bullets theorizing on numbers that PROVE NO CAUSALITY AT ALL!|
However, isn't it also true that current law in the states and britain make it real easy for any law enforcement official to accuse you of terrorism with really little evidence?
Doesnt that make you think that there SHOULD be, if not a revision of current home security laws and their constitutionality, some other legal provision that would make sure that they CANT accuse you without real evidence?
Slashdot Mirror
Mind bogling question: how the hell did you read mine?
Meh...
IVe EXCELENT karma
GASP
I cant believe it... did i make first post and wasted it on that lameity?
AAAAARRRRRRRGHHHHH Open That Window Joe, Im out!
It took you guys a while to get this one.
Ok, you concentrated in an evident mistake I made. Here is what I would change:
From:"In the GPL, there is NOTHING they can do, that is not in another distro."
To: "In the GPL, there is NOTHING they can do, that can not be done in another distro."
I think the general argument still stands: there is no real "interoperability" feature that exists in Novell's Suse and nowhere else. That can be done in ANY linux distro (if you feel such inclined).
Therefore, their campaing is full of BullShit (TM)
Call me when it runs on linux
If you were going on the free (as in really free-free) side of the ecuation, youd have done a lot better in centos,scilinux, mandriva, debian or ubuntu.
In particular Mandriva's conf screens beats the ---- out of yast any day of the week and twice on sunday.
One thing is to thank Novell for their contributions (which I do at least), and another thing is not looking at their "differentation through interoperability" strategy as the outright damned lie it is.
THey are saying that because they have this deal with MS, they are MORE interoperable than other linuxes.... which is an EVIDENT LIE.
In the GPL, there is NOTHING they can do, that is not in another distro.
While I m at this, I thank novell for their contributions, but i dont HAVE TO from any ethical standpoint. They contribute, but not because its fun to do it, or because it feels nice to, but because there is money in it for them.
So perhaps they should thank Linus Torvalds and the main team for them building a kernel and providing a free ecosystem where they can rescue their long forgotten company.
I have the exact opposite experience.
Ive had novell support tell me that some packages IN THEIR DISTRO are supported and some arent.
Which are which (i asked him) and where in your page can I know?
You cant, he said....
In RH, everything in the distro y rightly supported through adn through.
Novell is Microsoft's Trojan Horse against Linux and thats ALL it is.
They are selling their "differentiation through interoperability" so that they appear as a Microsoft friendly Linux.
A complete lie, of course, because if there is one thing true about the GPL, is that they cannot do anything without giving it back. Particularily in samba.
Assholes.
While I agree generally that one cannot dismiss microsoft's enormous product line with a "cant deliver" argument, you picked the WORST possible examples of this:
"IIS7 has gotten excellent; it's on par with Apache. Exchange blows the doors off anything that OSS has. Sharepoint is unparalleled in the OSS world."
IIS SUCKS, IIS7 Sucks a little less, but it has NOTHING against apache. Its a little mouse besides the great apache. Its a piece of shit when it comes to comparing it to apache. I fucking hate IIS7 and i have to work with it regularly.
Exchange is a PIECE OF SHIT as an MTA, as a mail store, it barely supports SOME mobile devices and cannot talk to anything non-microsoft, doesnt scale worth a DAMN. Its a pain in the ass to backup or restore it unless you fork out unjustifiable ammounts of cash for what is a damned email server. In any case, feature wise, we have EXCELENT collaboration servers in the opensource world for more situations than what exchange could ever hope to provide. As drop in examples: scalix and zimbra (and i like this second one the most).
Sharepoint is not only paralleled but WAY, WAY, WAY surpassed by MANY DMS'S and CMS platforms we have. Hell, weve had doc indexes for ages here in fossland and a gigantical advantage against sharepoint that can only talk, again, with microsoft's CRAP servers.
You are NUTS, my friend.
World Domination 1.0
World Domination 2.0
Nough Said
And still...
According to Microsoft FOSS dev. model is a bigger threat to them than a multibillion dollar company with a grudge against them.
So id say you live in the moon.
Youre looking in the wrong place. Best suited for your inquiry (or however one should write that), is groklaw.
For a short blurb:
1) MS has been the past few years under some pressure from big customers, particularly governments, to use a non-binary more open format for office documents.
2) It got to the point of some of this clients mandating that the office software they bought should support an open, ISO sanctioned standard for storing office documents.
3) Microsoft responded to this attempting to create an ISO standard, FUDdigly called Office Open XML (in an obvious attempt to thwart an already existing standard, whose reference implementation is Open Office, called Open Document Format, that was alaready sanctioned by ISO)
4) We (as in we, the open source zelots), got really mad at this position because its not tennable from many standpoints:
a) [most important] The submited documentation for supporting OOXML proved to be pretty lame, basically the document "standard" reflected implementation details of the MS Office product line. Such speciffic details are not welcome in any "standard" that should be usable by all.
b) The quality of the proposed standard was also very questionable because, first of all, there is no reference implementation of it. Not even MSOffice supports the documented standard in their docX, pptX..etc. files.
c) There is ALREADY an open standard, the one openoffice uses, called ODF, and it is non-patent-encumbered. COnversely, MS's proposal, was IP encumbered (meaning that they purpoted to keep control of it and reserve the right for them to make proprietary extensions to it and still call it an ISO standard). Additionally the ISO organization traditional stance is that they do not accept competing standards. If there is already one standard, then thats the Office Document ISO standard and none other.
d) In any case, the process to get this thing approved is lengthy and i cant get into it now. Suffice it to say that microsoft bribed many officials GLOBALLY and stalled the proceedings to get their "standard" aproved.
So there. Im gonna ask PJ for a job.
Brasil does NOT appeal OOXML decission but only PROTESTS against it because a Microsoft SHILL within their standards body imposed his/her view over even the FIRST NO vote of brasil regarding the standard.
I dont think you got it at all. But then again, perhaps my english was not that crisp yesterday.
I mean, I saw "multitouch" with compiz a while back at some demo or another. I dont think it does a lot for usability. I think that what theyve shown so far is that the best they can offer are BADLY DONE copies of what REAL innovators (Linux, Apple) do.
Fuck microsoft and the horse they rode on.
I know this crazy bunch of people that call this "...constantly keeping on top of money grubbing politicians and beaurocrats...", Participative Democracy.
I know, fucking hippies, ey?
And that would be bad becau
Man, lay off the bukake.
No no no, do NOT get all international on what constitutes democratic values and the philosophy where they derive from.
Sure, i too can get tolerant and accept that the Indian people have the right to institute in their laws things like hitting people for expressing their thoughts and then making people eat from the shithole.
There is nothing we can or should do to stop the Indians from doing whatever the hell they feel like with their own laws.
NOW, an AMERICAN company, HELPING a foreign government to do exactly what i depicted above, is NOT DOING A NICE THING.
They are doing an EVIL thing if we judge them from occident we can say certaintly and ethically say, we SHOULD say: fuck google and the horse they rode on.
Fucking assholes.
A total and complete thought crime. I find this the most offensive thing that corporate america has ever done to the democratic values of the country that leads the occidental civilization.
"Do no evil"? Google, you FUCKING JERKS (and i hope youll index my finger).
And the number of black people in jail is vastly superior to the number of white people in it.
What does this prove? Well, it may prove one of two things:
1) African american people are inherently evil
or
2) WASP america is still terribly discriminative and consistently violates the human rights of black people.
or
3) As black (or latinos, why dont we throw em in as well), are generally poorer people than WASPs, that may explain their extra proneness to violate the law as there just arent any jobs they can do cause they dont have enough dough to get the same education and fill the same economic niches as white people.
or
4) Man, im getting tired, but i could put a 100 bullets theorizing on numbers that PROVE NO CAUSALITY AT ALL!|
I hate you, english, human language AND george steiner. Oh yes, and Chomsky too.
Show off.
However, isn't it also true that current law in the states and britain make it real easy for any law enforcement official to accuse you of terrorism with really little evidence?
Doesnt that make you think that there SHOULD be, if not a revision of current home security laws and their constitutionality, some other legal provision that would make sure that they CANT accuse you without real evidence?