I think we can all agree that there are probably two things that Microsoft doesn't want.
1. Lots of legitimate claims 2. The publicity that a website like this can generate.
Microsoft states over and over that online forms will in no way be accepted. They also make a good point that Lindows seems to be offering a way that people can get an "Instant" Settlement. After reading the Lindows web page I must agree.
From the Lindows site:
Choose a method to process your claim . There are two ways to get your settlement: .
Use the manual form system where you fill out forms, mail back receipts, and wait for up to 6 months or more to receive your settlement.
Or...use MSfreePC.com to get your Instant Settlement* TODAY! This site provides an easy-to-use "Instant Settlement* Wizard" which can be completed online in about 4 minutes and will allow you to get an Instant Settlement* to purchase valuable computer products TODAY without you having to spend one dime or mail in a single form! Click the flashing arrow below to see what products you can purchase INSTANTLY, should you qualify. You could even be eligible to receive a FREE PC!
for pointing out some flaws. They should then fix their website and everyone will be happy. Cough, cough, choke, choke...
Personally I think that Microsoft is not as concerned about people submitting invalid claims as they are in receiving huge numbers of valid ones. And for Lindows' part this web page was probably put up out of spite. They're no doubt still a bit miffed over Microsoft's legal action over the Lindows name.
I think we need to realize that SCO FUD will have some effect.
At the same time Microsoft is spending a LOT of money right now on their "Do more with Less" 2003 server campaign. Some people never learn.
We don't need to "jump ship" we simply need to stay the course. Linux isn't going away. The SCO FUD will die with the destruction of SCO. And the people who switched to Microsoft will get raped by MS sometime in the future and probably switch back.
"If it were the case that Linux has SCO IP in the kernel, then IBM's case would have no merit."
No, no, no. You miss the point. IBM has contributed a lot of it's own code that SCO could not possibly have claim over. These are two different issues. Further, everyone who has contributed any code that SCO distributed has had their copyright violated by SCO. And I'm not just talking about the kernel. Any applications that are GPL'd that SCO distributed with its distro. as well.
Oh, but they may not have a choice with all of the counter suits that are going to come their way.
They can't just dismiss IBM's lawsuit and every single person who has contributed code in the version that SCO is distributing has valid grounds for a lawsuit. SCO could conceivably face hundreds of lawsuits. They will not be able to unilaterally dismiss all of the lawsuits and I doubt that their pockets are deep enough to settle out of court with everyone who will hopefully file a copyright infringement lawsuit.
SCO seems to have no concept of the separation of the Linux kernel from the remaining GPL's software that is distributed with it. It looks like they are claiming copyrights not over just the kernel but every application, which is bundled in the version that they have distributed.
Anyone who has contributed code to the version of Linux that SCO distributes should follow IBM's lead and file a lawsuit.
Let the march of the fire ants begin! SCO is going down like the cheap whore that it is!
"There has also been discussion, especially in China, of developing standardised microprocessors and other types of chips."
There is Intel's only real concern. I hardly think that Intel gives a rip about which OS China chooses to run as long as China uses CPUs made by Intel.
A battle between Microsoft and Google over search engine dominance. Who will win?
Hmmmmm... What advantages does each side have? Google has current dominance in the web search market. Microsoft has the ability to bundle its search technology into IE which it integrates into 98 percent of all desktops running on the planet.
Will the fact that this would be illegally leveraging its monopoly power on the desktop stop them? Doubtful. If their past behavior is any indication.
So in this contest it will be: Google 0, Microsoft 1.
Its been nice knowing you Google. You'll be able to sue but as our court system has shown, even if you win Microsoft will be allowed to profit from your demise.
"...so why are they seen to be *cooler* to open source zealots then other perfectly good office sweets?"
Ability Office 2002 System Requirements:
Windows 95/98/ME/NT/2000/XP Processor: Pentium class or higher recommended 40 MB hard disk space required during download and setup Less than 25 MB for full installation after setup 32MB RAM Mouse or other Windows pointer device
My prefered operating system does not seem to be listed.
That is not correct. IM services cost almost nothing to run. So, if you want the real reason it's probably more along the lines of wanting to force people to see the ads and thus ensuring that the cash cow doesn't dry up.
In Microsoft's case it is probably that and the fact that their primary stratagy has always been to flip the bird to any kind of open standard and using their monopoly power in other areas to push their way of doing into the main stream things thereby cutting out the competition.
A bug announcment for send mail. This product has had about a gazillion bugs found in it...
It's been so long since I saw a bug anouncment for this product that I though the project was dead. Good to see there are still people hard at work on it.
I don't know if Microsoft will use its patents to crush the MONO project but it may be an option. That should be enough to give the developers of MONO pause.
There was an anonymous coward who posted claiming to be a lawyer who said that these patents wouldn't effect MONO but he didn't elaborate. I have got to be skeptical.
The bottom line is: It is never a good idea to give Microsoft the option of crushing you. No one really knows what Microsoft will do except whatever it is, it will for sure be in their own best interest.
I am unhappy about paying for a Silver membership in the Mandrake Club and being treated like a non-subscriber. If I am not allowed a non-ad version I WILL be rethinking my commitment to support Mandrake.
It's funny to read the comments from people who believe that in an economy like this people should dump their jobs to make a statement.
A while back when Blizzard put out warcraft 3 I posted on Slashdot stating that because of their legal action against the open source bnetd group, I wouldn't be buying the game. I was flamed for having that position.
Apparently their is quite a double standard in the/. Community when it is someone else doing the sacrifice rather verses self-sacrifice. They believe that someone should sacrifice their lives to make a statement but are unwilling to due without a lousy game! What a sad reality that is.
Let me play devil's advocate. A lot of you are screaming about how terrible the RIAA is and how what they are doing is horrible.
Okay. If you were in business selling music and a bunch of college/high school students started trading your music without paying you a dime what would you do?
Just turn a blind eye as they made your business irrelevant? You own the copyrights and have a right to dictate the terms of your music's distribution but a group of people are flipping you the bird and distributing it for free without your consent.
What would you have them do?? You bitched when they went after the P2P technology and not that they are going after the infringers your complaining about that. So stop pissing and moaning and give them a REAL option. You know an option that doesn't include ?Fuck off and die!?
"This improper contribution of Unix code by SGI into Linux is one small example that reveals fundamental structural flaws in the Linux development process."
Okay assuming that proprietary code got included in an open source project, in what way is the open source development system flawed. How is the development system any different than say the system used to develop proprietary software that ends up including GPL'd code without disclosing the fact.
The very fact that open source is open discourages this kind of behavior unlike proprietary code that can be hidden away.
Slashdot Mirror
I think we can all agree that there are probably two things that Microsoft doesn't want.
1. Lots of legitimate claims
2. The publicity that a website like this can generate.
Microsoft states over and over that online forms will in no way be accepted. They also make a good point that Lindows seems to be offering a way that people can get an "Instant" Settlement. After reading the Lindows web page I must agree.
From the Lindows site:
Choose a method to process your claim
.
There are two ways to get your settlement:
.
Use the manual form system where you fill out forms, mail back receipts, and wait for up to 6 months or more to receive your settlement.
Or...use MSfreePC.com to get your Instant Settlement* TODAY! This site provides an easy-to-use "Instant Settlement* Wizard" which can be completed online in about 4 minutes and will allow you to get an Instant Settlement* to purchase valuable computer products TODAY without you having to spend one dime or mail in a single form! Click the flashing arrow below to see what products you can purchase INSTANTLY, should you qualify. You could even be eligible to receive a FREE PC!
for pointing out some flaws. They should then fix their website and everyone will be happy. Cough, cough, choke, choke...
Personally I think that Microsoft is not as concerned about people submitting invalid claims as they are in receiving huge numbers of valid ones. And for Lindows' part this web page was probably put up out of spite. They're no doubt still a bit miffed over Microsoft's legal action over the Lindows name.
Isn't corporate bickering fun to watch?
Exactly.
I think we need to realize that SCO FUD will have some effect.
At the same time Microsoft is spending a LOT of money right now on their "Do more with Less" 2003 server campaign. Some people never learn.
We don't need to "jump ship" we simply need to stay the course. Linux isn't going away. The SCO FUD will die with the destruction of SCO. And the people who switched to Microsoft will get raped by MS sometime in the future and probably switch back.
No, they licensed Microsoft's FUD patents.
"If it were the case that Linux has SCO IP in the kernel, then IBM's case would have no merit."
No, no, no. You miss the point. IBM has contributed a lot of it's own code that SCO could not possibly have claim over. These are two different issues. Further, everyone who has contributed any code that SCO distributed has had their copyright violated by SCO. And I'm not just talking about the kernel. Any applications that are GPL'd that SCO distributed with its distro. as well.
SCO = TOAST
Oh, but they may not have a choice with all of the counter suits that are going to come their way.
They can't just dismiss IBM's lawsuit and every single person who has contributed code in the version that SCO is distributing has valid grounds for a lawsuit. SCO could conceivably face hundreds of lawsuits. They will not be able to unilaterally dismiss all of the lawsuits and I doubt that their pockets are deep enough to settle out of court with everyone who will hopefully file a copyright infringement lawsuit.
I think SCO is toast.
SCO seems to have no concept of the separation of the Linux kernel from the remaining GPL's software that is distributed with it. It looks like they are claiming copyrights not over just the kernel but every application, which is bundled in the version that they have distributed.
Anyone who has contributed code to the version of Linux that SCO distributes should follow IBM's lead and file a lawsuit.
Let the march of the fire ants begin! SCO is going down like the cheap whore that it is!
I don't think that we can jump to the conclusion that because the software is written for Windows, Linux will be unaffected.
Probably Linux won't be able to play the CD at all. The music is probably uses some form of DRM.
The best thing that consumers can do is simply not give there hard earned cash for this crap.
"There has also been discussion, especially in China, of developing standardised microprocessors and other types of chips."
There is Intel's only real concern. I hardly think that Intel gives a rip about which OS China chooses to run as long as China uses CPUs made by Intel.
I no longer feel the need to send my letter which was prehaps less effective....
Dear Darl
Bite me.
Eric Damron
Flamming? Hardly.
Fag? Don't push off your pref. onto me!
A battle between Microsoft and Google over search engine dominance. Who will win?
Hmmmmm... What advantages does each side have? Google has current dominance in the web search market. Microsoft has the ability to bundle its search technology into IE which it integrates into 98 percent of all desktops running on the planet.
Will the fact that this would be illegally leveraging its monopoly power on the desktop stop them? Doubtful. If their past behavior is any indication.
So in this contest it will be: Google 0, Microsoft 1.
Its been nice knowing you Google. You'll be able to sue but as our court system has shown, even if you win Microsoft will be allowed to profit from your demise.
"...so why are they seen to be *cooler* to open source zealots then other perfectly good office sweets?"
Ability Office 2002
System Requirements:
Windows 95/98/ME/NT/2000/XP
Processor: Pentium class or higher recommended
40 MB hard disk space required during download and setup
Less than 25 MB for full installation after setup
32MB RAM
Mouse or other Windows pointer device
My prefered operating system does not seem to be listed.
"And now, the real reason behind the blockage...
IM services cost alot of money to run."
That is not correct. IM services cost almost nothing to run. So, if you want the real reason it's probably more along the lines of wanting to force people to see the ads and thus ensuring that the cash cow doesn't dry up.
In Microsoft's case it is probably that and the fact that their primary stratagy has always been to flip the bird to any kind of open standard and using their monopoly power in other areas to push their way of doing into the main stream things thereby cutting out the competition.
Nothing new there.
A bug announcment for send mail. This product has had about a gazillion bugs found in it...
It's been so long since I saw a bug anouncment for this product that I though the project was dead. Good to see there are still people hard at work on it.
Viruses are running wild so this jerk's answer is to fine the victoms!
I don't know if Microsoft will use its patents to crush the MONO project but it may be an option. That should be enough to give the developers of MONO pause.
There was an anonymous coward who posted claiming to be a lawyer who said that these patents wouldn't effect MONO but he didn't elaborate. I have got to be skeptical.
The bottom line is: It is never a good idea to give Microsoft the option of crushing you. No one really knows what Microsoft will do except whatever it is, it will for sure be in their own best interest.
I am unhappy about paying for a Silver membership in the Mandrake Club and being treated like a non-subscriber. If I am not allowed a non-ad version I WILL be rethinking my commitment to support Mandrake.
About the only thing pistols are designed to do is to shoot people.
It's funny to read the comments from people who believe that in an economy like this people should dump their jobs to make a statement.
/. Community when it is someone else doing the sacrifice rather verses self-sacrifice. They believe that someone should sacrifice their lives to make a statement but are unwilling to due without a lousy game! What a sad reality that is.
A while back when Blizzard put out warcraft 3 I posted on Slashdot stating that because of their legal action against the open source bnetd group, I wouldn't be buying the game. I was flamed for having that position.
Apparently their is quite a double standard in the
News would be:
No new flaw found in Microsoft OS!!
This is about punishment. It is not a "break even" scenario.
In Washington State the penalty for a single piece of spam is $500.00. This spammer got of easy.
Let me play devil's advocate. A lot of you are screaming about how terrible the RIAA is and how what they are doing is horrible.
Okay. If you were in business selling music and a bunch of college/high school students started trading your music without paying you a dime what would you do?
Just turn a blind eye as they made your business irrelevant? You own the copyrights and have a right to dictate the terms of your music's distribution but a group of people are flipping you the bird and distributing it for free without your consent.
What would you have them do?? You bitched when they went after the P2P technology and not that they are going after the infringers your complaining about that. So stop pissing and moaning and give them a REAL option. You know an option that doesn't include ?Fuck off and die!?
"This improper contribution of Unix code by SGI into Linux is one small example that reveals fundamental structural flaws in the Linux development process."
Okay assuming that proprietary code got included in an open source project, in what way is the open source development system flawed. How is the development system any different than say the system used to develop proprietary software that ends up including GPL'd code without disclosing the fact.
The very fact that open source is open discourages this kind of behavior unlike proprietary code that can be hidden away.
McBride... you are an idiot.
Slapping hands on head and making the raspberry sound at SCO....
In a heavy Hollywood style French accent: "Now go away or we shall taunt you a second time..."