In the early 80's, as work was progressing at CSRG in Berkely on BSD on the VAX, a controversy arose regarding the performance of BSD on the VAX vs VMS on the VAX. Dave Kashtan, a VMS and networking wizard then at SRI International claimed that VMS had superior performance. To prove his point, he wrote Eunice, a BSD kernel emulation layer on VMS. The system would run many BSD 4.2 VAX binaries on VMS unmodified in many cases faster than the same binaries ran natively on BSD. Kashtan's criticisms of BSD led to performance improvements in the 4.3 kernel and beyond. There's a reference to this in the daemon book. I administered VAX systems at UCSB in the late 80s. We had Eunice on one of those systems, and I hated it. it ran dog slow and had many bugs. Dave assures me that was just the inferior commercialized version, and that the "real" Eunice was far better. I have to be careful what I say about this because I work for him now. 8) Ironically, I administer his FreeBSD systems. Nonetheless, Eunice is the first OS emulation layer I recall hearing about. Its genesis as a working demonstration of a pointed criticism of 4.2 BSD and the subsequent effect it had on BSD development qualify Eunice as a "great hack" in my book.
Howard Owen hbo@egbok.com Everything's Gonna Be OK Consulting
I just downloaded this night's Mozilla build. Mon dieu but she is slow. But my god, she is cool!
I can't wait for an optimized, shipping version of this lizard!
I tried to post this using Mozilla, but it kept adding spaces after left angle brackets in my HTML formatting. I then proceeded to lose half the post trying to submit a plain-text version. Oh well, one for bugzilla.
Howard Owen hbo@egbok.com Everything's Gonna Be OK Consulting
The Bureau of Export Administration (BXA) has updated its encryption web site to include information on the new policy. In the question and answer page appears the following :
8. Is source code allowed to be exported under a license exception or does this policy only authorize the export of encryption object code?
Source code will continue to be reviewed under a case-by-case basis. This update will allow the global export of object code encryption software under a license exception.
This confirms the fears of many posing here that OSS crypto is NOT covered under the new policy. They also had an item this morning that seemed to imply that they were still hoping for some sort of key escrow for law enforcement, but it has since been pulled. It should be interesting to see how contined restrictions on the export of crypto source code are rationalized. The stated reason source (and object) code was treated differently from printed matter in the past was that such code represented an encryption "device". Clearly this continued restriction on source code export is designed to hobble freely available packages such as SSH, PGP and GnuPG. Why? So that export of crypto can be confined to business entities that can be pressured to play ball with the Government. Paranoid rant? I don't think so.
Howard Owen hbo@egbok.com Everything's Gonna Be OK Consulting
I've held the same opinion, that Microsoft was extremely unlikely to release Office for Linux or any other Unix variant. Any revenue they'd receive for Office on Linux would be tiny compared to the billions they will coin shipping Office 2K on Windows. However, the Linux platform does offer an opportunity for Corel, Lotus and others who have been effectively frozen out of the Windows platform by Billy's Bullies, so Microsoft could see some strategic value in porting to Linux. The clincher for me has been the undercutting of the Windows platform such a move by Microsoft would represent. The following conspiricy theory just occured to me nonetheless. Let's say Microsoft ports Office or parts of it to Linux in an attempt to undercut their arch-nemesis Sun. Though Unix in general has a tiny, tiny fraction of the desktop market, Office on Linux could boost the penguin in shops that run Solaris on their servers. I know it's not completely logical, but marketing never is, completely. Now for the nefarious part. Microsoft only ports Word and Excel, not Access, Powerpoint or the other cruft. This blunts competing commodity word processors and spreadsheets on Linux, but leaves Windows a better platform for Office in general. Windows remains the dominant desktop OS, and the competition for NT at the server is further split.
And my space alien contacts assure me that Richard Nixon is alive and well on Arcturus IV.
Netscape doesn't support PGP encryption. There's been a lot of discussion over at the mozilla crypto newsgroup on the hows and whys. Basically, AOL/Netscape's interpretation of the stupid US cryptography export regulations prevents them from even exposing their API for cryptographic processing. Some folks at NAI volunteered to help out, which elicited some favorable noises on the part of Mozilla, but no visible action. They may be working on it behind the scenes however.
Netscape Messenger owns a huge share of the Internet email client market. The lack of PGP support is a substantial impediment to the widespread adoption of PGP as a standard for Windows email. I'm not too fond of NAI, but I'd like to see this particular product succeed, since it's in such widespread use on Unix.
Yes, these are run-of-the-mill flamage. Yes, the posters are dufi. Yes, Mindcraft violated netiquette by posting private email.
And yes, this all might have a significant negative impact on the perception of Linux, particularly among IT managers.
Microsoft has gotten off the dime with regard to the threat it perceives from free software. Linux had half as many server shipments as NT last year according to one source, and its share is growing faster than NT's. The Empire of Redmondium will pull out all the stops to convince IT managers that Linux is a sloppy, unbusiness-like series of hacks perpetrated by wheat-germ eating comsymps, pimply faced pre-teenagers and dangerous, cranky, unix-crazed hackers with antisocial attitudes and day jobs as crack salesmen.
If I were a conspiricy theorist, I'd worry that posting the more revolting, rage-filled tirades of the inevitable double handful of know-nothing Linux bigots was a deliberate and pre-planned strategic move on the part of MS and its hench-firms. Alas, they didn't need to bother with scheming over this one. Those tirades were inevitable once Bill decided to take Linux on.
It's not that MS doesn't do underhanded things that make even fairly level-headed and well-informed Linux bigots mad. It's just that the predictable responses of some plays right into the hands of Mr Gates' efforts to portray the free software community as an enemy of free enterprise and a bad bet for your server farm.
Microsoft is engaged in a no-holds-barred propaganda war for the hearts and minds of Information Technology managers. They will use real facts, psychology, rigged and unrigged benchmarks, lies told by others and deniable lies told by themselves to create FUD, FUD and more FUD. They will hammer and pry on real and perceived weaknesses of the Linux community to drive home the point that Linux is not a good choice for the back office.
All Linux has going for it is immortality. You guys don't have to win this war. You don't even have to fight it. Just keep writing free software. Your best efforts will live forever. Or fight the battles, but don't lose the ultimate goal of writing useful software for its own sake. It would be truly sad and ironic if Linux won a significant place in the server racks of corporate planet Earth, but lost the grand vision that has driven it and other free software to a position within striking distance of huge success.
Slashdot Mirror
Howard Owen hbo@egbok.com Everything's Gonna Be OK Consulting
I can't wait for an optimized, shipping version of this lizard!
I tried to post this using Mozilla, but it kept adding spaces after left angle brackets in my HTML formatting. I then proceeded to lose half the post trying to submit a plain-text version. Oh well, one for bugzilla.
Howard Owen hbo@egbok.com Everything's Gonna Be OK Consulting
It's a troll.
Howard Owen hbo@egbok.com Everything's Gonna Be OK Consulting
Howard Owen hbo@egbok.com Everything's Gonna Be OK Consulting
The Bureau of Export Administration (BXA) has updated its encryption web site to include information on the new policy. In the question and answer page appears the following :
8. Is source code allowed to be exported under a license exception or does this policy only authorize the export of encryption object code?
Source code will continue to be reviewed under a case-by-case basis. This update will allow the global export of object code encryption software under a license exception.
This confirms the fears of many posing here that OSS crypto is NOT covered under the new policy.
They also had an item this morning that seemed to imply that they were still hoping for some sort of key escrow for law enforcement, but it has since been pulled.
It should be interesting to see how contined restrictions on the export of crypto source code are rationalized. The stated reason source (and object) code was treated differently from printed matter in the past was that such code represented an encryption "device". Clearly this continued restriction on source code export is designed to hobble freely available packages such as SSH, PGP and GnuPG. Why? So that export of crypto can be confined to business entities that can be pressured to play ball with the Government. Paranoid rant? I don't think so.
Howard Owen hbo@egbok.com Everything's Gonna Be OK Consulting
I heard Aretha Franklin singing "Think" in a perfume commercial the other day. It got my attention.
I've held the same opinion, that Microsoft was extremely unlikely to release Office for Linux or any other Unix variant. Any revenue they'd receive for Office on Linux would be tiny compared to the billions they will coin shipping Office 2K on Windows. However, the Linux platform does offer an opportunity for Corel, Lotus and others who have been effectively frozen out of the Windows platform by Billy's Bullies, so Microsoft could see some strategic value in porting to Linux. The clincher for me has been the undercutting of the Windows platform such a move by Microsoft would represent. The following conspiricy theory just occured to me nonetheless. Let's say Microsoft ports Office or parts of it to Linux in an attempt to undercut their arch-nemesis Sun. Though Unix in general has a tiny, tiny fraction of the desktop market, Office on Linux could boost the penguin in shops that run Solaris on their servers. I know it's not completely logical, but marketing never is, completely. Now for the nefarious part. Microsoft only ports Word and Excel, not Access, Powerpoint or the other cruft. This blunts competing commodity word processors and spreadsheets on Linux, but leaves Windows a better platform for Office in general. Windows remains the dominant desktop OS, and the competition for NT at the server is further split.
And my space alien contacts assure me that Richard Nixon is alive and well on Arcturus IV.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
z DyO1cTw8qtkeve/H K 5AM4TFc5U1RN8atP T jl+29ixoKEX4feO4
Cool protest there.
But I can't verify your signature with PGP 6.5. I'd be a lot happier
using GnuPG if it were interoperable.
(PGP 6.5 DOES interoperate with PGP 2.6.2)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGPfreeware 6.5.1 for non-commercial use
iQCVAwUBN6KEruBm2ExK/vexAQGmygQAxrtbzUudsjAY61C
Ug6MPpH8ONxu9szEynz2gFG7mLMAFQlmH9aBik1MnoXQdY2
DnlDl7WKs/vcPXRbXWWxJn97qmR2s4Oim5NtOpqQp/Wxjb6
jLP4af4UanI=
=PYKL
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Netscape doesn't support PGP encryption. There's been a lot of discussion over at the mozilla crypto newsgroup on the hows and whys. Basically, AOL/Netscape's interpretation of the stupid US cryptography export regulations prevents them from even exposing their API for cryptographic processing. Some folks at NAI volunteered to help out, which elicited some favorable noises on the part of Mozilla, but no visible action. They may be working on it behind the scenes however.
Netscape Messenger owns a huge share of the Internet email client market. The lack of PGP support is a substantial impediment to the widespread adoption of PGP as a standard for Windows email. I'm not too fond of NAI, but I'd like to see this particular product succeed, since it's in such widespread use on Unix.Yes, these are run-of-the-mill flamage. Yes, the posters are dufi. Yes, Mindcraft violated netiquette by posting private email.
And yes, this all might have a significant negative impact on the perception of Linux, particularly among IT managers.
Microsoft has gotten off the dime with regard to the threat it perceives from free software. Linux had half as many server shipments as NT last year according to one source, and its share is growing faster than NT's. The Empire of Redmondium will pull out all the stops to convince IT managers that Linux is a sloppy, unbusiness-like series of hacks perpetrated by wheat-germ eating comsymps, pimply faced pre-teenagers and dangerous, cranky, unix-crazed hackers with antisocial attitudes and day jobs as crack salesmen.
If I were a conspiricy theorist, I'd worry that posting the more revolting, rage-filled tirades of the inevitable double handful of know-nothing Linux bigots was a deliberate and pre-planned strategic move on the part of MS and its hench-firms. Alas, they didn't need to bother with scheming over this one. Those tirades were inevitable once Bill decided to take Linux on.
It's not that MS doesn't do underhanded things that make even fairly level-headed and well-informed Linux bigots mad. It's just that the predictable responses of some plays right into the hands of Mr Gates' efforts to portray the free software community as an enemy of free enterprise and a bad bet for your server farm.
Microsoft is engaged in a no-holds-barred propaganda war for the hearts and minds of Information Technology managers . They will use real facts, psychology, rigged and unrigged benchmarks, lies told by others and deniable lies told by themselves to create FUD, FUD and more FUD. They will hammer and pry on real and perceived weaknesses of the Linux community to drive home the point that Linux is not a good choice for the back office.
All Linux has going for it is immortality. You guys don't have to win this war. You don't even have to fight it . Just keep writing free software. Your best efforts will live forever. Or fight the battles, but don't lose the ultimate goal of writing useful software for its own sake. It would be truly sad and ironic if Linux won a significant place in the server racks of corporate planet Earth, but lost the grand vision that has driven it and other free software to a position within striking distance of huge success.
Well, there's always FreeBSD. 8)
Peace,
Howard