I submitted this story today, but as usual, since I am not a friend of the/. Editors, they shot it down big time (within minutes of when I submitted it), but I'm not bitter (that's a joke, OK?)! The guy from Eolas who brought the action against Microsoft about his browser patent, is in talks with "major Linux players." In fact, according to the eWeek story (rejected by/.), he's an Open Source contributor. Read between the lines, because this bodes VERY well for Mozilla. While W3 and Microsoft are hemming and hawing about what this kind of patent meant to them, and it means something very bad for Internet Explorer, I suspect Mozilla will not be a target. Perhaps it's wishful thinking, but "what if" this guy is into Open Source, and saw a nice way to screw MS? I know, "so what, he still has a patent for something that is obvious and should not be patented." Well, my position is just the same as with SCO / IMB. Lessor of two evils, and my enemies' enemy is my friend (for now).
I think that unfortunately, most developer who release GPL code do not have the resources to make a legal response (i.e. hire a lawyer) unless it's a very high profile application. This essentially leaves us with trashing / embarrassing the culprit in a public forum.
It would be nice if there where some endowed fund managed by, say, the FSF, that developers could turn to, but I don't see that happening. So, in my mind, public whipping is the only realistic alternative.
They are only squezing money out of anything if they actually win the case. Silly.
Don't forget, many times people will settle rather than litigate because it's cheaper. This is the game SCO is playing, not with IBM, but all the people they are threatening to sue over using Linux in the "enterprise". SCO will lose this bet, but often that is not the cas.
No, they are very smart. They defiantly are dishonest shysters, but they are a couple of very smart lawyers who have figured out how to dishonestly squeeze money out of a corrupt and flawed system.
From the story: Weyer [the guy who owns the patent], who is a patent attorney, is handling this case himself.
It's very clear that these two pulled one over on the Patent Office (not hard to do these days) for the specific purpose of litigating. Sure, the Patent Office needs reform, but there should be laws against this type of lawyer scam also.
Well, I'm not sure why they don't have the latest AIX, after all, much of it actually is under some agreement with SCO, but yes, if SCO IP went into Linux by whatever path, than they should be able to see that. I suspect what they are saying is that even if IBM came up with all this stuff entirely on their own, it's still a derivative, and there for belongs to SCO.
So they failed and the excuse is pretty ridiculous. Their claim is that Linux's code is owned, in part, by SCO. To prove this, they only need to show their code in their source in their product and show where it is identical within Linux's code. How is it necessary that IBM show completely unrelated code from AIX?
No. They claim that IBM misappropriated SCO code that was in AIX by donating it to Linux. This is the connection.
to see what IBM's Legion Of Firebreathing Laywers have to say about this.
Not sure if "fire breathing" is quit the right way to describe the IBM guys...
As we know from the fact that while "The Darl" God, his parents must have hated him) et al spew FUD like an angry volcano, IBM has more or less been quietly operating in the background, most likely when the time is right the IBM suits will calmly pop open their identical briefcases and extract the dental drills, pliers, and electrical probes...
This is typical garbage by snooty PHP haters, and is not supported by fact. I'm not going to get into a pointless argument with the "proud owner of a Mensa membership card"; clearly I'm not intellectually up to it. Besides, I'll probably become confused like a deer in the head lights when Mr. Mensa starts spewing "facts" about long depreciated (obsolete) versions of this armature tool for making inferior portals.
This is EXCELLENT! Not only do they dig themselves deeper and deeper, but I'm sure the Europeans will be much less inclined to put up with this kind of shit from SCO as long as we have. SCO is defiantly lining themselves up for a smack-down
Why are people all excited about this, say things like "gee, Microsoft is finally feeling the heat from Linux"? This is nothing more than a Linux-to-Windows migration tool!
I doubt it. More like they are finally able to see the writing on the wall. They are finally seeing that *nix has a presence, and they can't do a damn thing to stop it. So they will embrace it.
NO! Microsoft has no intensions of living alongside Linux. These types of tools have many uses, but in Micosoft's view are to assist Linux users to migrate Linux operations to Windows. Don't fool yourself.
Photoshop costs roughly twice what you claim, being 600 dollars minimum.
Well, I haven't purchased since Photoshop 4, and only paid the upgrade price for 5, but you can find Photoshop discounted for much less than $600+ that you quote. The upgrade to 5.0 cost me exactly $145.
How do you feel about operating systems? Would you pay three or four hundred dollars for your next upgrade?
If the upgrade where significantly better than the previous version? Sure, why not?
After all, Microsoft and Apple should be able to charge a reasonable price for their effort.
Indeed they do. Just as Linux venders such as Red Hat have the right to charge $2000+ for their "enterprise" versions, you are not being forced to buy it. Not all Linux products are free, or even cheap!
But not everything. Also it's important to point out that Photoshop upgrades are far far cheaper than the initial investment (not that anyone really needs more than what PS 5.0 has anyway).
I'm not sure about the easier to use part, maybe I'm just unfamiliar with Paint Shop Pro, but when I tried it, it seemed difficult and unintuitive. I seem to have no problems at all with Photoshop; I find it a joy to work with.
Maybe if they didn't spend R&D time and money on useless features, their products would be more affordable
Photoshop is quite affordable. Photoshop is a complex piece of software that does it's job better than any other similar product out there (sorry, GIMP is not a contender yet). $300 or $400 for a professional application of this type is quite reasonable. I really don't understand where people get this idea that all software should be free or at least under $50. Companies that have a considerable investment in a product should be able to charge a reasonable price for it.
I can see, sir, that you have no programming or customer relations experience
Not sure how you got to this point. I mean, let see... Machine gets hosed, spend a few days FUCKING with it, or an hour doing a clean install. Hmmmmm.
Users
Idiots
As to customer service, if you think and treat all *your* customers like ideots, than I am glad that both I am not *your* customer, and you don't work with / for me. Good day.
So, you desire to live off the teet of society and play games all day. Good for you. But when you come to the realization that you can't live in your mom's basement the rest of your life, YES, I WILL TAKE FRIES WITH THAT.
Slashdot Mirror
I submitted this story today, but as usual, since I am not a friend of the /. Editors, they shot it down big time (within minutes of when I submitted it), but I'm not bitter (that's a joke, OK?)! The guy from Eolas who brought the action against Microsoft about his browser patent, is in talks with "major Linux players." In fact, according to the eWeek story (rejected by /.), he's an Open Source contributor. Read between the lines, because this bodes VERY well for Mozilla. While W3 and Microsoft are hemming and hawing about what this kind of patent meant to them, and it means something very bad for Internet Explorer, I suspect Mozilla will not be a target. Perhaps it's wishful thinking, but "what if" this guy is into Open Source, and saw a nice way to screw MS? I know, "so what, he still has a patent for something that is obvious and should not be patented." Well, my position is just the same as with SCO / IMB. Lessor of two evils, and my enemies' enemy is my friend (for now).
Also, what if you don't want to give up your copyright to the FSF, does that my you "bad"?
The question is, would they actually put up a fight for you? Is there any evidence they will "walk the walk" or do they just talk about it.
Yeh, it must be nice for them considering that they have not always been held up so high in these forums! Lesser of two evils, I say.
It would be nice if there where some endowed fund managed by, say, the FSF, that developers could turn to, but I don't see that happening. So, in my mind, public whipping is the only realistic alternative.
Don't forget, many times people will settle rather than litigate because it's cheaper. This is the game SCO is playing, not with IBM, but all the people they are threatening to sue over using Linux in the "enterprise". SCO will lose this bet, but often that is not the cas.
No, they are very smart. They defiantly are dishonest shysters, but they are a couple of very smart lawyers who have figured out how to dishonestly squeeze money out of a corrupt and flawed system.
Morons? Not at all.
From the story: Weyer [the guy who owns the patent], who is a patent attorney, is handling this case himself.
It's very clear that these two pulled one over on the Patent Office (not hard to do these days) for the specific purpose of litigating. Sure, the Patent Office needs reform, but there should be laws against this type of lawyer scam also.
Well, I'm not sure why they don't have the latest AIX, after all, much of it actually is under some agreement with SCO, but yes, if SCO IP went into Linux by whatever path, than they should be able to see that. I suspect what they are saying is that even if IBM came up with all this stuff entirely on their own, it's still a derivative, and there for belongs to SCO.
This may be the one thing that Register.com and NetSol see eye-to-eye on...
No. They claim that IBM misappropriated SCO code that was in AIX by donating it to Linux. This is the connection.
Not sure if "fire breathing" is quit the right way to describe the IBM guys...
As we know from the fact that while "The Darl" God, his parents must have hated him) et al spew FUD like an angry volcano, IBM has more or less been quietly operating in the background, most likely when the time is right the IBM suits will calmly pop open their identical briefcases and extract the dental drills, pliers, and electrical probes...
What do you expect from someone who used to be an Assistant Vice President at Bankers Trust Co...
This is typical garbage by snooty PHP haters, and is not supported by fact. I'm not going to get into a pointless argument with the "proud owner of a Mensa membership card"; clearly I'm not intellectually up to it. Besides, I'll probably become confused like a deer in the head lights when Mr. Mensa starts spewing "facts" about long depreciated (obsolete) versions of this armature tool for making inferior portals.
Oh come on, take all the fun of bitching about music companies and big business away, what's left? Oh. A perfectly reasonable deal...
Unfortunatly I live in Washington State, where state government the god Gates, and His demi god Darl.
This is EXCELLENT! Not only do they dig themselves deeper and deeper, but I'm sure the Europeans will be much less inclined to put up with this kind of shit from SCO as long as we have. SCO is defiantly lining themselves up for a smack-down
Why are people all excited about this, say things like "gee, Microsoft is finally feeling the heat from Linux"? This is nothing more than a Linux-to-Windows migration tool!
But in a lot of ways, exactly true!
NO! Microsoft has no intensions of living alongside Linux. These types of tools have many uses, but in Micosoft's view are to assist Linux users to migrate Linux operations to Windows. Don't fool yourself.
Well, I haven't purchased since Photoshop 4, and only paid the upgrade price for 5, but you can find Photoshop discounted for much less than $600+ that you quote. The upgrade to 5.0 cost me exactly $145.
How do you feel about operating systems? Would you pay three or four hundred dollars for your next upgrade?
If the upgrade where significantly better than the previous version? Sure, why not?
After all, Microsoft and Apple should be able to charge a reasonable price for their effort.
Indeed they do. Just as Linux venders such as Red Hat have the right to charge $2000+ for their "enterprise" versions, you are not being forced to buy it. Not all Linux products are free, or even cheap!
But not everything. Also it's important to point out that Photoshop upgrades are far far cheaper than the initial investment (not that anyone really needs more than what PS 5.0 has anyway).
I'm not sure about the easier to use part, maybe I'm just unfamiliar with Paint Shop Pro, but when I tried it, it seemed difficult and unintuitive. I seem to have no problems at all with Photoshop; I find it a joy to work with.
Photoshop is quite affordable. Photoshop is a complex piece of software that does it's job better than any other similar product out there (sorry, GIMP is not a contender yet). $300 or $400 for a professional application of this type is quite reasonable. I really don't understand where people get this idea that all software should be free or at least under $50. Companies that have a considerable investment in a product should be able to charge a reasonable price for it.
Not sure how you got to this point. I mean, let see... Machine gets hosed, spend a few days FUCKING with it, or an hour doing a clean install. Hmmmmm.
Users
Idiots
As to customer service, if you think and treat all *your* customers like ideots, than I am glad that both I am not *your* customer, and you don't work with / for me. Good day.
So, you desire to live off the teet of society and play games all day. Good for you. But when you come to the realization that you can't live in your mom's basement the rest of your life, YES, I WILL TAKE FRIES WITH THAT.