Nonetheless, the decision was business, not technology. They did this to work around the consent-decree against bundling, though how 'integration into the OS' isn't 'bundling with the OS' is beyond me. A classic example of Microspeak.
The threat is that if they achieve true browser dominance, they can lverage it to achieve web server/service domainance, just as they have leveraged desktop dominance to achieve (or nearly achieve) browser dominance. They have no compunction in using their 'embrace extend, destroy' schemes on any standards that get in their way (witness Java; also, see http://www.fourmilab.ch/webtools/demo roniser/).
So the fact that they have a plausible-sounding explanation for locking IE into everything is no reason for us not to oppose/forbid it. If they are forced into some slightly less than optimal code resharing in order to protect us from their monopoly tactics, so be it.
They have acted in bad faith many times. We are not obligated to give them the benefit of the doubt anymore.
The SQL Client is not a web browser. The netmon is not a web browser. The installation of these DLLs doesn't specifically require installation of an entire web browser.
MS software installs are infamous for bringing along the DLLs they need. Why the sudden change in procedures?
The requirement is artificial, based on evasion of the old consent decree, not on valid technical reasons.
Last summer I wanted to install netmon, a packet monitor component of SMS. It forced me to install Internet Explorer. (I subsequently chose not to use the MS product for this reason. Screw you, Bill.)
This year we want to upgrade our SQL Client to 7.0. If FORCES us to install Internet Explorer.
In neither case is there any conceivable technical requirement for this.
This is part of why I despise MS. This arrogance in leveraging their position to force me to use their browser is astonishing. And it is chilling, because if they seriously dominate the Web Client, they can use that to attack the Web server market through their 'embrace, extend, destroy' approach to any standard.
You have to control everything a lot more than that to talk abbout 99.999% uptime - and that apparently was the goal, not going with the flow of already-existing distros.
At the very least, you have to leave out netscape.
How come my post gets called a troll and yours defending it is not? The moderators were out to lunch. my post was NOT a troll - I meant every word I wrote literally and factually, not as incitement. And I resent some moron giving me 2 points of negative karma on this.
1) If you leave the Desktop to winblowz, how will it be before MS makes that desktop work only with MS servers? (Actually, W2k w/ kerberos bastardized by MS may already have done that).
2)IF you doen't like the desktop that some future Linux shows up with, pick one you do like and install it.
This is a sucky protocol. It won't route, which means that to get it from one LAN to another you must bridge. That means you have to use spanning tree protocol to prevent bridging loops which cause broadcast storms (you'll still get broadcast storms, but from other causes) and that means you have very non-optimal packet-flow and slow adaptation to topology changes.
Stick with NetBIOS over TCP/IP - it's cleaner, with far less broadcasting, it's internet-useable and it's here now. And it's very interoperable w/ winblows - that's how Samba does it.
They are not to be trusted. I would NEVER run anything they intentionally wrote for Linux - they would intentionally break stuff, or use it tosned information about my machine to them or..who knows? This is the outfit that brought obviously falsified video tapes to their trial! They know no honest way of functioning.
And now that I think of this, running MS code under WINE is probably not going to smart any longer either. I wouldn't put it past them to put in code to detect that situation and do ugliness. They are very treacherous.
www.4cite.org has information on when this is coming up in other states. However, they did not spell out the difference between what passed today, apparently a decision to study UCITA, and an actual vote to pass UCITA itself.
I gleened these from http://legis.state.va.us/ (Virginia) and http://mlis.state.md.us/ (Maryland) while sending emails (I also sent written mail [that's 'snail mail", folks].
Send email to dfc@dfc.org to find out how you can help.
You need to read Richard Stallman's article at linuxtoday.com to see what a really evil piece of work this is. This bill is aimed right at the heart of Free Software and Open Source. It is intended to make it impossible for anyone but a well-heeled corporation with plenty of lwyers to distribute software.
Slashdot Mirror
It appears that openssh comes with suse6.4, tho I don't know if it's installed by default.
On my NT box, I had to upgrade to Winzip 8.0 - the older version I had (7.0, I think) wouldn't work.
Did you try it before you posted? I did - winzip on windows and unzip on Linux both fail.
You moron, you're talking about LinuxOne.
The line is fuzzier than I first thought.
Nonetheless, the decision was business, not technology. They did this to work around the consent-decree against bundling, though how 'integration into the OS' isn't 'bundling with the OS' is beyond me. A classic example of Microspeak.
The threat is that if they achieve true browser dominance, they can lverage it to achieve web server/service domainance, just as they have leveraged desktop dominance to achieve (or nearly achieve) browser dominance. They have no compunction in using their 'embrace extend, destroy' schemes on any standards that get in their way (witness Java; also, see http://www.fourmilab.ch/webtools/demo roniser/).
So the fact that they have a plausible-sounding explanation for locking IE into everything is no reason for us not to oppose/forbid it. If they are forced into some slightly less than optimal code resharing in order to protect us from their monopoly tactics, so be it.
They have acted in bad faith many times. We are not obligated to give them the benefit of the doubt anymore.
The SQL Client is not a web browser. The netmon is not a web browser. The installation of these DLLs doesn't specifically require installation of an entire web browser.
MS software installs are infamous for bringing along the DLLs they need. Why the sudden change in procedures?
The requirement is artificial, based on evasion of the old consent decree, not on valid technical reasons.
The bundling with the OS may be the least of it.
Last summer I wanted to install netmon, a packet monitor component of SMS. It forced me to install Internet Explorer. (I subsequently chose not to use the MS product for this reason. Screw you, Bill.)
This year we want to upgrade our SQL Client to 7.0. If FORCES us to install Internet Explorer.
In neither case is there any conceivable technical requirement for this.
This is part of why I despise MS. This arrogance in leveraging their position to force me to use their browser is astonishing. And it is chilling, because if they seriously dominate the Web Client, they can use that to attack the Web server market through their 'embrace, extend, destroy' approach to any standard.
CSS isn't about copy protection. CSS is about undermining ownership, about limiting it and converting it into something less.
It's amazing to me that someone this clueless still gets to write - or *can* write.
Much as I hate to say it, I've seen plenty of unkillable processes under Linux - most oft hem netscape. Not that NT doesn't suck.
You have to control everything a lot more than that to talk abbout 99.999% uptime - and that apparently was the goal, not going with the flow of already-existing distros.
At the very least, you have to leave out netscape.
How come my post gets called a troll and yours defending it is not? The moderators were out to lunch. my post was NOT a troll - I meant every word I wrote literally and factually, not as incitement. And I resent some moron giving me 2 points of negative karma on this.
MICROSOFT - they've said so publicly and one of their flunkies was very involved with the drafting.
Who else has so much to gain from a law that immunizes the vendor for the consequences of crappy software?
1) If you leave the Desktop to winblowz, how will it be before MS makes that desktop work only with MS servers? (Actually, W2k w/ kerberos bastardized by MS may already have done that).
2)IF you doen't like the desktop that some future Linux shows up with, pick one you do like and install it.
This is a sucky protocol. It won't route, which means that to get it from one LAN to another you must bridge. That means you have to use spanning tree protocol to prevent bridging loops which cause broadcast storms (you'll still get broadcast storms, but from other causes) and that means you have very non-optimal packet-flow and slow adaptation to topology changes.
Stick with NetBIOS over TCP/IP - it's cleaner, with far less broadcasting, it's internet-useable and it's here now. And it's very interoperable w/ winblows - that's how Samba does it.
- Bob Niederman http://bob-n.com
They are not to be trusted. I would NEVER run anything they intentionally wrote for Linux - they would intentionally break stuff, or use it tosned information about my machine to them or..who knows? This is the outfit that brought obviously falsified video tapes to their trial! They know no honest way of functioning.
And now that I think of this, running MS code under WINE is probably not going to smart any longer either. I wouldn't put it past them to put in code to detect that situation and do ugliness. They are very treacherous.
www.4cite.org has information on when this is coming up in other states. However, they did not spell out the difference between what passed today, apparently a decision to study UCITA, and an actual vote to pass UCITA itself.
Metcalfe just says stupid stuff for the sake of being controversial.
in 1995 he started predicting the collapse of the internet. We're still waiting.
in 1999 he predicted that the internet stocks would tank on Nov. 8 - we're still waiting.
He occasionally has something intelligent to say, but mostly it's just provocation to keep his readership. PATHETIC
Use 'em fast. Virginia votes as early as Monday or Tuesday!
ltgov@ltgov.state.va.us, Johnchich@aol.com, governor@gov.state.md.us, thomas_v_mike_miller@senate.state.md.us, casper_taylor@house.state.md.us,
kwaddell@ltgov.state.va.us
I gleened these from http://legis.state.va.us/ (Virginia) and http://mlis.state.md.us/ (Maryland) while sending emails (I also sent written mail [that's 'snail mail", folks].
Send email to dfc@dfc.org to find out how you can help.
You need to read Richard Stallman's article at linuxtoday.com to see what a really evil piece of work this is. This bill is aimed right at the heart of Free Software and Open Source. It is intended to make it impossible for anyone but a well-heeled corporation with plenty of lwyers to distribute software.
Yeah, great, more FCC laws regulating what ISPs can and can't do. That's brilliant man, just brilliant.
This particular law would be justified and only hurts the evildoers. No one has a legitimate reason for sending packets out with the wrong IP address.
"how could any rational person grant an injunction," It was a judge. Some of the stupidest people on the planet are judges.
...it will BURY them and not a moment too soon.
The one time I needed there support, I got exactly *dick*. They won't be missed.