> Rosenberg broke that story by exhuming it from lots of other content on Shuttleworth's very active blog.
I don't think that word means what you think it means? Shuttleworth "broke the story," Rosenberg "commented on his blog."
News is whatever appears above the fold. It's not news if it is buried in the classified section, which, thanks to Craigslist, is increasingly becoming an anachronism. If this very important comment by Ubuntu founder Mark Shuttleworth had not been repeated by Rosenberg, it would not have been found by a colleague on an email list, where I found it and submitted it to the/. editors. Ultimately, it is the/. editors who made it news by placing it in a place "that matters", Slashdot. Shuttleworth's comment was inherently newsworthy, but without Rosenberg's posting of the story on his blog, it would not have reached Slashdot.
Perhaps you could say that George F. Will only "comments" on the news, but his comments add value to the news. Granted, there is a vast difference between a George F. Will column and Rosenberg's blog, but IMHO it is a difference of degree, not kind. Commentary an inherent part of reporting.
Remmelt, Aysa, and the others who object to the linking to Rosenberg's blog seem to have three primary complaints about my linking to Rosenberg's blog: 1) Rosenberg's blog is not a proper magazine; 2) Rosenberg added nothing to Shuttleworth's comments; 3) and the use of summaries, such as what Rosenberg offered, degrade the news by soundbiting Shuttleworth's more lengthy comments into smaller segments.
Each of these points seem to ignore the primary role of editors and overlooks the importance of the democractic nature of/. and Digg. Millions of people come to/. and Digg every day because we want to know what stories have made it "over the fold". Digg and/. have somewhat different approaches to deciding what stories rise above the fold, but the effect is the same: by placing stories above the fold,/. editors or Diggers decide that the handful of stories which make it above the fold are worthy of consideration, even if only by a cursory read. IMHO, Rosenberg performed the vital function of nicely summarizing important remarks made by a newsmaker (Shuttleworth) so that busy/. readers would be able to get the substance of Shuttleworth's important remarks quickly. This is why we value editors: They help us learn quickly what is relevant to our lives. I felt that there was no way that I could improve on Rosenberg's summary, and that he therefore had made a meaningful contribution to the discussion.
If we look below the veneer of some aspects of the backlash against bloggers, sometimes we find nothing less than a contempt for democracy. I'm not saying that this necessarily is true of the comments of remmelt or aysa or others on this page. But it is true that often the backlash against bloggers arises out of disdain for the notion that ANYONE can open a blog and offer their opinion. How dare they! That blogger didn't study journalism at Harvard, Yale or Stanford, so what right do they have to lower the signal to noise ratio on the Internet! They should quietly sit down and shut up and passively consume the news like the rest of us.
Even worse, it is sometimes true that, buried at the heart of the disdain for the democracy of the Internet, lies the gnawing sense that someone else got there before you. After all, the notion of democracy is that everyone has equal access to the Internet, and everyone therefore has an equal chance to influence the discussions that are crucial to our times. Sometimes people wish that it was their name that appeared on that by-line, or that their thoughts had received the consideration of hundreds of thousands of readers and had been preserved in a prominent magazine like Slashdot. There is a sense that somehow THEY have
I linked to Steven Rosenberg's blog because he did a great job of finding a comment buried deep in Mark Shuttleworth's blog and because he nicely summarized Shuttleworth's opinion. Rosenberg broke that story by exhuming it from lots of other content on Shuttleworth's very active blog. Without Rosenberg's blog highlighting of Shuttleworth's blog entry, we/. readers would not have noticed it. Shuttleworth posted his comment on 15 June 2007, and a full day passed without that comment being noticed on/., which is a long time for a comment by the founder of a major GNU Linux distro to go unnoticed by/.
Also, Rosenberg saved busy readers a bit of time by summarizing Shuttleworth's longer opinion. Shuttleworth clearly took the time to make sure that his comments were diplomatic and well-rounded, but the result is that his comments were not subject to the kind of quick-glance summary that many/. readers need.
So, in summary, I felt that Rosenberg provided two important journalistic services, and that he deserved to get the attention and traffic for his good work.
Aysa is critical of the decision to link to Roseberg's blog, but IMHO, Aysa's criticism is directed more toward his or her disdain for bloggers and evinces a bias toward big media. Aysa would have had no complaint if this same summary had appeared on say Newsforge. Notice that Aysa doesn't complain about the caliber of Rosenberg's summary or Rosenberg's editorial choice to discuss Shuttleworth's blog. Indeed, Aysa could not have made such complaints, because Rosenberg's summary is pithy and his choice to run a comment by news-making Shuttleworth was unimpeachable. Rosenberg's only "fault" was the fact that his work did not appear on Newsforge. IMHO, Aysa's criticism of the link to a blogger therefore lacks substance and shows a meritless disdain merely for Rosenberg's status. If journalism is good, it's good regardless of where it appears.
The list of people challenging Microsoft to sue them has now grown to 1,440. And that is just based on Steve Ballmer's comments that FOSS projects infringe on 235 patents. Imagine how people would react if Microsoft did actually file suit. It would be bedlam. The "Sue me first, Microsoft" list is here:
Join the fun!! Sign up to get sued!! Look brave without taking any actual risk! (Microsoft ain't never gonna sue no one over its questionable patent claims against FOSS.)
I am a level one tech support volunteer for a public middle school in San Francisco. We have money to spend pursuant to the Microsoft California Anti-Trust Settlement, and we are trying to figure out the best way to make our creaking old Xeon server move a little faster. If you are in San Francisco, and would like to join our little school LUG, please feel free to email Christian Einfeldt at einfeldt at digital tipping point dot com. Thanks!
For those who do not already know it, Microsoft has settled its anti-trust case in California, resulting in a settlement fund that allows every school district in California to get a set dollar allotment per student per school district. This website has all the deets:
I am a level one tech support volunteer who has gotten some assistance building a 33-seat thin client network in a public school in San Francisco. We could use the help of a one or two higher-level network admins on a few issues. We have been up and running nicely for two years. We could just use some help occasionally. It's a public school, so there is almost no budget. We are doing almost all of this on legacy hardware. If you are in the San Francisco Bay Area, and would like to help with a few issues, please email me at einfeldt at digitaltippingpoint dot com. Thanks either way! Christian Einfeldt
When I personally use the term "disruptive innovation" here, I am using in the same way that Clayton Christensen uses it, because Christensen coined the term and he uses it in a highly specific way. Christensen identifies two types of disruptive innovations: 1) a low-end disruption; and 2) an emerging market disruption. He defines a low-end disruption as a product or service that is attractive to customers who are either not willing or not able to pay a premium for the market leader's enhanced products or services. He defines an emerging market disruption as a product or service that provides a new or different service that is not interesting to the market leader's best customers. Please notice that the definition of both of these terms is pegged to four entities or groups: 1) the market leader; 2) the market leader's customer; 3) the market entrant; 4) the market entrant's customers.
GNU Linux is a low-end disruption and an emerging market disruption. There has been lots of debate in this thread already about the low end disruption, but both sides seem to agree on one basic thing: there is a group of consumers who are either not willing or not able to pay the premium (relatively speaking) charged by the market leader (Microsoft) for its products. Examples are most consumers in the developing world; and schools in the United States, or at least most of the urban areas in California (the case that I am most familiar with, since I volunteer for a school which cannot afford Microsoft Windows and Microsoft Office for its students). IMHO, there is no doubt that these consumers are "overshot", which is also a term that Christensen coined. These consumers are overshot because they really don't need all of the features of Excel, for example, which are used by only 5% of Microsoft Office customers. A simple way of thinking of the term "overshot" is movie theater popcorn in North America. When you go to a movie theater in North America, the pricing encourages you to get a large barrel of popcorn, which is only $1.00 more than the tiny bag. You really didn't want the big barrel, but the little bag was not enough, so you pay for more than you will use. The big barrel "overshoots" your needs, in the same way that Excel overshoots the needs of most users, many of whom will now be able to be happy with Google Docs and Spreadsheets, which is a low-end disruption.
An example of an emerging market disruption is Google's classic search, as well as Google Earth. In both cases, Google uses off-the-shelf modular components (the LAMPPP stack) to allow its customers to do something that they were not able to do before; and, more important, the channels for delivering that service exist outside the business network of the market leader in desktop software (Microsoft). Google's main revenues are linked to delivering software as a service; Microsoft's main revenues are linked to delivering software as a product.
These products are disruptive because they grow outside Microsoft's business network (OEM distributors), but provide functionality which competes peripherally with Microsoft's products. As these products are becoming more polished, they are taking on functionality which are starting to approach the functionality of the market leader's major revenue winners.
At the risk of sounding corny, US President FDR had it right. The only thing to fear is fear itself. Microsoft has no colorable patent claims, IMHO, and I'm a lawyer. There are probably several good defenses to their patents: 1) prior art; 2) obviousness; 3) limits on patenting math. And right now there are 1,415 people who have signed a list asking Microsoft to sue them. We need business leaders to start signing this list, because plenty of grassroots people have signed the list already. You can find the sign-up page here:
Of course, please consult with a lawyer if you are making serious plans to challenge Microsoft in court. Also, of course it goes without saying that you should probably consult other big players on the FOSS side, such as the Linux Foundation and the Open Innovation Network, etc. So while I can't give legal advice to anyone, really folks, I don't think there's any there there, to quote Gertude Stein. Just my two cents.
In fact, I believe that Microsoft is doing this patent stuff because they want to ease into distributing GNU Linux themselves, and they want to be the market leading GNU Linux distro. They really kind of are forced to do it. GNU Linux and FOSS are eroding their revenue base. They have read Clayton Christensen's work. They know what a disruptive innovation is. They know that the only market leaders to have survived disruptive innovations are those who spun off an independent separate little company that sold the disruptive products or services. As that spin-off grew, the companies who were smart enough to do it, like Quantum spun off Plus, eventually found that the disruptive little company grew to a point where the two companies could merge, and thus gracefully transition to the new disruptive market. Microsoft is planning to buy a distro, and they are insulating themselves from legal attack once they get there. They are also probably planning to try to bust the GPL in court, which is why they need this legal protection. They are looking to bust the GPL down to something that they like, such as a BSD or MIT or Apache-type license.
So in the meantime, let's make them earn their place. Let's challenge them. Let's unmask their FUD. Sign the list!
IMHO, Microsoft's patent claims lack merit, for several reasons: prior art; obviousness; and limits on patenting math. Let's turn up the volume on our doubt of Microsoft's claims. Please challenge Microsoft to sue you (yes, you AND your company) by signing this list of 1,395 people who doubt Microsoft's patent claims:
This museum is evidence of a blind fanaticism that is so very devoted to faith that its adherents will ignore reason, science, evidence and logic in pursuit of a world view. These are the same people who want us to have Christian prayer in schools and impose their conservative lifestyles on the rest of us. And these people vote. In droves.
Mark Twain loved good farce, and he would love the charade that is Microsoft's patent claims. For those of you who might have not read Huckleberry Finn, or have forgotten Mark Twain's farcical "Royal Nonesuch" skit, here is the wikipedia summary:
"Royal Nonesuch" is a song from the 1974 musical film, Huckleberry Finn based on the book by Mark Twain. Like the song Royalty!, this song is also sung by Harvey Korman as "The King" (of France) and David Wayne as The Duke (of Bilgwater). Performing this song is the conartists' attempt to convince the town that they are travelling actors in possession of Shakespeare's lost masterpiece, The Royal Nonesuch. The conartists sell tickets to the unsuspecting town's people and exit, back stage with the all their money, without ever having given them a show, although, in the book, the dauphin runs around naked with only body paint on, and then convinces the people who watched this to pretend it was great to keep their pride after being tricked into seeing this.
It is time to throw back the curtain on Microsoft's patent charade. Join the 1,386 people who have already invited a Microsoft patent infringement lawsuit:
For those of you who have not heard, there is a list of people who are challenging Microsoft to sue them if it believes that FOSS violates Microsoft patents. Many of the people on the list are not just individuals, but owners of businesses who would potentially be in the sights Microsoft's so called "patent" weapon. None of Microsoft's patent FUD has value if prevailing public opinion questions the value of Microsoft's so-called "patent" weapon.
because last time, Microsoft was Google, and IBM was Microsoft. But now Google is Microsoft and Microsoft is IBM. If you haven't read any of Clayton Christensen's books, now would be a good time to read The Innovator's Solution by Christensen and Raynor. Ever since the telephone, small upstart companies have been offering products and services that were shunned by the market leader's best customers, and hence the market leader, usually because the product underperformed the expectations of the market leader's best customers. But the market entrant was able to make enough profit and gradually got better and better, and then started pulling customers out of the market leader's business network.
RCA didn't use transistors in small radios until it was too late. Western Union didn't use the telephone until it was too late. Microsoft didn't work with the FOSS community, and now it is too late. Google is great at broadcasting software. Microsoft is still mostly delivering software the old, slow way. This news is another digital tipping point. The OS is becoming less crucial. GNU Linux is getting its foot in the door with Dell. Google and 1000 other new start ups are using the power of FOSS to do creative stuff. Microsoft seems to be focused on older business models (DRM'd content) while Google continues to broadcast everything from its own software (Google algorithms on Linux) to fun, new format for video (YouTube shorts). I think that we are going to see some major changes in the way that desktop software is funded, distributed, and delivered. Once the Microsoft monopoly on the desktop is cracked, think of the changes we will see.
But then again, sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue and more
sue sue sue suesue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue Crookes sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue wacko sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue 1310 people sue sue sue This thing is getting a little out of hand, dontcha think?.
That Michael Kanellos article in Cnet was dated 2006/9/12 and was entitled, "Biodiesel to drive up the price of cooking oil".
bio-diesel may be affecting cooking oil prices...
on
Driving on Starch
·
· Score: 1
...according to this CNet article by Michael Kanellos:
If you think the high price of gas has been irritating, wait until you see the cost of french fries. The popularity of biodiesel--made from vegetable matter intead of fossil fuels--"will tighten the supply of vegetable oils," William Camp, executive vice president of Archer Daniels Midland, said during a presentation at the ThinkEquity Partners Growth Conference in San Francisco. Because agricultural prices typically fluctuate with supply levels, the vegetable oil shortage could cause food prices to rise. Martin Tobias, CEO of Seattle-based biodiesel start-up Imperium Renewables, agreed. Vegetable oil prices have declined in the past three weeks because projected demand for biodiesel has come down from the speculative levels achieved a few weeks ago. Nonetheless, lowered levels of projected demand still seem destined to make supply difficult. "I do think there will be a crimp in vegetable oil supplies in three to five years," said Tobias, who once worked at Microsoft.
When I quote a Microsoft employee or former employee, it is often with a large grain of salt. And Archer Daniels Midland is the Exxon of food. So for whatever it is worth, there it is.
Corporate and institutional FOSS users can be helped out here by a change in the media environment. We can just call Microsoft's bluff. As of 17:53 pm on 2007-05-22, we have 514 people who have signed up to be "sued" by Microsoft for Microsoft's "patent claims". Wink, wink, nod, nod.
If we continue to get a large response to the "Sue me first, Microsoft" list, we have a greater chance of getting media exposure for the fact that Microsoft makes bluffs, and just backs off of those bluffs. We ignored SCO, and so we can ignore Microsoft, too. The place to sign up to challenge Microsoft to sue you is here:
'Does our collective ear deceive us? If pirates are to plunder, Microsoft now wants them to board the Windows ship first. The news came about at last week's Morgan Stanley Technology conference where MS business group prez Jeff Raikes stated, 'If they're going to pirate somebody, we want it to be us rather than somebody else. We understand that in the long run the fundamental asset is the installed base of people who are using our products.' '
So yes, Microsoft understands that there really is only one difference between FOSS-based IT vendors and Microsoft: CONTROL. You can fork FOSS, but you can't fork Microsoft products. And in the end, it is that single fact that is going to tip the economics in favor of the FOSS community. Microsoft has long given away software that is free-as-in-beer, and that did not earn them our love. We want control. Transparency. Forkability. The right to share. The right to improve. Microsoft gives us no love in these areas.
Microsoft just won't be able to compete against a developer and testing community as large as the FOSS community. We are everywhere. And I dare say we are having more fun than the Microsofties.
Hey, dontcha just love the Microsoft PR machine!!! Here we are on Slashdot, talking about Microsoft's PR prowess, and Microsoft is kind enough to come along and give us a demonstration! On my screen, I am seeing advertisements for a kinder, gentler Microsoft, one that makes a donation to some unknown charity every time you use Microsoft IM. Oh, that's so sweet and cuddly! Just ignore those patent threats, boys and girls! We didn't mean any harm!
This is exactly my point, and it's why I offered to have Microsoft sue me. Microsoft is doing an excellent job of PR, and we need to draw public attention to two basic facts: 1) Microsoft's patent claims are unmeritorious; and 2) Microsoft is making vague patent threats because self-censorship is cheaper and more powerful than filing patent infringement lawsuits that only work in the US, if they work at all.
If you are not seeing the kinder, gentler IM donations on your screen, you can see them here on the Digital Tipping Point Flickr account, at least until Microsoft buys Yahoo, at which point you will see them only on our Google Picasa account:
Note to Microsoft counsel Brad Smith, Esq.: If you need documentary proof for your trial against me that I use Ubuntu GNU Linux, you can use this screenshot, which I am hereby vouching is a true and accurate shot depicting my Edgy Ubuntu desktop which, coincidentally, I am using to produce the Digital Tipping Point film. Among other things, the DTP film will suggest that Microsoft, like RCA and IBM before it, is facing an "innovator's dilemma" that will disrupt its current monopolistic business model. The funny thing is that the same market forces that propelled Microsoft to hammer IBM is now going to help IBM return the favor, this time using GNU Linux and OpenOffice.org. But I guess you knew that already, Sir Brad, because that is why you have been filing patents. You once worked at IBM. You learned well. Here is that proof you will want if you ever do file a case against me:
I am a lawyer with a very small civil practice in San Francisco. IMHO, t would be possible to file a declaratory relief action. Almost anyone who has been encumbered by a Microsoft patent threat would have standing to do so. I would be willing to participate in such a lawsuit, obviously, since my name is the first on the TFA "Sue me" list.
In order for a declaratory relief lawsuit to work, we would need to have coordinated action by some of the other large stakeholders whose businesses would be impacted by Microsoft's questionable PR patent campaign against FOSS. That takes time, planning, and money, though.
In the meantime, I wanted to take some action now to see if we could at least get a show of hands of people who doubt Microsoft's questionable PR patent campaign. I believe that few in the FOSS community really believe that Microsoft's purported patent claims have merit. So we probably need to shout really loud, so that the rest of the world can see and hear us. We don't want people to believe that a) We in the FOSS community are doing anything that is illegal, because we're not; or b) that we have doubts about whether or not Microsoft's questionable PR patent claims have merit (they don't, IMHO).
IMHO, we really can't allow Microsoft to dominate the airwaves with its questionable patent claims against us.
Christian Einfeldt,
Producer, The Digital Tipping Point
Slashdot Mirror
> Rosenberg broke that story by exhuming it from lots of other content on Shuttleworth's very active blog.
I don't think that word means what you think it means? Shuttleworth "broke the story," Rosenberg "commented on his blog."
News is whatever appears above the fold. It's not news if it is buried in the classified section, which, thanks to Craigslist, is increasingly becoming an anachronism. If this very important comment by Ubuntu founder Mark Shuttleworth had not been repeated by Rosenberg, it would not have been found by a colleague on an email list, where I found it and submitted it to the /. editors. Ultimately, it is the /. editors who made it news by placing it in a place "that matters", Slashdot. Shuttleworth's comment was inherently newsworthy, but without Rosenberg's posting of the story on his blog, it would not have reached Slashdot.
/. and Digg. Millions of people come to /. and Digg every day because we want to know what stories have made it "over the fold". Digg and /. have somewhat different approaches to deciding what stories rise above the fold, but the effect is the same: by placing stories above the fold, /. editors or Diggers decide that the handful of stories which make it above the fold are worthy of consideration, even if only by a cursory read. IMHO, Rosenberg performed the vital function of nicely summarizing important remarks made by a newsmaker (Shuttleworth) so that busy /. readers would be able to get the substance of Shuttleworth's important remarks quickly. This is why we value editors: They help us learn quickly what is relevant to our lives. I felt that there was no way that I could improve on Rosenberg's summary, and that he therefore had made a meaningful contribution to the discussion.
Perhaps you could say that George F. Will only "comments" on the news, but his comments add value to the news. Granted, there is a vast difference between a George F. Will column and Rosenberg's blog, but IMHO it is a difference of degree, not kind. Commentary an inherent part of reporting.
Remmelt, Aysa, and the others who object to the linking to Rosenberg's blog seem to have three primary complaints about my linking to Rosenberg's blog: 1) Rosenberg's blog is not a proper magazine; 2) Rosenberg added nothing to Shuttleworth's comments; 3) and the use of summaries, such as what Rosenberg offered, degrade the news by soundbiting Shuttleworth's more lengthy comments into smaller segments.
Each of these points seem to ignore the primary role of editors and overlooks the importance of the democractic nature of
If we look below the veneer of some aspects of the backlash against bloggers, sometimes we find nothing less than a contempt for democracy. I'm not saying that this necessarily is true of the comments of remmelt or aysa or others on this page. But it is true that often the backlash against bloggers arises out of disdain for the notion that ANYONE can open a blog and offer their opinion. How dare they! That blogger didn't study journalism at Harvard, Yale or Stanford, so what right do they have to lower the signal to noise ratio on the Internet! They should quietly sit down and shut up and passively consume the news like the rest of us.
Even worse, it is sometimes true that, buried at the heart of the disdain for the democracy of the Internet, lies the gnawing sense that someone else got there before you. After all, the notion of democracy is that everyone has equal access to the Internet, and everyone therefore has an equal chance to influence the discussions that are crucial to our times. Sometimes people wish that it was their name that appeared on that by-line, or that their thoughts had received the consideration of hundreds of thousands of readers and had been preserved in a prominent magazine like Slashdot. There is a sense that somehow THEY have
I linked to Steven Rosenberg's blog because he did a great job of finding a comment buried deep in Mark Shuttleworth's blog and because he nicely summarized Shuttleworth's opinion. Rosenberg broke that story by exhuming it from lots of other content on Shuttleworth's very active blog. Without Rosenberg's blog highlighting of Shuttleworth's blog entry, we /. readers would not have noticed it. Shuttleworth posted his comment on 15 June 2007, and a full day passed without that comment being noticed on /., which is a long time for a comment by the founder of a major GNU Linux distro to go unnoticed by /.
/. readers need.
Also, Rosenberg saved busy readers a bit of time by summarizing Shuttleworth's longer opinion. Shuttleworth clearly took the time to make sure that his comments were diplomatic and well-rounded, but the result is that his comments were not subject to the kind of quick-glance summary that many
So, in summary, I felt that Rosenberg provided two important journalistic services, and that he deserved to get the attention and traffic for his good work.
Aysa is critical of the decision to link to Roseberg's blog, but IMHO, Aysa's criticism is directed more toward his or her disdain for bloggers and evinces a bias toward big media. Aysa would have had no complaint if this same summary had appeared on say Newsforge. Notice that Aysa doesn't complain about the caliber of Rosenberg's summary or Rosenberg's editorial choice to discuss Shuttleworth's blog. Indeed, Aysa could not have made such complaints, because Rosenberg's summary is pithy and his choice to run a comment by news-making Shuttleworth was unimpeachable. Rosenberg's only "fault" was the fact that his work did not appear on Newsforge. IMHO, Aysa's criticism of the link to a blogger therefore lacks substance and shows a meritless disdain merely for Rosenberg's status. If journalism is good, it's good regardless of where it appears.
The list of people challenging Microsoft to sue them has now grown to 1,440. And that is just based on Steve Ballmer's comments that FOSS projects infringe on 235 patents. Imagine how people would react if Microsoft did actually file suit. It would be bedlam. The "Sue me first, Microsoft" list is here:
l e=SMFM_list_page_12
http://digitaltippingpoint.com/wiki/index.php?tit
Join the fun!! Sign up to get sued!! Look brave without taking any actual risk! (Microsoft ain't never gonna sue no one over its questionable patent claims against FOSS.)
hi,
I am a level one tech support volunteer for a public middle school in San Francisco. We have money to spend pursuant to the Microsoft California Anti-Trust Settlement, and we are trying to figure out the best way to make our creaking old Xeon server move a little faster. If you are in San Francisco, and would like to join our little school LUG, please feel free to email Christian Einfeldt at einfeldt at digital tipping point dot com. Thanks!
For those who do not already know it, Microsoft has settled its anti-trust case in California, resulting in a settlement fund that allows every school district in California to get a set dollar allotment per student per school district. This website has all the deets:
http://www.edtechk12vp.com
So if you have been wanting more FOSS in your school district, but haven't had the budget, step right up!
I am a level one tech support volunteer who has gotten some assistance building a 33-seat thin client network in a public school in San Francisco. We could use the help of a one or two higher-level network admins on a few issues. We have been up and running nicely for two years. We could just use some help occasionally. It's a public school, so there is almost no budget. We are doing almost all of this on legacy hardware. If you are in the San Francisco Bay Area, and would like to help with a few issues, please email me at einfeldt at digitaltippingpoint dot com. Thanks either way! Christian Einfeldt
When I personally use the term "disruptive innovation" here, I am using in the same way that Clayton Christensen uses it, because Christensen coined the term and he uses it in a highly specific way. Christensen identifies two types of disruptive innovations: 1) a low-end disruption; and 2) an emerging market disruption. He defines a low-end disruption as a product or service that is attractive to customers who are either not willing or not able to pay a premium for the market leader's enhanced products or services. He defines an emerging market disruption as a product or service that provides a new or different service that is not interesting to the market leader's best customers. Please notice that the definition of both of these terms is pegged to four entities or groups: 1) the market leader; 2) the market leader's customer; 3) the market entrant; 4) the market entrant's customers.
GNU Linux is a low-end disruption and an emerging market disruption. There has been lots of debate in this thread already about the low end disruption, but both sides seem to agree on one basic thing: there is a group of consumers who are either not willing or not able to pay the premium (relatively speaking) charged by the market leader (Microsoft) for its products. Examples are most consumers in the developing world; and schools in the United States, or at least most of the urban areas in California (the case that I am most familiar with, since I volunteer for a school which cannot afford Microsoft Windows and Microsoft Office for its students). IMHO, there is no doubt that these consumers are "overshot", which is also a term that Christensen coined. These consumers are overshot because they really don't need all of the features of Excel, for example, which are used by only 5% of Microsoft Office customers. A simple way of thinking of the term "overshot" is movie theater popcorn in North America. When you go to a movie theater in North America, the pricing encourages you to get a large barrel of popcorn, which is only $1.00 more than the tiny bag. You really didn't want the big barrel, but the little bag was not enough, so you pay for more than you will use. The big barrel "overshoots" your needs, in the same way that Excel overshoots the needs of most users, many of whom will now be able to be happy with Google Docs and Spreadsheets, which is a low-end disruption.
An example of an emerging market disruption is Google's classic search, as well as Google Earth. In both cases, Google uses off-the-shelf modular components (the LAMPPP stack) to allow its customers to do something that they were not able to do before; and, more important, the channels for delivering that service exist outside the business network of the market leader in desktop software (Microsoft). Google's main revenues are linked to delivering software as a service; Microsoft's main revenues are linked to delivering software as a product.
These products are disruptive because they grow outside Microsoft's business network (OEM distributors), but provide functionality which competes peripherally with Microsoft's products. As these products are becoming more polished, they are taking on functionality which are starting to approach the functionality of the market leader's major revenue winners.
At the risk of sounding corny, US President FDR had it right. The only thing to fear is fear itself. Microsoft has no colorable patent claims, IMHO, and I'm a lawyer. There are probably several good defenses to their patents: 1) prior art; 2) obviousness; 3) limits on patenting math. And right now there are 1,415 people who have signed a list asking Microsoft to sue them. We need business leaders to start signing this list, because plenty of grassroots people have signed the list already. You can find the sign-up page here:
l e=SMFM_list_page_12
http://digitaltippingpoint.com/wiki/index.php?tit
Of course, please consult with a lawyer if you are making serious plans to challenge Microsoft in court. Also, of course it goes without saying that you should probably consult other big players on the FOSS side, such as the Linux Foundation and the Open Innovation Network, etc. So while I can't give legal advice to anyone, really folks, I don't think there's any there there, to quote Gertude Stein. Just my two cents.
In fact, I believe that Microsoft is doing this patent stuff because they want to ease into distributing GNU Linux themselves, and they want to be the market leading GNU Linux distro. They really kind of are forced to do it. GNU Linux and FOSS are eroding their revenue base. They have read Clayton Christensen's work. They know what a disruptive innovation is. They know that the only market leaders to have survived disruptive innovations are those who spun off an independent separate little company that sold the disruptive products or services. As that spin-off grew, the companies who were smart enough to do it, like Quantum spun off Plus, eventually found that the disruptive little company grew to a point where the two companies could merge, and thus gracefully transition to the new disruptive market. Microsoft is planning to buy a distro, and they are insulating themselves from legal attack once they get there. They are also probably planning to try to bust the GPL in court, which is why they need this legal protection. They are looking to bust the GPL down to something that they like, such as a BSD or MIT or Apache-type license.
So in the meantime, let's make them earn their place. Let's challenge them. Let's unmask their FUD. Sign the list!
IMHO, Microsoft's patent claims lack merit, for several reasons: prior art; obviousness; and limits on patenting math. Let's turn up the volume on our doubt of Microsoft's claims. Please challenge Microsoft to sue you (yes, you AND your company) by signing this list of 1,395 people who doubt Microsoft's patent claims:
l e=SMFM_list_page_11
http://digitaltippingpoint.com/wiki/index.php?tit
This museum is evidence of a blind fanaticism that is so very devoted to faith that its adherents will ignore reason, science, evidence and logic in pursuit of a world view. These are the same people who want us to have Christian prayer in schools and impose their conservative lifestyles on the rest of us. And these people vote. In droves.
...by saying that somehow the benefits of democracy outweigh censoring even really dangerous, stupid shit like this museum.
At least we all get a good laugh out of this one.
And a good cry.
http://digitaltippingpoint.com/wiki/index.php?tit
For those of you who have not heard, there is a list of people who are challenging Microsoft to sue them if it believes that FOSS violates Microsoft patents. Many of the people on the list are not just individuals, but owners of businesses who would potentially be in the sights Microsoft's so called "patent" weapon. None of Microsoft's patent FUD has value if prevailing public opinion questions the value of Microsoft's so-called "patent" weapon.
because last time, Microsoft was Google, and IBM was Microsoft. But now Google is Microsoft and Microsoft is IBM. If you haven't read any of Clayton Christensen's books, now would be a good time to read The Innovator's Solution by Christensen and Raynor. Ever since the telephone, small upstart companies have been offering products and services that were shunned by the market leader's best customers, and hence the market leader, usually because the product underperformed the expectations of the market leader's best customers. But the market entrant was able to make enough profit and gradually got better and better, and then started pulling customers out of the market leader's business network.
RCA didn't use transistors in small radios until it was too late. Western Union didn't use the telephone until it was too late. Microsoft didn't work with the FOSS community, and now it is too late. Google is great at broadcasting software. Microsoft is still mostly delivering software the old, slow way. This news is another digital tipping point. The OS is becoming less crucial. GNU Linux is getting its foot in the door with Dell. Google and 1000 other new start ups are using the power of FOSS to do creative stuff. Microsoft seems to be focused on older business models (DRM'd content) while Google continues to broadcast everything from its own software (Google algorithms on Linux) to fun, new format for video (YouTube shorts). I think that we are going to see some major changes in the way that desktop software is funded, distributed, and delivered. Once the Microsoft monopoly on the desktop is cracked, think of the changes we will see.
sue sue sue sue sue sue
But then again, sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue
sue sue sue sue and more
sue sue sue suesue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue Crookes sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue wacko sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue sue 1310 people sue sue sue This thing is getting a little out of hand, dontcha think?.
And the really funny thing is, I'm a lawyer.
Well, you know, I had to ask.
Seriously, googling I was not able to see if this thing is running on GNU Linux or even just the kernel.
Oops, sorry, I forgot the link for that blockquote above about the cost of cooking oil being affected by bio-diesel. Linky here:
c e+of+cooking+oil/2100-11389_3-6114425.html
http://news.com.com/Biodiesel+to+drive+up+the+pri
And here is the tinyurl for it:
http://tinyurl.com/esxef
That Michael Kanellos article in Cnet was dated 2006/9/12 and was entitled, "Biodiesel to drive up the price of cooking oil".
Corporate and institutional FOSS users can be helped out here by a change in the media environment. We can just call Microsoft's bluff. As of 17:53 pm on 2007-05-22, we have 514 people who have signed up to be "sued" by Microsoft for Microsoft's "patent claims". Wink, wink, nod, nod.
l e=Sue_me_first%2C_Microsoft
If we continue to get a large response to the "Sue me first, Microsoft" list, we have a greater chance of getting media exposure for the fact that Microsoft makes bluffs, and just backs off of those bluffs. We ignored SCO, and so we can ignore Microsoft, too. The place to sign up to challenge Microsoft to sue you is here:
http://digitaltippingpoint.com/wiki/index.php?tit
The story about our "Sue me first, Microsoft" challenge appeared here yesterday on Slashdot. A story appeared here today in Redmond Mag on-line. So we practically have Microsoft surrounded. Heh. Okay, maybe not. But we're getting there.
Christian Einfeldt,
Producer, The Digital Tipping Point
Microsoft just won't be able to compete against a developer and testing community as large as the FOSS community. We are everywhere. And I dare say we are having more fun than the Microsofties.
Hey, dontcha just love the Microsoft PR machine!!! Here we are on Slashdot, talking about Microsoft's PR prowess, and Microsoft is kind enough to come along and give us a demonstration! On my screen, I am seeing advertisements for a kinder, gentler Microsoft, one that makes a donation to some unknown charity every time you use Microsoft IM. Oh, that's so sweet and cuddly! Just ignore those patent threats, boys and girls! We didn't mean any harm!
8 7/
8 3/
3 8/
4 1/
4 1/
This is exactly my point, and it's why I offered to have Microsoft sue me. Microsoft is doing an excellent job of PR, and we need to draw public attention to two basic facts: 1) Microsoft's patent claims are unmeritorious; and 2) Microsoft is making vague patent threats because self-censorship is cheaper and more powerful than filing patent infringement lawsuits that only work in the US, if they work at all.
If you are not seeing the kinder, gentler IM donations on your screen, you can see them here on the Digital Tipping Point Flickr account, at least until Microsoft buys Yahoo, at which point you will see them only on our Google Picasa account:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/49947835@N00/5088135
http://www.flickr.com/photos/49947835@N00/5088135
http://www.flickr.com/photos/49947835@N00/5087770
http://www.flickr.com/photos/49947835@N00/5087826
Note to Microsoft counsel Brad Smith, Esq.: If you need documentary proof for your trial against me that I use Ubuntu GNU Linux, you can use this screenshot, which I am hereby vouching is a true and accurate shot depicting my Edgy Ubuntu desktop which, coincidentally, I am using to produce the Digital Tipping Point film. Among other things, the DTP film will suggest that Microsoft, like RCA and IBM before it, is facing an "innovator's dilemma" that will disrupt its current monopolistic business model. The funny thing is that the same market forces that propelled Microsoft to hammer IBM is now going to help IBM return the favor, this time using GNU Linux and OpenOffice.org. But I guess you knew that already, Sir Brad, because that is why you have been filing patents. You once worked at IBM. You learned well. Here is that proof you will want if you ever do file a case against me:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/49947835@N00/5087826
No! Wait! Don't everyone rush over there at once! ;-)
Seriously.
Christian Einfeldt,
Producer, The Digital Tipping Point
p.s. Thanks for the interest, folks! Let's hope that old FreeBSD server can hang on!
hi,
I am a lawyer with a very small civil practice in San Francisco. IMHO, t would be possible to file a declaratory relief action. Almost anyone who has been encumbered by a Microsoft patent threat would have standing to do so. I would be willing to participate in such a lawsuit, obviously, since my name is the first on the TFA "Sue me" list.
In order for a declaratory relief lawsuit to work, we would need to have coordinated action by some of the other large stakeholders whose businesses would be impacted by Microsoft's questionable PR patent campaign against FOSS. That takes time, planning, and money, though.
In the meantime, I wanted to take some action now to see if we could at least get a show of hands of people who doubt Microsoft's questionable PR patent campaign. I believe that few in the FOSS community really believe that Microsoft's purported patent claims have merit. So we probably need to shout really loud, so that the rest of the world can see and hear us. We don't want people to believe that a) We in the FOSS community are doing anything that is illegal, because we're not; or b) that we have doubts about whether or not Microsoft's questionable PR patent claims have merit (they don't, IMHO).
IMHO, we really can't allow Microsoft to dominate the airwaves with its questionable patent claims against us.
Christian Einfeldt,
Producer, The Digital Tipping Point
Sorry about that folks!
Christian Einfeldt, Producer, The Digital Tipping Point
hi, sorry about this. Slashdot has crushed our server. I hope to get it back up soon. My apologies for the inconvenience.
Christian Einfeldt,
Producer, The Digital Tipping Point