Micros~1 does this all the time. Tell a untruth and spend ~$100,000 to have the press barf it up to the public. Who is going to put up the ~$100,000 to have the same distribution as the initial untruth? How many companies went out of business because Micros~1 published an untruth about some product they WERE coming out with only to release beta-level code >1year later that didn't even do what was initally published? This is it guys and gals. The guns are out and they are aimed at Linux. The last OS that these guns were pointed at was OS/2 and we know where that OS landed. Can you say niche? How does this get stopped? There is no law against this kind of untruth, they would just say there was a misunderstanding or a bug and it will be fixed at a later time. The DAMAGE is done. A later retraction means little. I'm sending email to James Love to see what they think about this kind of public deception. A group with some pull needs to address this, NOW.
I think it was just last year that SCO asked the EU to stop Micros~1 from charging them for Xenix code that hasn't been used for many years. SCO had a license to pay MS for the code to allow SCO Xenix compatability forever. Micros~1 released SCO from the license. Soooo, at some time Micros~1 owned Xenix.
save your breath(fingers) this is just Microsoft spreading Doubt about Linux. They will do this first, add alittle 'U'ncertenty, and when that doesn't work they will spread 'F'ear throughout all that they can control. It is the 'F' that can bury a product since they control OEM's, ISV's, and the press. Lucky that the Internet is here because those pretty PR stunts that used to take up to a month to disprove are now disproven in hours and within hours the world knows. Before corrections were not widely spread because of the needed $$ to send mailings to all the media. So it is the 'F' that is dangerous, 'U' and 'D' can be delt with quickly.
On the other hand you're probably right about the proprietary formats. I think I even read somewhere that Office 2000 would use a different approach in storing things.
That is SOP (standard operating proceedure) for Microsoft. It is not surprising that Office 2000 will have some different way to do things. Sorry, just seemed like such an obvious statement.:)
you wrote: "You have to know that Ellison is so filthy rich that he bought himself a Russian MIG."
I think MIGs were going for around $15,000 - $25,000 some years back. Russian breakup and all. Now he has to be filthy rich to maintain it if he intends to fly the thing. That must be exspensive.
Here is a link to one of Bill's upset neighbors. Sick of all the construction for a family of 3.5! http://www.consumerreports.org/Functions/More/Ph otogal/196601.jpg
More like a resugence of opposition to a dictatorship. Micros~1 = FUD. That is a given. It is finding out who works for Micros~1 that makes it difficult to seperate FUD from reality.
I hated the article too, in all its incarnations around the Internet, but.... What I did notice was the last thing said was positive. OK, it was only couple of sentances but it was still positive. This is something that is never done in a piece published with a Micros~1 blessing. IMHO. Someone is probably in trouble for that but the fact is that it leaves a better taste in the mouth then if it was left out. Looks like D.H. Brown is going on the pole with DataQuest...
We can't afford another 1994 settlement. Justice must be served. It is amazing that Micros~1 defense is based on showing that the game is different today. It is like killing someone then saying to the judge, "but judge, I can't kill again because 'so and so' isn't around to kill. And look, his/ her relatives are ganging up on me so you should not disarm me."
Why don't they ask IBM for the code? IBM used the Windows source in OS/2 versions 2.0 on up to todays Warp v4.0. I think they even have applied Y2K patches. Surely Micros~1 didn't do a cleanup back in 1990/1 when they split from IBM.....
Here is one for ya. Put OS/2 Warp v4 on your system with Elsa cards go get dual display. Now install XFree86OS2 to either run remote X clients or local (native OS/2) X clients but here is the kicker. VNC Server for Linux was ported to XFree86OS2 and VNC Client to standard OS/2 (Presentation Manager). See where I'm going? On OS/2 you have in effect a GNU/Linux system running with OS/2 and since OS/2 does dual displays, you can run the VNC client to the X session on one monitor and the other is the OS/2 desktop where you run OS/2, DOS, Windows16/32s, Java, TCL/TK, etc. Windows gamers need not apply cause only a few can be converted to run native with Win32OS2. I turn heads now running both OS/2 and XFree86OS2 with enlightenment (and GNome) simultaineously on my laptop. Dual monitors in this configuration would have people looking for the other PC chasis.....:)
No joke. I just compile mico (mico is CORBA) on OS/2 with minor makefile changes.
You are not paranoid, IMO. Micros~1 can not survive without the advantage of the OS. What they are doing is eliminating a OS division and spreading the OS technology throughout the new divisions. That way a split up gives all Micros~1 applications the likelyhood to survive ALL competition.
The DOJ had better not fall for this and they had better not pull a 1994 'type' of agreement.
You seem to forget that there is a Judge involved. In 1994, Microsoft was in the same pickle and signed a weak agreement with the DOJ. The Judge assigned to review the agreement, one Justice Sporken, read it and saw that it would do nothing to right was was already done and he rejected it. Janet Reno, took the case from Sporken and handed it to on Justice Jackson who was told to sign it by Reno.
In other words, it ain't over til Fat Billie is sing'n the blues. And we are not safe until then.
Yes, IBM is not dummy, having delt with the wrath of the DOJ for too many years. IBM is NOT going to push Linux on desktops till the DOJ vs MS is in closure stage. Look at what AOL consuming Netscape did. Hang in there people, we don't want Linux from putting Micros~1 behind bars! They must do time for the damages done or ANY OS will have slim change in hell at gaining much on the desktop. MS-Ziff Davis will pummel Linux as soon as the case is over.
Come on now, reinventing a square wheel? Like Micros~1 Windows isn't the QWERTY of the 80's and 90's. Talk about square wheels, 8.3 is the corregated roadway Windows users have accepted for 15 years and Ctl-Alt-Del is the reocurring vapor-lock that 'just happens'.
Slashdot Mirror
Micros~1 does this all the time. Tell a untruth and spend ~$100,000 to have the press barf it up to the public. Who is going to put up the ~$100,000 to have the same distribution as the initial untruth? How many companies went out of business because Micros~1 published an untruth about some product they WERE coming out with only to release beta-level code >1year later that didn't even do what was initally published?
This is it guys and gals. The guns are out and they are aimed at Linux. The last OS that these guns were pointed at was OS/2 and we know where that OS landed. Can you say niche? How does this get stopped? There is no law against this kind of untruth, they would just say there was a misunderstanding or a bug and it will be fixed at a later time. The DAMAGE is done. A later retraction means little.
I'm sending email to James Love to see what they think about this kind of public deception. A group with some pull needs to address this, NOW.
mailto://love@cptech.org
Locutus
I think it was just last year that SCO asked the EU to stop Micros~1 from charging them for Xenix code that hasn't been used for many years. SCO had a license to pay MS for the code to allow SCO Xenix compatability forever. Micros~1 released SCO from the license. Soooo, at some time Micros~1 owned Xenix.
Locutus
save your breath(fingers) this is just Microsoft spreading Doubt about Linux. They will do this first, add alittle 'U'ncertenty, and when that doesn't work they will spread 'F'ear throughout all that they can control. It is the 'F' that can bury a product since they control OEM's, ISV's, and the press. Lucky that the Internet is here because those pretty PR stunts that used to take up to a month to disprove are now disproven in hours and within hours the world knows. Before corrections were not widely spread because of the needed $$ to send mailings to all the media. So it is the 'F' that is dangerous, 'U' and 'D' can be delt with quickly.
Can you hear that DOJ? Stop the 'F'.
Locutus
That is SOP (standard operating proceedure) for Microsoft. It is not surprising that Office 2000 will have some different way to do things. Sorry, just seemed like such an obvious statement. :)
Locutus
you wrote:
h otogal/196601.jpg
"You have to know that Ellison is so filthy rich that he bought himself a Russian MIG."
I think MIGs were going for around $15,000 - $25,000 some years back. Russian breakup and all. Now he has to be filthy rich to maintain it if he intends to fly the thing. That must be exspensive.
Here is a link to one of Bill's upset neighbors. Sick of all the construction for a family of 3.5!
http://www.consumerreports.org/Functions/More/P
:)
More like a resugence of opposition to a dictatorship. Micros~1 = FUD. That is a given.
It is finding out who works for Micros~1 that
makes it difficult to seperate FUD from reality.
Locutus
I hated the article too, in all its incarnations around the Internet, but.... What I did notice was the last thing said was positive. OK, it was only couple of sentances but it was still positive. This is something that is never done in a piece published with a Micros~1 blessing. IMHO. Someone is probably in trouble for that but the fact is that it leaves a better taste in the mouth then if it was left out. Looks like D.H. Brown is going on the pole with DataQuest...
Locutus
We can't afford another 1994 settlement. Justice must be served. It is amazing that Micros~1 defense
is based on showing that the game is different
today. It is like killing someone then saying to
the judge, "but judge, I can't kill again because
'so and so' isn't around to kill. And look, his/
her relatives are ganging up on me so you should
not disarm me."
Hang'm high!
Locutus
Why don't they ask IBM for the code? IBM used the
Windows source in OS/2 versions 2.0 on up to
todays Warp v4.0. I think they even have applied
Y2K patches. Surely Micros~1 didn't do a cleanup
back in 1990/1 when they split from IBM.....
Locutus
Here is one for ya. Put OS/2 Warp v4 on your :)
system with Elsa cards go get dual display.
Now install XFree86OS2 to either run remote X
clients or local (native OS/2) X clients but
here is the kicker. VNC Server for Linux was
ported to XFree86OS2 and VNC Client to standard
OS/2 (Presentation Manager). See where I'm going?
On OS/2 you have in effect a GNU/Linux system
running with OS/2 and since OS/2 does dual
displays, you can run the VNC client to the X
session on one monitor and the other is the OS/2
desktop where you run OS/2, DOS, Windows16/32s,
Java, TCL/TK, etc. Windows gamers need not apply
cause only a few can be converted to run native
with Win32OS2. I turn heads now running both
OS/2 and XFree86OS2 with enlightenment (and
GNome) simultaineously on my laptop. Dual
monitors in this configuration would have people
looking for the other PC chasis.....
No joke. I just compile mico (mico is CORBA)
on OS/2 with minor makefile changes.
Locutus
You are not paranoid, IMO. Micros~1 can not
survive without the advantage of the OS. What
they are doing is eliminating a OS division and
spreading the OS technology throughout the new
divisions. That way a split up gives all Micros~1
applications the likelyhood to survive ALL
competition.
The DOJ had better not fall for this and they
had better not pull a 1994 'type' of agreement.
Locutus
You seem to forget that there is a Judge
involved. In 1994, Microsoft was in the same
pickle and signed a weak agreement with the DOJ.
The Judge assigned to review the agreement, one
Justice Sporken, read it and saw that it would do
nothing to right was was already done and he
rejected it. Janet Reno, took the case from
Sporken and handed it to on Justice Jackson who
was told to sign it by Reno.
In other words, it ain't over til Fat Billie is
sing'n the blues. And we are not safe until then.
Locutus
Yes, IBM is not dummy, having delt with the
wrath of the DOJ for too many years. IBM is
NOT going to push Linux on desktops till the
DOJ vs MS is in closure stage. Look at what
AOL consuming Netscape did. Hang in there
people, we don't want Linux from putting
Micros~1 behind bars! They must do time for
the damages done or ANY OS will have slim
change in hell at gaining much on the desktop.
MS-Ziff Davis will pummel Linux as soon as
the case is over.
Locutus
Gates wouldn't stand a chance again Ellisons :)
Ninja Shuriken stars or hand claws.
Then again when Gates lines Compaq and Dell
executives up in from of him, Ellison might
take alittle longer.
Locutus
Come on now, reinventing a square wheel?
Like Micros~1 Windows isn't the QWERTY
of the 80's and 90's. Talk about square
wheels, 8.3 is the corregated roadway
Windows users have accepted for 15 years
and Ctl-Alt-Del is the reocurring
vapor-lock that 'just happens'.
Get real.
Locutus