businesses and the press are discussing and worried about MSFT IP in Linux. Microsoft is getting what they paid for. The fact that it cost them a few hundred million is insigificant. Look, Microsoft has already been willing to spend/lose 10's of billions to just make sure the market in handheld OS's is not dominated by another( namely Palm ). They've been willing to do the same with the game console market.
Like I said, spending a few hundred million on getting businesses and the press to think Linux and OSS are dangerous options legally is like spending a dime and getting Coke. It's noise but still there is satisfaction and the expected result. IMO.
kinda sounds like SCO and how Microsoft not only paid them directly(licensing UNIX) but also actively went out and obtained millions in investment capital from BayStar and others. SCO was running out of money and then Microsoft helped them out.
Sounds alot like Novell. Microsoft has been good at using its cash like this in the past so it's no surprise. Now Novell goes under will be what's interesting here and who gets the UNIX rights.
where did you find information on these guys have a 100% success rate until now? Had this not been blogged, who outside of a few thousand WA residents would have known what happened?
What blows me away is that with that kind of history, they didn't have a backup system so the show still went on and sync'ed to SOME music. Obviously, engineering is not something they thought was important when it comes to their computer control software and hardware.
Makes you wonder what kind of things are getting put into other automation systems? Wasn't there a story recently of a Windows computer getting hacked in a cab and the passenger was able to get admin control of the Windows PC with all its web browser, file access, and system control software available/installed? There's the CSX railroad signaling system which was taken offline by a Windows virus... How about the new voting machines? There sure are alot of hacks getting jobs putting a poorly designed OS places it should not be and using poor judgment right through to the application design and installation configurations.
please show the data stating they have not had any previous problems with their software/hardware.
what would be even funnier is if Bill and his whole family where in The Needle for the event. THAT would put the icing on the cake in really ring in 2008 the right way. As it is, I already like how 2008 is starting off.
it's good to hear and I hope you are more correct than my thoughts on what could happen. It also sounds like you've had some help in clarifying things so thanks for that. Thanks for mentioning the Gnome forking issues. I'd read that Miguel said he wanted to Mono-ize Gnome and with more and more Gnome utility and task apps showing up with Gnome, I figured he'd already set some Mono hooks into Gnome. This also clarifies how/why businesses could still feel somewhat confident with using Gnome in spite of the Microsoft/Novell deals.
I've spent some time in 20 deg and even negative numbers so I know where you're coming from. The other health issues can only make that memory pale in comparison so I understand. Good luck with the work when it's warmer.
hmmm, talking about the need for an insurance against a products bad management decisions and how it could mean fewer developers behind their chosen product just doesn't sound like something you'd want to bring up at a sales meeting if you can help it. I doubt if any sales rep for a proprietary product is going to talk about such insurances and there is a good reason for that. It does not provide or provoke a feeling of confidence in the one who's got to put there neck on the line and make the purchase. Forking may be something that's great for the hacker and general population of users who just go along with what is out there but business is not that way. It'll be look at as a possible costly change in the product down the road and a threat to budgets and reliability too.
If 25% of US businesses had just one required Linux based software product inhouse and Microsoft could pull the IP ripcord on those customers then they'd do it today. IMO, 25% is easily a larger enough margin to spread massive FUD into the business world to keep the rest away from Linux and open source for a decade or so. If you've not seen it, what SCO did by sueing AutoZone and others for just using Linux was enough to keep many businesses away from Linux and OSS. That effect has lost much of its value now that word is finally getting out that SCO had nothing up its sleeves.
What do you think will happen when Microsoft shows even just one valid IP claim and goes to collect fees? One valid one and the threat of dozens, or hundreds more, will be enough to tell the business world that Linux and OSS is not free and not a safe bet. Sorry, but Microsoft is out to kill this threat to their Windows monopoly and everything in their history shows that it is a Windows game or no game.
I would rather see OSS move much much further into business and government offices for competitive reasons and social reasons. I don't want to see it just continue to exist. Microsoft is not a threat to OSS existence, just it's expansion to the point of a marketshare which is large enough to support far far more consulting positions and be a financial benefit to the public and businesses. So telling businesses about how forking OSS project software is good is not a good idea right now. IMO.
I don't think moving to an ATI card is something you want to do if you are going for stability. Atleast if you are also going to go with ATI's drivers. Maybe the open source radeon driver(xorg.conf => DRIVER=ati) is fine though.
You do know that you could very well just swap the video cards at any point after changing the/etc/X11/xorg.conf file to use the ati driver instead of the svga one if it is what the Diamond Speedstar is using? Backup the original just incase the modelines are not compatible( though they should be since the Diamond is not that special and the monitor is the same ). IE, there's no need to wait to upgrade the card if it'll get you the higher resolution you want now. It can also be easier on the head to limit what is changing when large software updates are going to happen. There's enough to worry about in a major update to go and throw in a hardware change too.
Maybe I didn't say it clearly, the reason they should make some kind of deal is because Ubuntu is a very popular distro and has a supported KDE version. If LTS support is a key point in the decision process for many businesses/users/etc picking Ubuntu over others, not having a KDE version for the next 3 years is going to lose KDE many customers/users.
but hey, if they do what they do for the fun of it and don't care how many use their product(s), go ahead and don't provide security and major bug fixes for the latest stable release and let Ubuntu/Gnome customer base grow. Let the Ubuntu/KDE customer base shrink or stagnate for 3 or more years.
Do you see my point now?
"gnome based".... You don't understand what THAT ment in the context of the writing? Or maybe you don't understand that while it can be very easy to install and setup KDE on standard Ubuntu and maybe even SuSe, RedHat, etc, it is far easier to NOT do it. And doing so might not get you support from the company you originally got the distro from if that is important to you. You know we are talking about a support issue here( LTS - Long Term Support ). The fact that a Gnu/Linux distro defaults to a Gnome desktop manager means it is "gnome based" as far as the desktop, user interface, and default application list is concerned. That means alot IMO and there is going to be a threat brought against all users of Gnome based distros in the near future if Microsoft keeps on its current course if IP threats. But that's another story. Yes it's easy to install another desktop and I've done it many times but that has little to do with Ubuntu/Canonical skipping LTS(support) for a KDE version for 3 years. Remember, I'm still talking about the LTS release here. Ofcourse, IMO.
I didn't think I was saying or inferring that Ubuntu LTS was of "limited utility". I don't know how successful Canonical has been with it in the market or how the market views it. Obviously, there is someone who has seen it's value( linuxcnc.org ) but one does not a party make. If Ubuntu's LTS is what is getting looked at in the general market, not shipping a KDE supported LTS version for the next release is not going to be good for KDE's marketshare.
You didn't state if the EMC development is using Ubuntu LTS or Kubuntu LTS. If it is Kubuntu LTS than you've got another issue to deal with since there isn't going to be a Kubuntu LTS for this next cycle.
BTW, I'm very pleased that LinuxCNC.org/EMC is moving along and providing a very workable/usable product. I only wish I had a CNC machine so I could try it out. Power tools and building 'things' are my 2nd love.:-)
While there is absolutely zero reason to have any trust whatsoever for Miguel or Novell as a whole, the good news is that we have no need to trust them. If they do something nasty to GTK or any other important parts of Gnome, we'll fork.
While that sounds just fine if you're a single user out banging on the keyboard at home, try telling that to a hospital IT department after they've gone through the hardship of moving everything from Windows to Linux/Gnome. If you want to put a putrid taste toward Linux and OSS in managements mouth, do what you are saying, "we'll fork". I am afraid THIS is one of the tactics Microsoft has plans for. It'll buy them another 5-10 years of the mindset that Windows is a safe bet and nobody'll get fired for using it. IMO
considering that Ubuntu's LTS means security fixes and not application updates, you'd think that they could swing a deal with KDE people or even the Kubuntu people to ship KDE3 and just provide bug fixes as REQUIRED. Missing out on such a large market is not going to be a good thing for KDE. After all, many of the 'big' distro's are gnome based now and losing any more ground could hurt.
That is if Canonical is really moving anywhere with the LTS kits. Three years is a long time to miss out on.
the reasoning is sound but the effect is not what I think is going to be good for the desktop. Microsoft has way too many hooks into Gnome via Mono and too much reliance on Gnome could allow more harm when Microsoft gets more agressive with their patent claims.
FWIW, I recently ran across another instance of my I don't like Gnome. I did an installation of Ubuntu for a noob and went to edit the default menus but found only some items were editable. WTF, is up with that? I really disliked how Microsoft would make various desktop and system objects 'special' and without common access features. Try explaining to a new user why somethings get acted on one way while other, similar objects are acted on differently or can't be acted on. There was also the case where two of use could not find anywhere to change the text color of the desktop icons. All we found on the web was hand editing config files to change the text color and that through me over the top. I installed kubuntu-desktop and was done with it in no time.
There is dumbing down the UI and then there is dumb-shitting the dumbing down. Gnome is doing a great job at making a desktop you can't grow into. What next Miguel, MS-Bob-gnome?
With hope, Canonical can bring kubuntu(KDE v4.0) into the LTS support cycle once it's been shaken down. Even if it's a year into the the LTS release cycle.
the reviewer sounded like a real novice to me so the resulting negative review isn't a surprise. He's probably a Windows nut and the gOS does not make him feel comfortable as he does in Windows. But it will still have a negative impact on the product sales since PC Mag is a noob mag anyways and those are the ones who'd want a $200 PC.
he said his personal lawyer was named "Tony Clifton" so anybody who knows who Andy Kaufman was got clued in that it was indeed a joke. Just google for andy kaufman and tony clifton to put it together for yourself: http://www.google.com/search?q=andy+kaufman+tony+clifton
I don't know the details, just that some app resource(s) ended up above the 512MB of address space OS/2 procs were limted to. And it was Win32c which ran on OS/2.
That's right, Microsoft does not want people running Windows inside of a VM on Linux and so they put it in their EULA(legal?) that you can't run Windows Vista in a VM. Well, except if you purchase the much much more expensive "business" or "ultimate" versions of Vista.
But why would you want MS Vista? WinXP is far far more compatible with any exiting Windows based application one would be REQUIRED to run in their business/government.
I'm wondering if these funky memory addressing issues in Windows were due to it's choice of how to stop OS/2 from running 32bit Windows applications years ago. IIRC, IBM had OS/2 running 32bit Windows apps in a beta of OS/2 about a year before Windows 95 shipped but then one of the Win95 beta's broke this capability. When it was analyzed, it was found that what Microsoft did was changed the application loader so that it pulled a few app resource data structures and plopped them up at around the 1GB address space. OS/2 processes had upto 512MB of address space available to each process and with the Win32 apps poking a number of bits of code up at the high end there was no way for OS/2 to run Win32 apps without IBM changing OS/2's max process address space. IBM eventually did but didn't bother trying to run Windows applications inside of OS/2 any further.
Now here we are with available system memory growing into the multi GB's for standard desktop/laptops and we find that Microsoft Windows applications are running into upper limit issues. Kinda sound like Microsoft could be getting hit with the results from hard-coding/forcing special data structures into places a cleanly designed OS would not run into.
put Windows in a feak'n sandbox/VM where it really belongs and run any 'special needs' applications there instead of giving some Microsoft OEM the profits of tying Windows to the hardware. And anybody who purchases a whole computer to run Windows is of of his/her mind and wasting the companies money. IMO.
yes, let's hope they fix this before the server version comes out. We don't want those Microsoft SQL accesses slowing to a crawl because some admin is playing music on the server console. Maybe on the server, they'll decide to throttle down particular applications like apache, JVM, RealNetwork streamer, and any other non-Microsoft application which might be using the network.
Whatever the reason, it's silly it's happening on multi GHz systems but then again, the Windows OS seems to keep getting slower and slower as the kitchen sink and toilet get embedded into it. IMO.
another nice trick is to use the PBA( Personal Backup Appliance ) to backup an old computer, then install VMware, create a virtual machine for your old computer, have the VM boot the PBA.iso restore CD and restore that old computer into the virtual machine.
I just did this to an old drive/system and now have it backed up in a VM on a raid array which we can also access for any retrieval needs. The old hardware will be donated. It's actually a good way to get Linux on your system now and have Windows running for when you need/want it.
I could see that happening if there was THAT kind of control of the hardware vendors. Does Microsoft have that kind of control over hardware vendors such that they are forced to NOT produce drivers for another Microsoft product( ie, WinXP )?
I know they have control over the OEMs via how much money( marketing $$ ) they pump back to these OEMs but I didn't know they could do likewise to the companies who make video cards, systemboards, etc.
Slashdot Mirror
businesses and the press are discussing and worried about MSFT IP in Linux. Microsoft is getting what they paid for. The fact that it cost them a few hundred million is insigificant. Look, Microsoft has already been willing to spend/lose 10's of billions to just make sure the market in handheld OS's is not dominated by another( namely Palm ). They've been willing to do the same with the game console market.
Like I said, spending a few hundred million on getting businesses and the press to think Linux and OSS are dangerous options legally is like spending a dime and getting Coke. It's noise but still there is satisfaction and the expected result. IMO.
LoB
kinda sounds like SCO and how Microsoft not only paid them directly(licensing UNIX) but also actively went out and obtained millions in investment capital from BayStar and others. SCO was running out of money and then Microsoft helped them out.
Sounds alot like Novell. Microsoft has been good at using its cash like this in the past so it's no surprise. Now Novell goes under will be what's interesting here and who gets the UNIX rights.
LoB
where did you find information on these guys have a 100% success rate until now? Had this not been blogged, who outside of a few thousand WA residents would have known what happened?
What blows me away is that with that kind of history, they didn't have a backup system so the show still went on and sync'ed to SOME music. Obviously, engineering is not something they thought was important when it comes to their computer control software and hardware.
Makes you wonder what kind of things are getting put into other automation systems? Wasn't there a story recently of a Windows computer getting hacked in a cab and the passenger was able to get admin control of the Windows PC with all its web browser, file access, and system control software available/installed? There's the CSX railroad signaling system which was taken offline by a Windows virus... How about the new voting machines? There sure are alot of hacks getting jobs putting a poorly designed OS places it should not be and using poor judgment right through to the application design and installation configurations.
please show the data stating they have not had any previous problems with their software/hardware.
LoB
what would be even funnier is if Bill and his whole family where in The Needle for the event. THAT would put the icing on the cake in really ring in 2008 the right way. As it is, I already like how 2008 is starting off.
LoB
Could it have been that the show was written/scheduled in Microsoft PowerPoint and a corrupt .ppt file caused the OS to crash? ;-)
LoB
that is left to Patch Tuesday events. ;-)
LoB
it's good to hear and I hope you are more correct than my thoughts on what could happen. It also sounds like you've had some help in clarifying things so thanks for that. Thanks for mentioning the Gnome forking issues. I'd read that Miguel said he wanted to Mono-ize Gnome and with more and more Gnome utility and task apps showing up with Gnome, I figured he'd already set some Mono hooks into Gnome. This also clarifies how/why businesses could still feel somewhat confident with using Gnome in spite of the Microsoft/Novell deals.
LoB
I've spent some time in 20 deg and even negative numbers so I know where you're coming from. The other health issues can only make that memory pale in comparison so I understand. Good luck with the work when it's warmer.
hmmm, talking about the need for an insurance against a products bad management decisions and how it could mean fewer developers behind their chosen product just doesn't sound like something you'd want to bring up at a sales meeting if you can help it. I doubt if any sales rep for a proprietary product is going to talk about such insurances and there is a good reason for that. It does not provide or provoke a feeling of confidence in the one who's got to put there neck on the line and make the purchase. Forking may be something that's great for the hacker and general population of users who just go along with what is out there but business is not that way. It'll be look at as a possible costly change in the product down the road and a threat to budgets and reliability too.
If 25% of US businesses had just one required Linux based software product inhouse and Microsoft could pull the IP ripcord on those customers then they'd do it today. IMO, 25% is easily a larger enough margin to spread massive FUD into the business world to keep the rest away from Linux and open source for a decade or so. If you've not seen it, what SCO did by sueing AutoZone and others for just using Linux was enough to keep many businesses away from Linux and OSS. That effect has lost much of its value now that word is finally getting out that SCO had nothing up its sleeves.
What do you think will happen when Microsoft shows even just one valid IP claim and goes to collect fees? One valid one and the threat of dozens, or hundreds more, will be enough to tell the business world that Linux and OSS is not free and not a safe bet. Sorry, but Microsoft is out to kill this threat to their Windows monopoly and everything in their history shows that it is a Windows game or no game.
I would rather see OSS move much much further into business and government offices for competitive reasons and social reasons. I don't want to see it just continue to exist. Microsoft is not a threat to OSS existence, just it's expansion to the point of a marketshare which is large enough to support far far more consulting positions and be a financial benefit to the public and businesses. So telling businesses about how forking OSS project software is good is not a good idea right now. IMO.
LoB
I don't think moving to an ATI card is something you want to do if you are going for stability. Atleast if you are also going to go with ATI's drivers. Maybe the open source radeon driver(xorg.conf => DRIVER=ati) is fine though.
/etc/X11/xorg.conf file to use the ati driver instead of the svga one if it is what the Diamond Speedstar is using? Backup the original just incase the modelines are not compatible( though they should be since the Diamond is not that special and the monitor is the same ). IE, there's no need to wait to upgrade the card if it'll get you the higher resolution you want now. It can also be easier on the head to limit what is changing when large software updates are going to happen. There's enough to worry about in a major update to go and throw in a hardware change too.
You do know that you could very well just swap the video cards at any point after changing the
LoB
Maybe I didn't say it clearly, the reason they should make some kind of deal is because Ubuntu is a very popular distro and has a supported KDE version. If LTS support is a key point in the decision process for many businesses/users/etc picking Ubuntu over others, not having a KDE version for the next 3 years is going to lose KDE many customers/users.
but hey, if they do what they do for the fun of it and don't care how many use their product(s), go ahead and don't provide security and major bug fixes for the latest stable release and let Ubuntu/Gnome customer base grow. Let the Ubuntu/KDE customer base shrink or stagnate for 3 or more years.
Do you see my point now?
"gnome based".... You don't understand what THAT ment in the context of the writing? Or maybe you don't understand that while it can be very easy to install and setup KDE on standard Ubuntu and maybe even SuSe, RedHat, etc, it is far easier to NOT do it. And doing so might not get you support from the company you originally got the distro from if that is important to you. You know we are talking about a support issue here( LTS - Long Term Support ). The fact that a Gnu/Linux distro defaults to a Gnome desktop manager means it is "gnome based" as far as the desktop, user interface, and default application list is concerned. That means alot IMO and there is going to be a threat brought against all users of Gnome based distros in the near future if Microsoft keeps on its current course if IP threats. But that's another story. Yes it's easy to install another desktop and I've done it many times but that has little to do with Ubuntu/Canonical skipping LTS(support) for a KDE version for 3 years. Remember, I'm still talking about the LTS release here. Ofcourse, IMO.
LoB
I didn't think I was saying or inferring that Ubuntu LTS was of "limited utility". I don't know how successful Canonical has been with it in the market or how the market views it. Obviously, there is someone who has seen it's value( linuxcnc.org ) but one does not a party make. If Ubuntu's LTS is what is getting looked at in the general market, not shipping a KDE supported LTS version for the next release is not going to be good for KDE's marketshare.
:-)
You didn't state if the EMC development is using Ubuntu LTS or Kubuntu LTS. If it is Kubuntu LTS than you've got another issue to deal with since there isn't going to be a Kubuntu LTS for this next cycle.
BTW, I'm very pleased that LinuxCNC.org/EMC is moving along and providing a very workable/usable product. I only wish I had a CNC machine so I could try it out. Power tools and building 'things' are my 2nd love.
LoB
While there is absolutely zero reason to have any trust whatsoever for Miguel or Novell as a whole, the good news is that we have no need to trust them. If they do something nasty to GTK or any other important parts of Gnome, we'll fork.
While that sounds just fine if you're a single user out banging on the keyboard at home, try telling that to a hospital IT department after they've gone through the hardship of moving everything from Windows to Linux/Gnome. If you want to put a putrid taste toward Linux and OSS in managements mouth, do what you are saying, "we'll fork". I am afraid THIS is one of the tactics Microsoft has plans for. It'll buy them another 5-10 years of the mindset that Windows is a safe bet and nobody'll get fired for using it. IMO
LoB
the AC who posted that crap is obviously not a member of the tribe and with an attitude like that, they can stay away.
LoB
considering that Ubuntu's LTS means security fixes and not application updates, you'd think that they could swing a deal with KDE people or even the Kubuntu people to ship KDE3 and just provide bug fixes as REQUIRED. Missing out on such a large market is not going to be a good thing for KDE. After all, many of the 'big' distro's are gnome based now and losing any more ground could hurt.
That is if Canonical is really moving anywhere with the LTS kits. Three years is a long time to miss out on.
LoB
the reasoning is sound but the effect is not what I think is going to be good for the desktop. Microsoft has way too many hooks into Gnome via Mono and too much reliance on Gnome could allow more harm when Microsoft gets more agressive with their patent claims.
FWIW, I recently ran across another instance of my I don't like Gnome. I did an installation of Ubuntu for a noob and went to edit the default menus but found only some items were editable. WTF, is up with that? I really disliked how Microsoft would make various desktop and system objects 'special' and without common access features. Try explaining to a new user why somethings get acted on one way while other, similar objects are acted on differently or can't be acted on. There was also the case where two of use could not find anywhere to change the text color of the desktop icons. All we found on the web was hand editing config files to change the text color and that through me over the top. I installed kubuntu-desktop and was done with it in no time.
There is dumbing down the UI and then there is dumb-shitting the dumbing down. Gnome is doing a great job at making a desktop you can't grow into. What next Miguel, MS-Bob-gnome?
With hope, Canonical can bring kubuntu(KDE v4.0) into the LTS support cycle once it's been shaken down. Even if it's a year into the the LTS release cycle.
LoB
the reviewer sounded like a real novice to me so the resulting negative review isn't a surprise. He's probably a Windows nut and the gOS does not make him feel comfortable as he does in Windows. But it will still have a negative impact on the product sales since PC Mag is a noob mag anyways and those are the ones who'd want a $200 PC.
LoB
he said his personal lawyer was named "Tony Clifton" so anybody who knows who Andy Kaufman was got clued in that it was indeed a joke. Just google for andy kaufman and tony clifton to put it together for yourself:
http://www.google.com/search?q=andy+kaufman+tony+clifton
FSJ does it again. LoL
LoB
I don't know the details, just that some app resource(s) ended up above the 512MB of address space OS/2 procs were limted to. And it was Win32c which ran on OS/2.
LoB
That's right, Microsoft does not want people running Windows inside of a VM on Linux and so they put it in their EULA(legal?) that you can't run Windows Vista in a VM. Well, except if you purchase the much much more expensive "business" or "ultimate" versions of Vista.
But why would you want MS Vista? WinXP is far far more compatible with any exiting Windows based application one would be REQUIRED to run in their business/government.
LoB
I'm wondering if these funky memory addressing issues in Windows were due to it's choice of how to stop OS/2 from running 32bit Windows applications years ago. IIRC, IBM had OS/2 running 32bit Windows apps in a beta of OS/2 about a year before Windows 95 shipped but then one of the Win95 beta's broke this capability. When it was analyzed, it was found that what Microsoft did was changed the application loader so that it pulled a few app resource data structures and plopped them up at around the 1GB address space. OS/2 processes had upto 512MB of address space available to each process and with the Win32 apps poking a number of bits of code up at the high end there was no way for OS/2 to run Win32 apps without IBM changing OS/2's max process address space. IBM eventually did but didn't bother trying to run Windows applications inside of OS/2 any further.
Now here we are with available system memory growing into the multi GB's for standard desktop/laptops and we find that Microsoft Windows applications are running into upper limit issues. Kinda sound like Microsoft could be getting hit with the results from hard-coding/forcing special data structures into places a cleanly designed OS would not run into.
Or not.
LoB
put Windows in a feak'n sandbox/VM where it really belongs and run any 'special needs' applications there instead of giving some Microsoft OEM the profits of tying Windows to the hardware. And anybody who purchases a whole computer to run Windows is of of his/her mind and wasting the companies money. IMO.
LoB
yes, let's hope they fix this before the server version comes out. We don't want those Microsoft SQL accesses slowing to a crawl because some admin is playing music on the server console. Maybe on the server, they'll decide to throttle down particular applications like apache, JVM, RealNetwork streamer, and any other non-Microsoft application which might be using the network.
Whatever the reason, it's silly it's happening on multi GHz systems but then again, the Windows OS seems to keep getting slower and slower as the kitchen sink and toilet get embedded into it. IMO.
LoB
another nice trick is to use the PBA( Personal Backup Appliance ) to backup an old computer, then install VMware, create a virtual machine for your old computer, have the VM boot the PBA.iso restore CD and restore that old computer into the virtual machine.
I just did this to an old drive/system and now have it backed up in a VM on a raid array which we can also access for any retrieval needs. The old hardware will be donated. It's actually a good way to get Linux on your system now and have Windows running for when you need/want it.
LoB
I could see that happening if there was THAT kind of control of the hardware vendors. Does Microsoft have that kind of control over hardware vendors such that they are forced to NOT produce drivers for another Microsoft product( ie, WinXP )?
I know they have control over the OEMs via how much money( marketing $$ ) they pump back to these OEMs but I didn't know they could do likewise to the companies who make video cards, systemboards, etc.
Good point if that is the case.
LoB