NOT TO MENTION the US Supreme Court seriously changed the rules in determining "prior art" and "obviousness". Previously the determination was made narrowly about the patent technology being claimed. What the court did was do away with that narrow examination and made other works related to the patent even if they are in other fields come into question as to whether someone could obviously decide that piece Y should follow piece X.
This is an incredibly important change that few people have even considered in this whole affair. Also, it is clear that any prior patents can now be challenged based on these changes.
This means that prior art and obviousness will come into play in software patents in a HUGE HUGE HUGE way.
No, the real question is whether Microsoft will get away with extorting patents out of others with these indefensible patent lies.
Microsoft has been stealing IP, and now some very important cases are over and they find themselves on the loosing end of the stick. They still need to steal the patents to keep up since they are not innovative themselves. What they were doing is outright stealing patents and hoping they'd be able to win in court.
Patents cross-licensing are like a web that criss-crosses the globe. Everyone does it. Open source is the exception. The initiative that Novell co-founded with IBM and others is designed to allow patent exchange and to help protect those participating from patent lawsuits. Microsoft is one of the boys that aren't allowed to play the game. Microsoft is the shunned rich kid bully being beat up by a group of Boston Southies. They aren't going to get into the gang no matter how much they threaten the Southies with their money. They are just going to get beat up more.
This initiative was somewhat thwarted by the agreement of Novell and Microsoft. It effectively gave them a lot of patents without having to even give back to the open source community. This isn't to say that they were taking the open source patents from Novell; it is that they were trying to divide and conquer.
So, this group of companies holds patents that Microsoft wants and needs to stay in the game. The GPL v3 doesn't prohibit them from entering into such an agreement, it just makes impossible to indemnify ONLY a subset of the open source arena.
Microsoft wants the patents because they've been loosing in court when they outright steal them. They are not telling anyone what the violations are because they are like the rich kid who says "it's my chessboard so I am the only one that can know which moves are legal. If you break a rule you loose the game."
Microsoft is like a big Oil company that says that if you use the gasoline of one of its competitors you could be sued, and in fact, anyone, including the manufacturer of the cars, can be sued. They say this because the competing Oil companies may have used some of their IP when they refine gasoline. What they are not telling anyone is which portion of the refinery process is in question and are not providing a way to allow the competing oil companies to change their refinery process or even to challenge that IP they claim is violated.
Bringing that down to real world terms shows how ridiculous their claim is. You are a thief, you have stolen from them, but they won't tell you what you stole nor give you a chance to correct yourself rather than continue to perform that alleged theft.
Someone suggested a few days ago that everyone that is an open source developer send a certified letter to Microsoft demanding to know exactly which IP was in violation. If Microsoft disregards the letters then they provide a good affirmative defense. If Microsoft does respond then we'll know exactly what to do to stop, or we can challenge the claims. Either way Microsoft is overwhelmed with paperwork.
If you decide to send the certified letter you should set a date by which they must respond to you. That will ensure that you tried, you gave them a reasonable amount of time, and they did not provide you with a way to resolve the issue.
They don't value your skills as much as they value theirs. That's what life is all about. We don't get to learn all about all things and only some about some things. We still don't call them idiots. I can only wonder about someone that doesn't know much about computers reading what is being writing and how they feel about that depiction of them. I'll bet they think it is pretty idiotic. Would they go out and write something up accusing these people of being an idiot even if it were so? No because they know what it means to open their mouths and become one.
When anyone can do half of what those so called idiots do day in and day out (outside of the computing world) then come back and call them idiots. If anyone can do that well, we know they are either superman, an Einstein a millions times over, or are some kind of renaissance man that has abilities beyond all things human. They must be an alien, or they are lying to themselves and everyone else.
Let's be real here. Do you write letters with your car? Do you design homes with your car? Do you create complex financial analysis with your car? Do you send mail through your car?
The car is pretty much just general use. It is very generic. Does one thing.
Most are confusing the generic use of a car with the infinite use of a computer. They are very different. There are times when you would compare them such as in repair and set up. But you wouldn't in general use. It is not an apt analogy.
Your granny would no more try to fix her car nor know about mechanics than she would be trying to fix her computer or know about the electronics of it. She would not be trying to resolve complex programming issues either.
The computer is what it is.
I guess it is time for most of these people claiming others to be idiots to start making their own refrigerators, their own cathode ray tubes, their own light bulbs, their own power generators. Rather than do that just admit others have skills you don't have and that you look pretty unenlightened to them when it comes to comparing your knowledge to their skills.
Let's get real. Stop attacking people. Stop saying Linux fails here and there. How about you start working toward solving the deficiencies in each OS so that everyone can move on. Let's get past this vendor lock in and get an OS out there that is not dependent on the whims of one vendor.
You can play mp3s in Windows without any added codecs or software. This is true, but Microsoft lost a recent lawsuit over the inclusion of the technology that allowed you to do that.
You COULD NEVER just click on an encrypted commercial movie in Windows and have it run out of the box. You had to install the proper video drivers and then you had to install a commercial codec that you purchased or received as part of an OEM deal. You never were able to play an encrypted movie without doing that.
Once you install the two codecs in question you can do the same thing under Linux as you are doing with Windows.
Just stop giving people uninformed information. If you don't know what is happening you shouldn't be volunteering your point of view based on that lack of knowledge.
You NEED to purchase a commercial codec to play encrypted DVDs under Windows and you need to do the same under Linux. You need not pay for mp3 support because Microsoft provided that but they did so at the expense of other companies and got sued for it.
If you didn't install it then someone installed it for you. That's the same thing that would happen in Linux. If the Linux user didn't install it someone could do it for them.
Your granny can use Linux very well. Your granny would not be making the choices you make nor would she be looking at the problems from your perspective. No more would your granny be complaining about installation or uninstalling applications than she would be picking through the registry or cleaning crap viruses and adware from her computer.
You would be doing it for her.
When she asks you about mp3 files you would have to tell her that Microsoft was recently sued and lost the suit regarding MP3 support in Windows and that it cost them a very considerable sum of money. You would also have to tell her that the Linux community has left that out to maintain legality. You would also be able to offer her appropriate mp3 support at any time if you would simply install the codec for her.
Your grand mother would use the computer as she always has. She'd be reading the web, chatting with friends, she'd be sending her mail and play POGO bingo with them. If your grand mother does more and would actually be trying these things that you complain of she'd be an exception and rare person for her age as most people her age didn't have access to computers nor the knowledge necessary to do those things back then.
And let's hope you are talking about an 80 year old granny because I have women, and men, in their middle to late 70s in my store all the time doing all sorts of things you couldn't imagine and asking questions you couldn't answer off the top of your head. Most are about Windows and most are like opening a pandora's box.
Besides, what is so hard about opening synaptic, hitting the search button, typing in the name of the program and then clicking to add or remove then hitting apply? It isn't that much different and your granny isn't a trained seal so she can think and reason through these things. 15 years ago she may have viewed any attempt to learn a computer something only computer wizards did. Today she uses them without batting an eye and she has a considerable amount of time invested in learning computers. Every software manufacturer of say "a word processor" under Windows will tell you it is just a matter of adjusting to the way they do it. If you know one you can adjust and use another. The same goes for a GUI. If you know the concepts behind one you can learn another.
What you are arguing about is that you care to have your granny ignorant and unwilling to learn and change so you can make a point.
You have a valid point. It isn't as 1,2,3 easy as it sometimes is under Windows but Linux generally is easier in many other ways and sometimes just step 4 or 5 more to get the same job done. That's not a reason to put Linux down. There's a big difference between performing one or 2 more steps in getting something installed/uninstalled then there used to be in just going from one app to another. What it means is that Linux is a grown up and so is your Granny. Stop treating both of them as children.
The lack of an installer of the pre-compiled binaries under Firefox is the fault of Mozilla. A simple script that looks at your environment and the updates the relevant files would suffice.
But no where is it required to be compile from source--if you know where the pre-compiled binaries go just copy them. Also, you are talking about using a version of Ubuntu that is several releases old. Two other MAJOR versions of Ubuntu have been released since the version you are talking about.
The need to compile programs under Linux is a side effect of the DISTRO that you choose. You choose Gentoo then you will mostly likely compile. If you choose Debian you may or may not. If you choose Ubuntu the likelihood is very slim that you'll ever compile anything.
Linux is/was consider a geeky platform because the ZEALOT teenagers (and others that refused to grow past their teenage years) attacked anyone who demanded maturity from the product. The product was and is capable of that maturity. Look at Ubuntu.
So, clearly those two things you say about Linux are no longer true and you would do us all a favor by not spreading those untruths any longer.
The share of the market owned by Linux is small compared to Windows. That is due to several factors, the least of which is NOT their monopolistic predatory practices.
1) Monopolistic Predatory practices of the major OS vendor. This got them convicted of criminal acts.
2) Proprietary closed source gaming API. DirectX is one of the major reasons people do not use Linux. If gaming were to come to the Linux platform you'd see otherwise. If gaming manufacturers got smart and understood that OpenGL is as good if not better than DirectX they'd develop for it, but since Microsoft discontinued OpenGL in Windows it is hard to build up any incentive.
3) People aren't as dissatisfied (with Microsoft & Windows) only because they don't know what the people in the blogs, web pages, forums, etc know. As this knowledge is spread, and we all should be telling everyone we meet, that will change.
4) Linux market share does give it a sizable chunk of users. This ain't chump change. To say that the market share is so dismal is wrong only because you compare it to the ONLY other real player. Yes, the Mac OSX is a nice OS but Linux has a greater market share than it has.
5) It has only been about a year since the likes of Ubuntu came into being and that is a major change in the trend for Linux. That will begin to grow. In fact, it is estimated that by the end of 2008 the impact of Linux on the desktop will be double what it has been for all prior years. That's nothing to shake a stick at.
There are good reasons and bad reasons for all things. Yes, Linux needs some important changes still, such as OFFLINE UNIVERSAL DISTRO INDEPENDENT INSTALLERS. The very competition amongst Distros that fuels competitive growth is also the very thing that kills any universal aspects.
One major hurdle (drivers) has been overcome and is mostly an insignificant issue. There certainly are more drivers for Linux for modern and older hardware than there are for Vista. Every day I visit hardware manufacturer sites looking for drivers and see they offer Linux support. I'm truly amazed. No, not every one but a lot have jumped on the band wagon. If the manufacturer doesn't offer them then there are plenty of people that make them for Linux for free. But the important ones, the Video card manufacturers are well on board and that's significant.
I have people come into my store daily that get an eye full of what Linux is and EVERY SINGLE ONE want it on their machine. They hesitate only because they already have Windows installed. If they really had a choice at the time of purchase then we'd see significantly greater numbers using Linux. If manufacturers of those pre-fab machines took Linux to heart we'd see some rather major market share growth.
Bottom line--it isn't because Linux is not capable of doing what the consumer wants. In fact, it can with the exception of mainly a lack of support for gaming. That's the game manufacturer's fault for not writing to the non-closed non-proprietary gaming API. As far as why there's a smaller market share, well, that's many fold not the least of which is due to Microsoft's criminal monopolistic predatory practices over the past years. The fact that the average consumer never hears about all the really nasty things Microsoft has done is one main reason. The reason people on the forums, web blogs, etc feel the way they do about Microsoft is because they know the hard cold facts about what they have done to harm the consumer and what they continue to do to harm the consumer.
If Microsoft had not done the warm and cozy thing of making the world standardized and helped to advance computing in the lives of everyone in the world then some other product(s) would have done that. The wealth that was generated would most likely been spread over a greater number of people and helped the economy in a greater way. We wouldn't have a monopolistic predator threatening their competitors and their competitor's customers for using the competition.
This is probably them fulfilling their obligation for the code they allowed the NSA to incorporate into XP and Vista.
Microsoft can take their ideas and shove them up their asses. What do you think we want Microsoft making these decisions and bringing up these ideas. It is none of their freaking business nor anyone else's if I choose to use the internet.
These people are getting freaking spooky. We really need to shut them down and fast. Stop frigging buying Microsoft products. Protect your security and your privacy by using Linux.
The problem with more Service Packs for XP is that they probably will be modifying the underlying OS to program more spying capabilities into it.
See, XP is Vista's MAJOR competitor. Linux is very close. But as long as people can and will stay with XP modifying it to make it more pirate proof is going to be a priority. Even if this is a total violation of our privacy. Their checks against privacy are laudible when you don't spy on the customer and you tell the customer in advance you are doing it and you let them agree to it first and give them a choice to decline. The way Vista is set up is that it is the equivalent of having a Walmart employee knock on your door one Sunday morning wanting to inspect your home to determine if all the goods you have that are from Walmart have be purchased legitimately. Just because they are doing it with a hidden camera (or rather hidden software) makes it no less an infringement. It is like having an agreement that you will allow Walmart to include a device in your home that tests all goods to determine if they have been purchased legitimately without the need to have an employee visit.
It is a violation of privacy.
So, no matter how you look at it SP2 brought more spying capabilities and SP3 will bring many more because Microsoft views it as a threat to their new product and all the DRM crap they programmed into it. If they can add some of that to XP via SP3 they'll do it, period.
People care about open source when they know about it. I can attest to that every day, as every day I show Ubuntu Linux and explain what it is to someone every day. They can be old and retired, young and just looking for inexpensive, or middle-aged and worried about the economy and Microsoft's monopoly. All seem to like it when they know about it. I've had no one say, "screw that"! They all want to know how to get it and what they can do with it.
That's huge for Linux because when the average person sees it and likes it and want to use it we have a the potential to change the whole landscape.
Microsoft became what it is today, at least in part, due to guys like me selling it to customers. Not selling them the product, selling them on the idea. That same "us" can undo what we've so wrongly done with Microsoft--sold it without realizing how Microsoft would abuse it. Now we can right that wrong. It only takes the effort of us that want to see change to help make that change.
The premise he puts forth about a lack of exchange and hence an issue with the market is based on a false assumption. That assumption is that nothing gets exchanged when you give something away for free.
There is an exchange and you get value in return. Not every exchange has to have an equal value or a value for more than you put into it.
What he fails is in the idea that the exchange of value has to be immediate. For instance, those programmers giving away their code for free gets to learn more from what is returned back to it. H/She gets to see the flaws, and how other programmers might have addressed the same or similar issue. He also fails to see that the exchange comes in the form of other services. For instance, companies like Red Hat, Novell, etc were making money off the products those programmers are producing. Some of that is in the form of support dollars, support contracts, etc.
These companies can't have a valuation in the markets if they are not producing something to generate income to pay those programmers.
If there was a qualifying factor that you must get something immediately in return of greater value then the XBox and XBox 360 would be communistic approaches to marketing. They are loosing money in order to gain market share.
There's a false presumption that all open source code is developed in the basements of some obese unclean unshaven juvenile-minded 42 year old virgin. This isn't the case. Businesses such as IBM make contributions, produce products and income off Open Source. Companies such as some of the major car manufacturers make money by saving dollars on large investments in computers by using Open Source. To this end they produce a product (a car/truck/whatever) at a cheaper cost. It also provides jobs to those that support those systems in house. NASA contributes, our US Military and other sectors of our government use Linux.
So it is very disingenuous to say that no value is exchanged. That programmer sitting at home learning from the mistakes he makes that others correct that he learns from gives him the potential to build better products and to make money off the support of that product or to take the learned skills (not the code) to his regular job.
There is no loss to jobs from Open Source. There are significantly greater lost jobs in the US due to out-sourcing to other countries.
Another false presumption on his part is that *all* governments of all nations are designed like the USA. This is not true. There are democratic countries that have very successful economies that are not purely capitalist. There are plenty of jobs for people in those countries and plenty that have great opportunities that they may never have had if they'd never had the chance to look at the source code for an open source project.
The benefits of Open Source significantly, by massively huge margins, outweigh any potential loss of a job due to free competing with commercial in any given market. In fact, that very alleged conflict creates a stronger free and commercial market.
This is just more Microsoft diatribe from a potential paid blogger (even if he did participate in some open forum). Frankly his participation in that forum has direct correlation to free vs. commercial markets. His ideas could be sold as a think tank response but instead he puts it out there for free. He's a Marxist for doing that. He's giving away free ideas which conflicts with the commercial markets governed by the commercial organizations that make money postulating these very things to the corporate world.
I don't perceive the issue of loss impacting Mircrosoft. It is their aberrant behavior that troubles me the most.
Having watched Ballmer and Gates over the past few years (actually Gates from the beginning and Ballmer once his head stopped shinning in my eyes) I have had (and have had it before and it turned out successful) that Ballmer has to go.
He's not extremely bright and he doesn't compose himself as a man you can trust. Gates either for that matter. He and Ballmer have managed to stay together through most of this so they are like peas in a pod, whereas Paul Allen has essentially done everything he can to divest himself of Microsoft and those two.
The attitude that starts at the top filters down to the rest of the executives and farther down to even the "day in and day out" managers. If the things filtering down were absolute positives then we'd be looking at a company willing and able to compete with innovation. Instead we have a company that has been resting on it's laurels and has been effectively saying: you can't compete with us because if you do we'll sue your customers.
That is mostly irrelevant, at least it would be to me as a CS student (or student of the IT field) because as a student I would be essentially locked into Microsoft products. So, the only thing that would be relevant to me would be whether some other OS is up and coming to the point of providing me an alternative to the lock in I'm experiencing, or whether Microsoft is dying.
Largely the numbers of initial sales of a new OS in the early months are not relevant due to the fact that they probably are being intentionally quoted inaccurately in order to artificially inflate their value.
You should be more interested in the numbers presented by other organizations, the ones that attempt to show the real numbers. Certainly I would not be impressed by just someone's belief that he should congratulate Microsoft because he doesn't feel like holding their feet to the fire like everyone else.
What I care about is being called a thief for using gasoline purchased from another company because that company uses the same or similar process to refine the gasoline.
Effectively that's what Microsoft is doing. They are calling me a thief for using Linux on my computer because Linux may have used some of the same processes as Microsoft did. By the way, those same processes were probably copied by Microsoft some years ago (or as recent court rulings have been showing--stolen). Now they are trying to extort those companies they are accusing into giving them IP in exchange, which, by the way, will only indemnify the customers of the company they entered into the IP cross license. So they can just pick up the bat again and swing at another.
Think about this in real life terms. The car uses gasoline (the computer an operating system) so the car is just a pile of metal and plastic without gasoline (computer as well without an OS). So, some dominant Oil company (OS vendor) then decides to call *everyone* that doesn't use their gasoline a thief because you are using the gasoline (for computers an operating system) from another company because that other company may have copied some elements of the refinery process (in the OS some of it's IP), then tries to extort all major companies that use the cars (computers) into giving them some of their profits and some other valuable property (in computers other IP developed by the company). Then they won't even tell you what part of the refinery process was copied so the major companies can determine if there really is a fault or to let the other gas companies change their refinery process to not copy.
Microsoft is a self-destructive organization. What I mean is that their whole company persona is one of negativity and threats against their users, and those that don't use them. Only one type of company threatens those that don't use their product--a self-destructive one. It would be like the gas companies calling you thieves because you use the gasoline of another company that maybe copied your process for processing gasoline (which by the way you probably copied years ago). With the new rules for determining prior art for patents much of what Microsoft says is essentially toothless, but it does damage--it harms the reputation of those involved in something great--Linux.
Microsoft is where it is because of some rather unsavory tactics and now they are using those same deceptive practices to make it seem like their product is more successful than it is. As well, they are trying to create a fervor in those that might be looking at others and want to be like them. They are creating an artificial fervor in order to create a "I want to be like the Joneses".
In reality what should be happening is that people should be using the products that protect their privacy, products don't spy on them; and never will. This invasion of privacy, the threats against consumers, the lies about their success, and the constant theft of IP from other organizations is just a bit too much, and if the average consumer understood what was happening they would not be buying Microsoft products.
With their veiled threats against Linux users, which is being done to extort companies into cross licensing of IP is nothing more than them trying to steal their IP without outright stealing it and then ending up in court. They are threatening the community to force certain companies that would never cross license with Microsoft into giving up their IP--and in reality that's just extortion and an attempt to get the IP they normally would have just stolen and fought about in court. But since they loose so many cases they had to change their tactics. As well, since the new Supreme Court ruling on what is included in how to determine "prior art" Microsoft is about as desperate as one would guess. They are not an innovative company, they just don't innovate.
This is a very self-destructive pattern for them...
And to hear a Microsoft cronnie claiming that 2007 is the year of the death of Open Source is just pathetic. That individual would have been dumped by a regular company but instead he's paraded about inside Microsoft as some master tactician.
2007/2008 will show growth in Linux and Open Source equal to or better than all prior years of its growth. He can take that to the bank.
Good try, but I didn't compare it to murder. I compared it to the need of the victim to go through the proper authorities instead of taking the law into their own hands. You are reading too much into that.
I guess I could have said that if you stole trade secrets it would be up to me to work with the authorities to get the police or other governmental investigative agencies to look at my case.
The WGA/WGN utilities were not originally given as an option because as they were then (and they are now) they are hidden in critical updates. As well, individuals have no idea what WGA/WGN really entail. Activation is fine as it simply tells them that this machine is now good to go and that it was purchased. WGN constantly monitors even legitimate users machines. They run all the time and report back to Microsoft regularly.
Microsoft was sued in Washington State (where they are headquartered) and in California (and I believe a couple others) for spyware activity. That is how those utilities were classified. The original version did not inform the user that the software was being installed and did not ask for an OK. Microsoft tried to hide this by stating that it should be acceptable for the US customers to accept this because the Asian continent customers accepted it. After the lawsuits they removed it from their download site for some time but it is back now. And yes it does prompt the user and the user can opt out, but when they do the information is sent to Microsoft anyway, including personally identifiable information such as the MAC address of the network component and the IP and date/time of the information. This directly identifies the user.
Tho you can turn it off and choose not to install it Microsoft still flags their update site in a way that warns you that you have not installed all critical updates. This alarms people into thinking that their machine is insecure so many do it out of ignorance to what that message actually means.
The WGN is the tool that annoys you. The WGA tool is for activation through their website used to check the validity of your key. It doesn't monitor your system on a daily basis (as the original WGN tool did). Although I have an issue with that I accept it.
It is estimated that 80% of those copies Microsoft considered to be invalid (20% of all PCs) actually were indeed valid. Especially in the US where machines rarely are sold without a valid install. If you build your own or have someone custom build a unit for you that's another story.
Now, it doesn't really matter if they feel they have the right to monitor your computer, to look at your content, to report back to them what you have and what they believe is valid or not. It still is the same idea of them spying on you with a hidden camera. The only reason people would actively agree to allow that software installed is because they believe it causes no harm to them (but they forget others feel it does cause harm to them), or they just don't know what is really happening with the WGA/WGN tools. When you bring to light that installing hidden software on your computer without fully explaining what is happening (and truly giving customers an opt out without sending any information at all back to their servers), you are doing the equivalent of making it permissible to having say, as an example "a walmart employee knock on your door requesting to regularly inspect your home (because your computer is an extension of your home) in order to determine if any of the goods you have in your home are stolen from their store, due to the fact that you are a regular customer at their store)." The WGA is like having them inspect your bag as you leave the store, but the WGN is like having walmart come to your door repeatedly to inspect your home.
Now, no person would even allow the police to do that unless they had a warrant issued by the court and signed by a Judge. No one would allow the police to hide a camera in their home for the purpose of monitoring you, even if they would
These numbers are being disputed because it is impossible that these sales are to a consumer to be used by that consumer--many don't consider it a sale unless it is going into the hands of the actual consumer of the goods.
Your analogy is wrong. Those distributed licenses are more like consignments than they are sales. When a store gets computers on consignment to sell they can sell those to customers and the ones they can't sell generally go back to the company that sold them to you on consignment. I'm sure the rules are somewhat different for each company offering consignment sales.
In reality it is like the local baker that makes bread for various stores in town. The baker only gets paid for the bread that is sold to a customer. Those that go old and stale are given back to the baker or tossed by the baker and do not constitute a sale.
So, yes, they are saying that the license did exchange hands from Microsoft to another entity but they did not make it into the hands of the actual consumer for their use. That's a big difference. This is why people get upset at companies such as Microsoft that exaggerate these claims. It is that it makes others feel there's a greater success there then there is. It is an attempt at generating a fever in order to convince others to buy what think everyone else is buying.
The reality of it is that the hardware manufacturers are not experiencing increased sales and in fact, some leading hardware indicators are that sales are actually down. So, there's a lot of contradictory information here. Some from Microsoft which is now becoming the most untrustworthy company in the world, and the others from organizations that generally track these sales of hardware and software. The numbers that Microsoft has been touting are not matching up to the other leading indicators. For this reason people are trying to figure out why there are disparities. Without honest forthcoming numbers it'll take longer to see what actually happened. What Microsoft is doing is as bad as them sponsoring their own Polls and studies. We all know that those can't be trusted. It is only from independent 3rd parties that we can have some faith in the numbers.
So people are just saying that it is impossible that 40 million copies have been sold and are in the hands of the consumer that is actually going to use them (especially when you don't also state that the market is 2 times the size it was to the market Microsoft compared it to). The ratio of "sold vs. customers" is about the same or lower than XP sales. These Microsoft numbers were debunked about a month or so ago by very reputable groups, and even though this is the case Microsoft keep touting them as facts. They are facts, they are just misleading because all the picture hasn't been presented.
I'd estimate world-wide that there are some 50 million Linux users, probably more. Now that the update to Ubuntu is out I'd estimate a significantly greater number in the next year as Ubuntu is really a great desktop and it is a powerful desktop tool. You can do just about anything you want with it except play certain games or run Windows software. It is well structured, clean, well maintained, and once installed is good enough even for your granny to use.
As far as drivers go: the availability of drivers for old and new hardware is better than those available to Windows Vista users, even proprietary drivers. In Ubuntu you can even get proprietary drivers installed with a couple clicks of a mouse whereas with Windows you have to go to the website of the hardware manufacturer and download then install them.
This isn't to say that it is bad that you have to do that. It is to say that Ubuntu's implementation is quite nice and is very accessible to even the average user.
As far as things like playing DVDs goes even under Windows you have to purchase a commercial package that has the necessary CODEC to play back encrypted movies and then you have to install it.
I own a computer store where I do installs, upgrades, repairs, custom builds, etc. On my main machine, which people see day in and day out as they enter my store is a wide screen high def 24" LCD flatscreen. On that machine I have Ubuntu linux with Beryl. Every customer that comes into the store gets a little treat of eye candy and then are told that Ubuntu is free and so is all the software installed on the computer.
I also have an Microsoft Action Pack Subscription. I need XP for certain games. In the subscription is a license for 10 xp pro 64 bit, 10 xp pro 32 bit, and 10 Vista business. Now the Vista business licenses are upgrades so I'm expected to upgrade each of those XP boxes. The reality of it is this. It isn't going to happen. I'm not going to upgrade those XP boxes any time soon and most of my 20+ computers are going to stick with the OS they were sold with unless I need to change them and in that case they'll get Ubuntu installed on them.
I upgraded a single computer with Vista only because I need to know about how to resolve issues with Vista when a customer brings their machine into the store. I also need to know how everything is organized. Other than that I have no need for those Vista licenses and they'll probably remain unused until the subscription expires--which will be in 6 months or so.
Microsoft was so cheap they couldn't even give me the Ultimate version in the action pack subscription unless I was willing to dish out 50% more for the actual subscription cost to upgrade. Then when the subscription expires I loose that money as well.
Of the machines that come into my store I have only seen a total of 3 with Vista in the first 100 days. I have had customers ask me about Vista and I explain what the WGN and WGA facilities are and how it equates to spying on them and then I make sure they understand the analogy of "walmart employees knocking on your door to search your home for paid for goods that you purchased at their store since you may be a regular customer". When they understand that analogy that's usually curtains for any Vista sale. I then tell them about how they drafted the hardware manufacturers into implementing this DRM technology and how the DRM is a locking mechanism to keep them from buying or investing in other systems. I give them the example of Apple's iPod and the music bought through iTunes. When they understand that they understand I'm trying to protect them and their privacy.
I assure them that Linux is the only product that will forever ensure their privacy and will never be used as a tool to lock them into a specific vendor.
Microsoft has been acting up. They've been a bad fat bully and people are really starting to despise them. You don't reward a fat bully by giving them candy and patting them on the back. You take out the strap and you don't spare the whip.
Microsoft knows they can just ignore any attempt at correction because they have certain politicians in their back pocket. They also know that they are a monopoly and no one can challege them in any short period of time. But sooner or later all these things are going to backfire and they are going to run out of new ways of getting around the laws. Sooner or later alternatives such as the Mac or Linux will pick up steam and Microsoft won't be able to stop the ball from rolling.
When the courts force Microsoft to disclose which IP is in question then we'll have that 800 pound chimpanzee off our backs and we can move on so that regular people can use Linux to do those things they want to do.
And frankly the guy that stated that Linux does nothing is so full of shit. When I read that I was like: what planet does this guy come from? What have they been feeding him there? He has no clue where Linux is and he's still opening his mouth. I wonder if he understands the difference between a copyright and a patent.
Their numbers are like their FUD about IP violations in Linux. Neither the Linux FUD nor these numbers can be trusted. After the almost blatant lies about the Linux FUD I have no trust whatsoever in Microsoft.
Listen, anyone that tells you that:
1) you are guilty of a crime.
2) you have stolen from me.
3) you belong in jail.
Then refuses to tell me what crime specifically I committed, what I stole, and how long I belong in jail, is so full of shit. You can't trust those people and they need to be seen as a shunned entity. Until they come forward and tell us what has been done wrong, specifying which IP (patents) have been violated then as far as the industry is concerned there is no IP violation and no wrongdoing. This is an extortion bid and they are playing off on the fact that there's no one company to attack so they can lie about it and get away with it.
This is quite simply just more of their manipulation of the press, etc in order to build up their stock value, which could be done for a number of reasons.
Vista is a pig with lipstick and it is a tool for spying on the end-user. It is as close to renting software as you can get and the only thing getting in the way is the FOSS movement. Nothing else is really at issue. Even OSX has a smaller market share than Linux.
You guys want to defend a company that has repeatedly been caught stealing the IP of other companies and then loosing in the courts go ahead. But don't drag your family, friends, and acquaintances into this reality distortion field.
That's what it is. These numbers about Linux and these numbers about Windows Vista are pure reality distortion. Again, Microsoft can't be innovative and find their own way of pulling the wool over the eyes of the public, they have to steal even these effects from Apple, Inc.
It's not this quarter that matters. It is the next two quarters and even the year on.
People have stopped talking about the spying and invasion of privacy Microsoft has been doing so word has stopped getting around. People are beginning to think it is ok to have a company such as Microsoft protect itself at our expense.
Listen even if someone is nearly murdered by someone that victim doesn't have the right to take the law into their own hands at the expense of society. So, even if you think it is ok to have Microsoft spying on you and invading your privacy they don't have the right. They should be going through the Police authorities to deal with it. Even then, the Police authorities have no right to invade your privacy without warrants issued by the court and signed by a judge.
Not to mention, it will be a rude wake up call when people are not able to play back their content or get their computer shut down because of Microsoft's stupid mistakes. And to facilitate spying on me by other vendors is criminal.
It isn't the ports nor security nor the nagging UAC. It is the spyware as documented repeatedly including the WGN and WGA tools, the persistent need to reactivate (or redo that process every 6 months) and the fact that Microsoft is invading my privacy by doing this. You can also count in the checks against the HD media and the fact that they have "drafted" the hardware manufacturers into something none of us want. I would no more want this than I would allow Walmart to enter my home every 6 months to verify that those items I have in my home are actually paid for given that I may be a regular shopper at Walmart. What bothers me about Vista is Microsoft's history of deficiency. They claimed SP2 would significantly reduce the amount of problems with adware/spyware and other types of issues but they have not subsided. Sure there are larger problems with a sp1 patched machine but there are also huge numbers of problems with SP2 machines too. They didn't even come close to resolving the issue. I know because daily I fix computers and clean them of this crap and I see how far patched these machines are.
WGA/WGN was put on people's machine without fully explaining what it meant--that you were allowing Microsoft to spy on you. This is just nasty stuff and having that incorporated into Vista is a rather aggrievous violation of one's privacy. To potentially shut down a computer mis-identified is a rather nasty act. To spy on the content consumed is also very nasty. To force manufacturers to comply is also nasty.
This doesn't even remotely touch on the lock-in that DRM creates. No profit oriented business is going to make content with DRM that will run on multiple platforms because doing so for Microsoft's lock in is going to be costly on a per sale basis. What this means is that most likely Microsoft will get profits based on every sale of content with their DRM implementation. To then redo that content to comply with Apple's will be costly and then to release it for Linux will never happen.
Everyone has been saying that DRM has to go and we've heard words from Microsoft but those words are empty because the only reason they don't want DRM is to allow them to break Apple's hold on the music market. Once they have control they'll re-implement the DRM in their own image.
So, with all this spying we have the DRM lockin which means that consumers are not going to shift off of Windows due to the fact that the content cost them so much and that it won't run on other operating systems. This is a huge lock in and they have been hoping for this since long before Vista because they know how DRM can lock you in as demonstrated by Apple.
The dumb part would be to buy Vista and then buy HD content based on Microsoft's DRM. Linux isn't just Microsoft's competition, it is a product that people want to use. They should not be forced to use something they don't want.
Alas, this post is more on topic as it pertains to the original writeup because the original writeup talks about how this person hates the Microsoft activation process.
A properly set up Ubuntu is fine for grannies. Most grannies don't set up their windows boxes so one would not expect their grannies to set up their linux boxes.
Slashdot Mirror
NOT TO MENTION the US Supreme Court seriously changed the rules in determining "prior art" and "obviousness". Previously the determination was made narrowly about the patent technology being claimed. What the court did was do away with that narrow examination and made other works related to the patent even if they are in other fields come into question as to whether someone could obviously decide that piece Y should follow piece X.
This is an incredibly important change that few people have even considered in this whole affair. Also, it is clear that any prior patents can now be challenged based on these changes.
This means that prior art and obviousness will come into play in software patents in a HUGE HUGE HUGE way.
No, the real question is whether Microsoft will get away with extorting patents out of others with these indefensible patent lies.
Microsoft has been stealing IP, and now some very important cases are over and they find themselves on the loosing end of the stick. They still need to steal the patents to keep up since they are not innovative themselves. What they were doing is outright stealing patents and hoping they'd be able to win in court.
Patents cross-licensing are like a web that criss-crosses the globe. Everyone does it. Open source is the exception. The initiative that Novell co-founded with IBM and others is designed to allow patent exchange and to help protect those participating from patent lawsuits. Microsoft is one of the boys that aren't allowed to play the game. Microsoft is the shunned rich kid bully being beat up by a group of Boston Southies. They aren't going to get into the gang no matter how much they threaten the Southies with their money. They are just going to get beat up more.
This initiative was somewhat thwarted by the agreement of Novell and Microsoft. It effectively gave them a lot of patents without having to even give back to the open source community. This isn't to say that they were taking the open source patents from Novell; it is that they were trying to divide and conquer.
So, this group of companies holds patents that Microsoft wants and needs to stay in the game. The GPL v3 doesn't prohibit them from entering into such an agreement, it just makes impossible to indemnify ONLY a subset of the open source arena.
Microsoft wants the patents because they've been loosing in court when they outright steal them. They are not telling anyone what the violations are because they are like the rich kid who says "it's my chessboard so I am the only one that can know which moves are legal. If you break a rule you loose the game."
Microsoft is like a big Oil company that says that if you use the gasoline of one of its competitors you could be sued, and in fact, anyone, including the manufacturer of the cars, can be sued. They say this because the competing Oil companies may have used some of their IP when they refine gasoline. What they are not telling anyone is which portion of the refinery process is in question and are not providing a way to allow the competing oil companies to change their refinery process or even to challenge that IP they claim is violated.
Bringing that down to real world terms shows how ridiculous their claim is. You are a thief, you have stolen from them, but they won't tell you what you stole nor give you a chance to correct yourself rather than continue to perform that alleged theft.
Someone suggested a few days ago that everyone that is an open source developer send a certified letter to Microsoft demanding to know exactly which IP was in violation. If Microsoft disregards the letters then they provide a good affirmative defense. If Microsoft does respond then we'll know exactly what to do to stop, or we can challenge the claims. Either way Microsoft is overwhelmed with paperwork.
If you decide to send the certified letter you should set a date by which they must respond to you. That will ensure that you tried, you gave them a reasonable amount of time, and they did not provide you with a way to resolve the issue.
They don't value your skills as much as they value theirs. That's what life is all about. We don't get to learn all about all things and only some about some things. We still don't call them idiots. I can only wonder about someone that doesn't know much about computers reading what is being writing and how they feel about that depiction of them. I'll bet they think it is pretty idiotic. Would they go out and write something up accusing these people of being an idiot even if it were so? No because they know what it means to open their mouths and become one.
When anyone can do half of what those so called idiots do day in and day out (outside of the computing world) then come back and call them idiots. If anyone can do that well, we know they are either superman, an Einstein a millions times over, or are some kind of renaissance man that has abilities beyond all things human. They must be an alien, or they are lying to themselves and everyone else.
Let's be real here. Do you write letters with your car? Do you design homes with your car? Do you create complex financial analysis with your car? Do you send mail through your car?
The car is pretty much just general use. It is very generic. Does one thing.
Most are confusing the generic use of a car with the infinite use of a computer. They are very different. There are times when you would compare them such as in repair and set up. But you wouldn't in general use. It is not an apt analogy.
Your granny would no more try to fix her car nor know about mechanics than she would be trying to fix her computer or know about the electronics of it. She would not be trying to resolve complex programming issues either.
The computer is what it is.
I guess it is time for most of these people claiming others to be idiots to start making their own refrigerators, their own cathode ray tubes, their own light bulbs, their own power generators. Rather than do that just admit others have skills you don't have and that you look pretty unenlightened to them when it comes to comparing your knowledge to their skills.
Let's get real. Stop attacking people. Stop saying Linux fails here and there. How about you start working toward solving the deficiencies in each OS so that everyone can move on. Let's get past this vendor lock in and get an OS out there that is not dependent on the whims of one vendor.
You can play mp3s in Windows without any added codecs or software. This is true, but Microsoft lost a recent lawsuit over the inclusion of the technology that allowed you to do that.
You COULD NEVER just click on an encrypted commercial movie in Windows and have it run out of the box. You had to install the proper video drivers and then you had to install a commercial codec that you purchased or received as part of an OEM deal. You never were able to play an encrypted movie without doing that.
Once you install the two codecs in question you can do the same thing under Linux as you are doing with Windows.
Just stop giving people uninformed information. If you don't know what is happening you shouldn't be volunteering your point of view based on that lack of knowledge.
You NEED to purchase a commercial codec to play encrypted DVDs under Windows and you need to do the same under Linux. You need not pay for mp3 support because Microsoft provided that but they did so at the expense of other companies and got sued for it.
If you didn't install it then someone installed it for you. That's the same thing that would happen in Linux. If the Linux user didn't install it someone could do it for them.
Your granny can use Linux very well. Your granny would not be making the choices you make nor would she be looking at the problems from your perspective. No more would your granny be complaining about installation or uninstalling applications than she would be picking through the registry or cleaning crap viruses and adware from her computer.
You would be doing it for her.
When she asks you about mp3 files you would have to tell her that Microsoft was recently sued and lost the suit regarding MP3 support in Windows and that it cost them a very considerable sum of money. You would also have to tell her that the Linux community has left that out to maintain legality. You would also be able to offer her appropriate mp3 support at any time if you would simply install the codec for her.
Your grand mother would use the computer as she always has. She'd be reading the web, chatting with friends, she'd be sending her mail and play POGO bingo with them. If your grand mother does more and would actually be trying these things that you complain of she'd be an exception and rare person for her age as most people her age didn't have access to computers nor the knowledge necessary to do those things back then.
And let's hope you are talking about an 80 year old granny because I have women, and men, in their middle to late 70s in my store all the time doing all sorts of things you couldn't imagine and asking questions you couldn't answer off the top of your head. Most are about Windows and most are like opening a pandora's box.
Besides, what is so hard about opening synaptic, hitting the search button, typing in the name of the program and then clicking to add or remove then hitting apply? It isn't that much different and your granny isn't a trained seal so she can think and reason through these things. 15 years ago she may have viewed any attempt to learn a computer something only computer wizards did. Today she uses them without batting an eye and she has a considerable amount of time invested in learning computers. Every software manufacturer of say "a word processor" under Windows will tell you it is just a matter of adjusting to the way they do it. If you know one you can adjust and use another. The same goes for a GUI. If you know the concepts behind one you can learn another.
What you are arguing about is that you care to have your granny ignorant and unwilling to learn and change so you can make a point.
You have a valid point. It isn't as 1,2,3 easy as it sometimes is under Windows but Linux generally is easier in many other ways and sometimes just step 4 or 5 more to get the same job done. That's not a reason to put Linux down. There's a big difference between performing one or 2 more steps in getting something installed/uninstalled then there used to be in just going from one app to another. What it means is that Linux is a grown up and so is your Granny. Stop treating both of them as children.
The lack of an installer of the pre-compiled binaries under Firefox is the fault of Mozilla. A simple script that looks at your environment and the updates the relevant files would suffice.
But no where is it required to be compile from source--if you know where the pre-compiled binaries go just copy them. Also, you are talking about using a version of Ubuntu that is several releases old. Two other MAJOR versions of Ubuntu have been released since the version you are talking about.
The need to compile programs under Linux is a side effect of the DISTRO that you choose. You choose Gentoo then you will mostly likely compile. If you choose Debian you may or may not. If you choose Ubuntu the likelihood is very slim that you'll ever compile anything.
Linux is/was consider a geeky platform because the ZEALOT teenagers (and others that refused to grow past their teenage years) attacked anyone who demanded maturity from the product. The product was and is capable of that maturity. Look at Ubuntu.
So, clearly those two things you say about Linux are no longer true and you would do us all a favor by not spreading those untruths any longer.
The share of the market owned by Linux is small compared to Windows. That is due to several factors, the least of which is NOT their monopolistic predatory practices.
1) Monopolistic Predatory practices of the major OS vendor. This got them convicted of criminal acts.
2) Proprietary closed source gaming API. DirectX is one of the major reasons people do not use Linux. If gaming were to come to the Linux platform you'd see otherwise. If gaming manufacturers got smart and understood that OpenGL is as good if not better than DirectX they'd develop for it, but since Microsoft discontinued OpenGL in Windows it is hard to build up any incentive.
3) People aren't as dissatisfied (with Microsoft & Windows) only because they don't know what the people in the blogs, web pages, forums, etc know. As this knowledge is spread, and we all should be telling everyone we meet, that will change.
4) Linux market share does give it a sizable chunk of users. This ain't chump change. To say that the market share is so dismal is wrong only because you compare it to the ONLY other real player. Yes, the Mac OSX is a nice OS but Linux has a greater market share than it has.
5) It has only been about a year since the likes of Ubuntu came into being and that is a major change in the trend for Linux. That will begin to grow. In fact, it is estimated that by the end of 2008 the impact of Linux on the desktop will be double what it has been for all prior years. That's nothing to shake a stick at.
There are good reasons and bad reasons for all things. Yes, Linux needs some important changes still, such as OFFLINE UNIVERSAL DISTRO INDEPENDENT INSTALLERS. The very competition amongst Distros that fuels competitive growth is also the very thing that kills any universal aspects.
One major hurdle (drivers) has been overcome and is mostly an insignificant issue. There certainly are more drivers for Linux for modern and older hardware than there are for Vista. Every day I visit hardware manufacturer sites looking for drivers and see they offer Linux support. I'm truly amazed. No, not every one but a lot have jumped on the band wagon. If the manufacturer doesn't offer them then there are plenty of people that make them for Linux for free. But the important ones, the Video card manufacturers are well on board and that's significant.
I have people come into my store daily that get an eye full of what Linux is and EVERY SINGLE ONE want it on their machine. They hesitate only because they already have Windows installed. If they really had a choice at the time of purchase then we'd see significantly greater numbers using Linux. If manufacturers of those pre-fab machines took Linux to heart we'd see some rather major market share growth.
Bottom line--it isn't because Linux is not capable of doing what the consumer wants. In fact, it can with the exception of mainly a lack of support for gaming. That's the game manufacturer's fault for not writing to the non-closed non-proprietary gaming API. As far as why there's a smaller market share, well, that's many fold not the least of which is due to Microsoft's criminal monopolistic predatory practices over the past years. The fact that the average consumer never hears about all the really nasty things Microsoft has done is one main reason. The reason people on the forums, web blogs, etc feel the way they do about Microsoft is because they know the hard cold facts about what they have done to harm the consumer and what they continue to do to harm the consumer.
If Microsoft had not done the warm and cozy thing of making the world standardized and helped to advance computing in the lives of everyone in the world then some other product(s) would have done that. The wealth that was generated would most likely been spread over a greater number of people and helped the economy in a greater way. We wouldn't have a monopolistic predator threatening their competitors and their competitor's customers for using the competition.
This is probably them fulfilling their obligation for the code they allowed the NSA to incorporate into XP and Vista.
Microsoft can take their ideas and shove them up their asses. What do you think we want Microsoft making these decisions and bringing up these ideas. It is none of their freaking business nor anyone else's if I choose to use the internet.
These people are getting freaking spooky. We really need to shut them down and fast. Stop frigging buying Microsoft products. Protect your security and your privacy by using Linux.
The problem with more Service Packs for XP is that they probably will be modifying the underlying OS to program more spying capabilities into it.
See, XP is Vista's MAJOR competitor. Linux is very close. But as long as people can and will stay with XP modifying it to make it more pirate proof is going to be a priority. Even if this is a total violation of our privacy. Their checks against privacy are laudible when you don't spy on the customer and you tell the customer in advance you are doing it and you let them agree to it first and give them a choice to decline. The way Vista is set up is that it is the equivalent of having a Walmart employee knock on your door one Sunday morning wanting to inspect your home to determine if all the goods you have that are from Walmart have be purchased legitimately. Just because they are doing it with a hidden camera (or rather hidden software) makes it no less an infringement. It is like having an agreement that you will allow Walmart to include a device in your home that tests all goods to determine if they have been purchased legitimately without the need to have an employee visit.
It is a violation of privacy.
So, no matter how you look at it SP2 brought more spying capabilities and SP3 will bring many more because Microsoft views it as a threat to their new product and all the DRM crap they programmed into it. If they can add some of that to XP via SP3 they'll do it, period.
People care about open source when they know about it. I can attest to that every day, as every day I show Ubuntu Linux and explain what it is to someone every day. They can be old and retired, young and just looking for inexpensive, or middle-aged and worried about the economy and Microsoft's monopoly. All seem to like it when they know about it. I've had no one say, "screw that"! They all want to know how to get it and what they can do with it.
That's huge for Linux because when the average person sees it and likes it and want to use it we have a the potential to change the whole landscape.
Microsoft became what it is today, at least in part, due to guys like me selling it to customers. Not selling them the product, selling them on the idea. That same "us" can undo what we've so wrongly done with Microsoft--sold it without realizing how Microsoft would abuse it. Now we can right that wrong. It only takes the effort of us that want to see change to help make that change.
The premise he puts forth about a lack of exchange and hence an issue with the market is based on a false assumption. That assumption is that nothing gets exchanged when you give something away for free.
There is an exchange and you get value in return. Not every exchange has to have an equal value or a value for more than you put into it.
What he fails is in the idea that the exchange of value has to be immediate. For instance, those programmers giving away their code for free gets to learn more from what is returned back to it. H/She gets to see the flaws, and how other programmers might have addressed the same or similar issue. He also fails to see that the exchange comes in the form of other services. For instance, companies like Red Hat, Novell, etc were making money off the products those programmers are producing. Some of that is in the form of support dollars, support contracts, etc.
These companies can't have a valuation in the markets if they are not producing something to generate income to pay those programmers.
If there was a qualifying factor that you must get something immediately in return of greater value then the XBox and XBox 360 would be communistic approaches to marketing. They are loosing money in order to gain market share.
There's a false presumption that all open source code is developed in the basements of some obese unclean unshaven juvenile-minded 42 year old virgin. This isn't the case. Businesses such as IBM make contributions, produce products and income off Open Source. Companies such as some of the major car manufacturers make money by saving dollars on large investments in computers by using Open Source. To this end they produce a product (a car/truck/whatever) at a cheaper cost. It also provides jobs to those that support those systems in house. NASA contributes, our US Military and other sectors of our government use Linux.
So it is very disingenuous to say that no value is exchanged. That programmer sitting at home learning from the mistakes he makes that others correct that he learns from gives him the potential to build better products and to make money off the support of that product or to take the learned skills (not the code) to his regular job.
There is no loss to jobs from Open Source. There are significantly greater lost jobs in the US due to out-sourcing to other countries.
Another false presumption on his part is that *all* governments of all nations are designed like the USA. This is not true. There are democratic countries that have very successful economies that are not purely capitalist. There are plenty of jobs for people in those countries and plenty that have great opportunities that they may never have had if they'd never had the chance to look at the source code for an open source project.
The benefits of Open Source significantly, by massively huge margins, outweigh any potential loss of a job due to free competing with commercial in any given market. In fact, that very alleged conflict creates a stronger free and commercial market.
This is just more Microsoft diatribe from a potential paid blogger (even if he did participate in some open forum). Frankly his participation in that forum has direct correlation to free vs. commercial markets. His ideas could be sold as a think tank response but instead he puts it out there for free. He's a Marxist for doing that. He's giving away free ideas which conflicts with the commercial markets governed by the commercial organizations that make money postulating these very things to the corporate world.
I don't perceive the issue of loss impacting Mircrosoft. It is their aberrant behavior that troubles me the most.
Having watched Ballmer and Gates over the past few years (actually Gates from the beginning and Ballmer once his head stopped shinning in my eyes) I have had (and have had it before and it turned out successful) that Ballmer has to go.
He's not extremely bright and he doesn't compose himself as a man you can trust. Gates either for that matter. He and Ballmer have managed to stay together through most of this so they are like peas in a pod, whereas Paul Allen has essentially done everything he can to divest himself of Microsoft and those two.
The attitude that starts at the top filters down to the rest of the executives and farther down to even the "day in and day out" managers. If the things filtering down were absolute positives then we'd be looking at a company willing and able to compete with innovation. Instead we have a company that has been resting on it's laurels and has been effectively saying: you can't compete with us because if you do we'll sue your customers.
That is mostly irrelevant, at least it would be to me as a CS student (or student of the IT field) because as a student I would be essentially locked into Microsoft products. So, the only thing that would be relevant to me would be whether some other OS is up and coming to the point of providing me an alternative to the lock in I'm experiencing, or whether Microsoft is dying.
Largely the numbers of initial sales of a new OS in the early months are not relevant due to the fact that they probably are being intentionally quoted inaccurately in order to artificially inflate their value.
You should be more interested in the numbers presented by other organizations, the ones that attempt to show the real numbers. Certainly I would not be impressed by just someone's belief that he should congratulate Microsoft because he doesn't feel like holding their feet to the fire like everyone else.
What I care about is being called a thief for using gasoline purchased from another company because that company uses the same or similar process to refine the gasoline.
Effectively that's what Microsoft is doing. They are calling me a thief for using Linux on my computer because Linux may have used some of the same processes as Microsoft did. By the way, those same processes were probably copied by Microsoft some years ago (or as recent court rulings have been showing--stolen). Now they are trying to extort those companies they are accusing into giving them IP in exchange, which, by the way, will only indemnify the customers of the company they entered into the IP cross license. So they can just pick up the bat again and swing at another.
Think about this in real life terms. The car uses gasoline (the computer an operating system) so the car is just a pile of metal and plastic without gasoline (computer as well without an OS). So, some dominant Oil company (OS vendor) then decides to call *everyone* that doesn't use their gasoline a thief because you are using the gasoline (for computers an operating system) from another company because that other company may have copied some elements of the refinery process (in the OS some of it's IP), then tries to extort all major companies that use the cars (computers) into giving them some of their profits and some other valuable property (in computers other IP developed by the company). Then they won't even tell you what part of the refinery process was copied so the major companies can determine if there really is a fault or to let the other gas companies change their refinery process to not copy.
I mean, come on, you can't miss that point.
Lol, but I sort of envisioned it as a Pig With Lipstick. Haha, Vista is a pig with lipstick.
Microsoft is a self-destructive organization. What I mean is that their whole company persona is one of negativity and threats against their users, and those that don't use them. Only one type of company threatens those that don't use their product--a self-destructive one. It would be like the gas companies calling you thieves because you use the gasoline of another company that maybe copied your process for processing gasoline (which by the way you probably copied years ago). With the new rules for determining prior art for patents much of what Microsoft says is essentially toothless, but it does damage--it harms the reputation of those involved in something great--Linux.
Microsoft is where it is because of some rather unsavory tactics and now they are using those same deceptive practices to make it seem like their product is more successful than it is. As well, they are trying to create a fervor in those that might be looking at others and want to be like them. They are creating an artificial fervor in order to create a "I want to be like the Joneses".
In reality what should be happening is that people should be using the products that protect their privacy, products don't spy on them; and never will. This invasion of privacy, the threats against consumers, the lies about their success, and the constant theft of IP from other organizations is just a bit too much, and if the average consumer understood what was happening they would not be buying Microsoft products.
With their veiled threats against Linux users, which is being done to extort companies into cross licensing of IP is nothing more than them trying to steal their IP without outright stealing it and then ending up in court. They are threatening the community to force certain companies that would never cross license with Microsoft into giving up their IP--and in reality that's just extortion and an attempt to get the IP they normally would have just stolen and fought about in court. But since they loose so many cases they had to change their tactics. As well, since the new Supreme Court ruling on what is included in how to determine "prior art" Microsoft is about as desperate as one would guess. They are not an innovative company, they just don't innovate.
This is a very self-destructive pattern for them...
And to hear a Microsoft cronnie claiming that 2007 is the year of the death of Open Source is just pathetic. That individual would have been dumped by a regular company but instead he's paraded about inside Microsoft as some master tactician.
2007/2008 will show growth in Linux and Open Source equal to or better than all prior years of its growth. He can take that to the bank.
Good try, but I didn't compare it to murder. I compared it to the need of the victim to go through the proper authorities instead of taking the law into their own hands. You are reading too much into that.
I guess I could have said that if you stole trade secrets it would be up to me to work with the authorities to get the police or other governmental investigative agencies to look at my case.
The WGA/WGN utilities were not originally given as an option because as they were then (and they are now) they are hidden in critical updates. As well, individuals have no idea what WGA/WGN really entail. Activation is fine as it simply tells them that this machine is now good to go and that it was purchased. WGN constantly monitors even legitimate users machines. They run all the time and report back to Microsoft regularly.
Microsoft was sued in Washington State (where they are headquartered) and in California (and I believe a couple others) for spyware activity. That is how those utilities were classified. The original version did not inform the user that the software was being installed and did not ask for an OK. Microsoft tried to hide this by stating that it should be acceptable for the US customers to accept this because the Asian continent customers accepted it. After the lawsuits they removed it from their download site for some time but it is back now. And yes it does prompt the user and the user can opt out, but when they do the information is sent to Microsoft anyway, including personally identifiable information such as the MAC address of the network component and the IP and date/time of the information. This directly identifies the user.
Tho you can turn it off and choose not to install it Microsoft still flags their update site in a way that warns you that you have not installed all critical updates. This alarms people into thinking that their machine is insecure so many do it out of ignorance to what that message actually means.
The WGN is the tool that annoys you. The WGA tool is for activation through their website used to check the validity of your key. It doesn't monitor your system on a daily basis (as the original WGN tool did). Although I have an issue with that I accept it.
It is estimated that 80% of those copies Microsoft considered to be invalid (20% of all PCs) actually were indeed valid. Especially in the US where machines rarely are sold without a valid install. If you build your own or have someone custom build a unit for you that's another story.
Now, it doesn't really matter if they feel they have the right to monitor your computer, to look at your content, to report back to them what you have and what they believe is valid or not. It still is the same idea of them spying on you with a hidden camera. The only reason people would actively agree to allow that software installed is because they believe it causes no harm to them (but they forget others feel it does cause harm to them), or they just don't know what is really happening with the WGA/WGN tools. When you bring to light that installing hidden software on your computer without fully explaining what is happening (and truly giving customers an opt out without sending any information at all back to their servers), you are doing the equivalent of making it permissible to having say, as an example "a walmart employee knock on your door requesting to regularly inspect your home (because your computer is an extension of your home) in order to determine if any of the goods you have in your home are stolen from their store, due to the fact that you are a regular customer at their store)." The WGA is like having them inspect your bag as you leave the store, but the WGN is like having walmart come to your door repeatedly to inspect your home.
Now, no person would even allow the police to do that unless they had a warrant issued by the court and signed by a Judge. No one would allow the police to hide a camera in their home for the purpose of monitoring you, even if they would
These numbers are being disputed because it is impossible that these sales are to a consumer to be used by that consumer--many don't consider it a sale unless it is going into the hands of the actual consumer of the goods.
Your analogy is wrong. Those distributed licenses are more like consignments than they are sales. When a store gets computers on consignment to sell they can sell those to customers and the ones they can't sell generally go back to the company that sold them to you on consignment. I'm sure the rules are somewhat different for each company offering consignment sales.
In reality it is like the local baker that makes bread for various stores in town. The baker only gets paid for the bread that is sold to a customer. Those that go old and stale are given back to the baker or tossed by the baker and do not constitute a sale.
So, yes, they are saying that the license did exchange hands from Microsoft to another entity but they did not make it into the hands of the actual consumer for their use. That's a big difference. This is why people get upset at companies such as Microsoft that exaggerate these claims. It is that it makes others feel there's a greater success there then there is. It is an attempt at generating a fever in order to convince others to buy what think everyone else is buying.
The reality of it is that the hardware manufacturers are not experiencing increased sales and in fact, some leading hardware indicators are that sales are actually down. So, there's a lot of contradictory information here. Some from Microsoft which is now becoming the most untrustworthy company in the world, and the others from organizations that generally track these sales of hardware and software. The numbers that Microsoft has been touting are not matching up to the other leading indicators. For this reason people are trying to figure out why there are disparities. Without honest forthcoming numbers it'll take longer to see what actually happened. What Microsoft is doing is as bad as them sponsoring their own Polls and studies. We all know that those can't be trusted. It is only from independent 3rd parties that we can have some faith in the numbers.
So people are just saying that it is impossible that 40 million copies have been sold and are in the hands of the consumer that is actually going to use them (especially when you don't also state that the market is 2 times the size it was to the market Microsoft compared it to). The ratio of "sold vs. customers" is about the same or lower than XP sales. These Microsoft numbers were debunked about a month or so ago by very reputable groups, and even though this is the case Microsoft keep touting them as facts. They are facts, they are just misleading because all the picture hasn't been presented.
I'd estimate world-wide that there are some 50 million Linux users, probably more. Now that the update to Ubuntu is out I'd estimate a significantly greater number in the next year as Ubuntu is really a great desktop and it is a powerful desktop tool. You can do just about anything you want with it except play certain games or run Windows software. It is well structured, clean, well maintained, and once installed is good enough even for your granny to use.
As far as drivers go: the availability of drivers for old and new hardware is better than those available to Windows Vista users, even proprietary drivers. In Ubuntu you can even get proprietary drivers installed with a couple clicks of a mouse whereas with Windows you have to go to the website of the hardware manufacturer and download then install them.
This isn't to say that it is bad that you have to do that. It is to say that Ubuntu's implementation is quite nice and is very accessible to even the average user.
As far as things like playing DVDs goes even under Windows you have to purchase a commercial package that has the necessary CODEC to play back encrypted movies and then you have to install it.
Linux is extremely powerful an
I own a computer store where I do installs, upgrades, repairs, custom builds, etc. On my main machine, which people see day in and day out as they enter my store is a wide screen high def 24" LCD flatscreen. On that machine I have Ubuntu linux with Beryl. Every customer that comes into the store gets a little treat of eye candy and then are told that Ubuntu is free and so is all the software installed on the computer.
I also have an Microsoft Action Pack Subscription. I need XP for certain games. In the subscription is a license for 10 xp pro 64 bit, 10 xp pro 32 bit, and 10 Vista business. Now the Vista business licenses are upgrades so I'm expected to upgrade each of those XP boxes. The reality of it is this. It isn't going to happen. I'm not going to upgrade those XP boxes any time soon and most of my 20+ computers are going to stick with the OS they were sold with unless I need to change them and in that case they'll get Ubuntu installed on them.
I upgraded a single computer with Vista only because I need to know about how to resolve issues with Vista when a customer brings their machine into the store. I also need to know how everything is organized. Other than that I have no need for those Vista licenses and they'll probably remain unused until the subscription expires--which will be in 6 months or so.
Microsoft was so cheap they couldn't even give me the Ultimate version in the action pack subscription unless I was willing to dish out 50% more for the actual subscription cost to upgrade. Then when the subscription expires I loose that money as well.
Of the machines that come into my store I have only seen a total of 3 with Vista in the first 100 days. I have had customers ask me about Vista and I explain what the WGN and WGA facilities are and how it equates to spying on them and then I make sure they understand the analogy of "walmart employees knocking on your door to search your home for paid for goods that you purchased at their store since you may be a regular customer". When they understand that analogy that's usually curtains for any Vista sale. I then tell them about how they drafted the hardware manufacturers into implementing this DRM technology and how the DRM is a locking mechanism to keep them from buying or investing in other systems. I give them the example of Apple's iPod and the music bought through iTunes. When they understand that they understand I'm trying to protect them and their privacy.
I assure them that Linux is the only product that will forever ensure their privacy and will never be used as a tool to lock them into a specific vendor.
Microsoft has been acting up. They've been a bad fat bully and people are really starting to despise them. You don't reward a fat bully by giving them candy and patting them on the back. You take out the strap and you don't spare the whip.
Microsoft knows they can just ignore any attempt at correction because they have certain politicians in their back pocket. They also know that they are a monopoly and no one can challege them in any short period of time. But sooner or later all these things are going to backfire and they are going to run out of new ways of getting around the laws. Sooner or later alternatives such as the Mac or Linux will pick up steam and Microsoft won't be able to stop the ball from rolling.
When the courts force Microsoft to disclose which IP is in question then we'll have that 800 pound chimpanzee off our backs and we can move on so that regular people can use Linux to do those things they want to do.
And frankly the guy that stated that Linux does nothing is so full of shit. When I read that I was like: what planet does this guy come from? What have they been feeding him there? He has no clue where Linux is and he's still opening his mouth. I wonder if he understands the difference between a copyright and a patent.
Their numbers are like their FUD about IP violations in Linux. Neither the Linux FUD nor these numbers can be trusted. After the almost blatant lies about the Linux FUD I have no trust whatsoever in Microsoft.
Listen, anyone that tells you that:
1) you are guilty of a crime.
2) you have stolen from me.
3) you belong in jail.
Then refuses to tell me what crime specifically I committed, what I stole, and how long I belong in jail, is so full of shit. You can't trust those people and they need to be seen as a shunned entity. Until they come forward and tell us what has been done wrong, specifying which IP (patents) have been violated then as far as the industry is concerned there is no IP violation and no wrongdoing. This is an extortion bid and they are playing off on the fact that there's no one company to attack so they can lie about it and get away with it.
This is quite simply just more of their manipulation of the press, etc in order to build up their stock value, which could be done for a number of reasons.
Vista is a pig with lipstick and it is a tool for spying on the end-user. It is as close to renting software as you can get and the only thing getting in the way is the FOSS movement. Nothing else is really at issue. Even OSX has a smaller market share than Linux.
You guys want to defend a company that has repeatedly been caught stealing the IP of other companies and then loosing in the courts go ahead. But don't drag your family, friends, and acquaintances into this reality distortion field.
That's what it is. These numbers about Linux and these numbers about Windows Vista are pure reality distortion. Again, Microsoft can't be innovative and find their own way of pulling the wool over the eyes of the public, they have to steal even these effects from Apple, Inc.
It's not this quarter that matters. It is the next two quarters and even the year on.
People have stopped talking about the spying and invasion of privacy Microsoft has been doing so word has stopped getting around. People are beginning to think it is ok to have a company such as Microsoft protect itself at our expense.
Listen even if someone is nearly murdered by someone that victim doesn't have the right to take the law into their own hands at the expense of society. So, even if you think it is ok to have Microsoft spying on you and invading your privacy they don't have the right. They should be going through the Police authorities to deal with it. Even then, the Police authorities have no right to invade your privacy without warrants issued by the court and signed by a judge.
Not to mention, it will be a rude wake up call when people are not able to play back their content or get their computer shut down because of Microsoft's stupid mistakes. And to facilitate spying on me by other vendors is criminal.
It isn't the ports nor security nor the nagging UAC. It is the spyware as documented repeatedly including the WGN and WGA tools, the persistent need to reactivate (or redo that process every 6 months) and the fact that Microsoft is invading my privacy by doing this. You can also count in the checks against the HD media and the fact that they have "drafted" the hardware manufacturers into something none of us want. I would no more want this than I would allow Walmart to enter my home every 6 months to verify that those items I have in my home are actually paid for given that I may be a regular shopper at Walmart. What bothers me about Vista is Microsoft's history of deficiency. They claimed SP2 would significantly reduce the amount of problems with adware/spyware and other types of issues but they have not subsided. Sure there are larger problems with a sp1 patched machine but there are also huge numbers of problems with SP2 machines too. They didn't even come close to resolving the issue. I know because daily I fix computers and clean them of this crap and I see how far patched these machines are.
WGA/WGN was put on people's machine without fully explaining what it meant--that you were allowing Microsoft to spy on you. This is just nasty stuff and having that incorporated into Vista is a rather aggrievous violation of one's privacy. To potentially shut down a computer mis-identified is a rather nasty act. To spy on the content consumed is also very nasty. To force manufacturers to comply is also nasty.
This doesn't even remotely touch on the lock-in that DRM creates. No profit oriented business is going to make content with DRM that will run on multiple platforms because doing so for Microsoft's lock in is going to be costly on a per sale basis. What this means is that most likely Microsoft will get profits based on every sale of content with their DRM implementation. To then redo that content to comply with Apple's will be costly and then to release it for Linux will never happen.
Everyone has been saying that DRM has to go and we've heard words from Microsoft but those words are empty because the only reason they don't want DRM is to allow them to break Apple's hold on the music market. Once they have control they'll re-implement the DRM in their own image.
So, with all this spying we have the DRM lockin which means that consumers are not going to shift off of Windows due to the fact that the content cost them so much and that it won't run on other operating systems. This is a huge lock in and they have been hoping for this since long before Vista because they know how DRM can lock you in as demonstrated by Apple.
The dumb part would be to buy Vista and then buy HD content based on Microsoft's DRM. Linux isn't just Microsoft's competition, it is a product that people want to use. They should not be forced to use something they don't want.
Alas, this post is more on topic as it pertains to the original writeup because the original writeup talks about how this person hates the Microsoft activation process.
A properly set up Ubuntu is fine for grannies. Most grannies don't set up their windows boxes so one would not expect their grannies to set up their linux boxes.