• Welcome to OS2World OLD-STATIC-BACKUP Forum.
 

News:

This is an old OS2World backup forum for reference only. IT IS READ ONLY!!!

If you need help with OS/2 - eComStation visit http://www.os2world.com/forum

Main Menu

If you can not beat them, (continue to) appropriate their creativity.

Started by El Vato, 2008.01.05, 02:09:51

Previous topic - Next topic

El Vato

"Unix/Linux technologies are finding their way onto .Net."

http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1895,2242809,00.asp

This article reminded me of the 2007 San Francisco Open Source Business Conference (OSBC), Microsoft/Novell session, on whether the two organizations' deal would be "good" for the Open Source Software (OSS).

A few days earlier, Ballmer had just spread out another of those bouts of Fear Uncertainty and Doubt (FUD) in an article published in Fortune http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/fortune_archive/2007/05/28/100033867/ .  Accordingly, the session was replete with interested parties --and expectation for what the panel composed of Microsoft, OSS, and Novell's representatives would say about the MS/Novell deal in light of Ballmer's most recent attack on OSS. 

How would Novell justify the deal that clearly put OSS developers (those at the upstream of the OSS rainforest ecosystem, as Professor Moglen alluded in his  veiled criticism at Novell) at risk of litigation in exchange for an vague IP "indemnification" to end users --those who bought Linux distro (SuSE) exclusively from Novell ???  Probably was the most pressing concern of all of us who jammed the session room --there were even people sitting on the rug and many were on their feet due to unavailable seat space.

There were fancy clad attorneys supporting the parties in the panel and mixed within the audience.  I was seated next to my friend who is herself an civil rights attorney interested in OSS.  As the presentation progressed, I began jotting down a few lines that would take form into a statement in support of OSS developers when the time was right.   Among those panelists on the OSS side was Linux kernel developer Jonathan Corbet.  Representing MS was Sam Ramji from MS' port 25.

This is what Corbet had to say about Ballmer's FUD and Novell's tacit acceptance :

"But the real reason why this agreement has taken such criticism from the community is deeper. We in the community are proud of our work. We have done it ourselves, and have not stolen anything from anybody. When a company like Novell tells me that my work was stolen from Microsoft, and that anybody using my work owes taxes to Microsoft, I cannot help but be deeply offended. When such a statement comes from inside our community, it's even worse. It feels like a betrayal of the trust which holds the development community together, it's a divisive thing. In that way, I think this agreement is not good for open source."

(Rather than paraphrasing Corbet's approximate adherence to his own notes, the above is taken verbatim from http://lwn.net/Articles/235770/ )

At the end of the session, after some disingenuous statements from Sam Ramji's party that evoked a rather condescending laughter from the audience, Mr. Ramji approached Jonathan and apologized for his master er, employer's continued attacks on the OSS;  Sam extended his hand to Corbet as he handed out his business card to the bemused developer.   Possibly, like the subject above states, appropriating strategic creativity and features of the (Free)OSS into MS' products is the equivalent to undermining the OSS movement using a circumscribed, rather than a direct assault...

It is a different strategy than the direct attack used against Netscape communications in the past.  Apropos AOL is sinking their commercial implementation of the code that gave rise to Mozilla/FireFox.  For those who believe that MS does not stifle innovation, look at the firsts by Netscape: http://www.eweek.com/slideshow_viewer/0,1205,l=&s=25942&a=222626&po=1,00.asp?p=y&kc=EWKNLEDP010408A

And of course, the MS hirelings will revise history and publish their master's "truth."  For my part, I am glad deals like those made by MS/Novell were taken care of by the GPLv3: the latter license appears to have efectively stopped MS' SuSE Linux coupons/support redistribution.

El Vato

...and after getting in bed with Novell, MS brings open source talent on board to fix the crappy security issues in the User Account Control (UAC) of the purportedly more secure Vista.

I met this guy at LinuxWorld 2007 in San Francisco.  We attended an Xen versus KVM virtualization session; on that occasion he still worked for Novell for he wore a shirt with an inscribed Novell/Linux logo.  Besides, the card that he handed out to me reads:

Crispin Cowan, PhD
Director of Software Engineering
Security Architect, SUSE Linux
(etc.)

At that time he did not appear too happy when I suggested that Novell should stand out for the Open Document Format (ODF) --in actions and not merely in words-- it never crossed my mind that he was wanted by MS to improve Vista's security --which the MS propaganda machine claims as superb.

Reiterating, if MS can not beat the Penguin crowd, why not simply demise its Vista OS in favour of its (choice of) Linux distro under the hood and apply a GUI to all functions of its Linux distro ??? ...MS users will not notice or, like the Apple crowd, mind at all.  After all, what Cowan will attempt to do is implement an (automated) graphical front end and/or application wrapper to an emulated chmod, chown, etc. so as to offer MS users another button of "intuitiveness" for their applications.

What has been an inherent and defining feature of Unix/Linux/freeBSD is barely being addressed by the purportedly cutting edge MS operating system...by appropriating members of the free and open source software camp.

The context of the following quote, in response to an implicit offense by the MS borg's web log post, might be educative to understand the financial and ideological atmosphere of others in the Free and OSS side (and hence the reason most will refuse to look at proprietary source code --and possibly not believe in organized religion  ;), either ):


# re: Crispin Cowan joins the Windows Security Team!

"a non-zealot"

Ha! So those of us who adhere to a moral philosophy and refuse to sell out are zealots?

Given the choice between millions $ and poverty on the streets, I'd choose poverty rather than join Microsoft.
Monday, January 21, 2008 4:15 AM by Anonymous

El Vato

"It was Steven A. Ballmer, the chief executive of Microsoft, and his message was curt. He did not call to negotiate. Microsoft would make public a hostile $44.6 billion offer for Yahoo early Friday morning in a bold move to counter Google's online pre-eminence."

Reading the New York Times from Seamonkey under OS/2 --with no flash related issues, by the way.

If successful, Mr. Yang will get a heart attack --not only because his creation will be assimilated by the MS Borg, but also because Yahoo!'s investments in open source infrastructure, like the Zimbra acquisition, will be replaced by substandard-performance encroaching proprietary alternatives.

P.S. Mr. David Graser: as you can see, I shamelessly  :) applied the update to your cool work Noia Warm icon theme, highlighting the icons relevant to the OS/2 command prompts --my preferred tools in my belt.  Your current engagement in the visual aspect for the OS/2 interface would be your best reference in your resume if in the future there is an additional commercial effort on behalf of the OS.  On the other hand, judging by the sample of people, elsewhere in another post, who obviously did not support the commercial native Java effort by GCD, this is a tough proposition of mine.

BigWarpGuy

http://www.tgdaily.com/content/view/35913/118/
"Google calls Microsoft's Yahoo bid "troubling" "

http://www.eweek.com/c/a/Messaging-and-Collaboration/Source-Yahoo-May-Consider-Google-Alliance/ "Yahoo May Consider Google Alliance: Source"

http://www.informationweek.com/news/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=206101894
"Microsoft's Ballmer Discusses Yahoo, Google, Integration Challenges "

http://www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?command=viewArticleBasic&articleId=9060798&intsrc=hm_list
"Google plays antitrust card on Microsoft's Yahoo bid"

http://www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?command=viewArticleBasic&articleId=9060703&intsrc=hm_list
"Privacy advocates sound alarms over Microsoft's bid to buy Yahoo"

http://blogs.zdnet.com/hardware/?p=1205
"Would a Microsoft/Yahoo! deal mean more junk and OS bloat? Probably"

More articles on it.  8)

Saijin_Naib


Lumo

Quote from: Saijin_Naib on 2008.02.04, 18:56:33
I personally distrust google more, but hey, whatever.

You don't have to use google. It doesn't come preloaded, no questions asked, on every computer on the planet.

Microsoft are monopolists and either buy or strong-arm the competition to fold. I think you distrust the wrong people.

Saijin_Naib

No, but google crawls the whole internet gleaning every bit of information there is. They also buy information from other sites and cooperate with yet more sites. They also now have their hands in alt-energy and other projects, and I really am not comfortable with them. My roomate just brought Google Health to my attention, and it appears to have very shady privacy terms that may violate HIPPA.

Also, windows does not come preloaded on every computer, surely you over-exaggerate. You also don't need to use windows if it is installed. Tons of people like Linux for some reason. If that doesn't float your boat, use OS/2 or BeOS or FreeBSD or any other os. Hell, if you have more money than you know what to do with,  pony up for a shiny "toy" and get a Mac product.

Lumo

Are you saying Microsofts search engine doesn't crawl the net, Microsoft doesn't buy information from other sites and cooperate with other sites?  ???

And the reason for buying a Mac is obviously to run UNIX, the hardware being shiny is just a side effect of the awesomeness of UNIX.

RobertM

Quote from: Lumo on 2008.05.20, 11:23:12
Are you saying Microsofts search engine doesn't crawl the net, Microsoft doesn't buy information from other sites and cooperate with other sites?  ???

They do indeed crawl the net. Their results are less relevant though. None of the search engines I have used are 100% accurate - but Google's is better - and besides the various Google Webmaster Guides out there, their Webmaster Tools help webmasters glean even more info about how Google ranks them.

Their APIs for numerous products are also either open or at least usable by others in their sites, and their ad serving engine is best bar none.

As for MS's cooperation with other sites, it is more limited than Google - for a few reasons... MS's own practices and who/how they cooperate with other sites - as well as the fact that Google has a far bigger product line in comparison (as just two reasons).

Quote from: Lumo on 2008.05.20, 11:23:12
And the reason for buying a Mac is obviously to run UNIX, the hardware being shiny is just a side effect of the awesomeness of UNIX.

The "hardware being shiny" is a side effect of Apple always trying to (if not always succeeding) use the best quality hardware in combination with creating a brand image in their styling.

That aside, the reason to buy a Mac is not always (and probably rarely) with the intent to run Unix. Most Mac users buy it to run MacOSX - which, while that amounts to the same thing, the Unix aspect behind it is not the driving force. The ability to get a system with available software for many tasks a lot easier is. For instance, "I'm going to buy _____ for MacOSX"

Many people who transitioned from MacOS9/8/etc to MacTel MacOSX didnt do so because of the Unix aspect - but did so for the design and "simplicity" of the interface and the software available on their favorite platform - combined recently with the ease of running Windows via various solutions (Parallels, BootCamp, etc) on the same hardware, giving them the best of both worlds in one solid investment.

In the AMD/Intel/Windows world, it is hard to get a machine of similar quality. And it is impossible to get a machine that has as few virus risks. And it is very difficult to get a machine with a consistent, not-bogged-down interface (Vista anyone?).

While there are those who choose a Mac to be able to run a version of Unix that is preinstalled and has a decent amount of software available, it is probably rarely the conscious reason that people choose a MacOSX based machine.

-Robert


|
|
Kirk's 5 Year Mission Continues at:
Star Trek New Voyages
|
|


Saijin_Naib

Best quality hardware my ass. Anyone with half a brain can build a better computer for a quarter of the price.

People buy macs because they are duped by the cult mentality that is pushed via Apples brilliant marketing.

A FEW (precious few) buy macs for some of the rendering software suites, but that is a precious few. The rest are more likely just silly sheep with too much money to burn.

Lumo

RobertM: It's the reason I bought a Mac mini to begin with. Every convert (in my circle) is of the same ilk. Neither I nor them would have considered a Mac if they had continued with their MacOS 9 lineage.

(I have, however, after getting hooked on OS X bought a PowerPC-based Mac with MacOS 9 just to be able to run the MachTen BSD subsystem on it)

Saijin_Naib: A _quarter_ of the price? Who's over-exaggerating now? And do you agree or disagree that a search engine _should_ crawl the net and that Microsoft does this too?

Saijin_Naib

I'm not exaggerating, a quarter of the price is about right, maybe a third is more accurate.

Yes, search engines should crawl, thats the point, but I don't like how google is appropriating all this personal information and spreading into things like energy and communication. It seems shady.

RobertM

Quote from: Lumo on 2008.05.20, 23:31:53
RobertM: It's the reason I bought a Mac mini to begin with. Every convert (in my circle) is of the same ilk. Neither I nor them would have considered a Mac if they had continued with their MacOS 9 lineage.

(I have, however, after getting hooked on OS X bought a PowerPC-based Mac with MacOS 9 just to be able to run the MachTen BSD subsystem on it)

Saijin_Naib: A _quarter_ of the price? Who's over-exaggerating now? And do you agree or disagree that a search engine _should_ crawl the net and that Microsoft does this too?

Hi Lumo,

I'm not saying that you or others did not buy a Mac with OSX for that reason - I was just saying that wasnt the main reason (or even a reason at all) why most people buy Macs... from years of working retail and watching why people buy them. I am assuming you and those in your circle are likewise minded when it comes to technical things, which wouldnt make it much surprise that you had similar or the same reasons for purchasing Macs.

It's kinda like those who build machines and install Linux and frequent Slashdot... they all did it for similar reasons - but it does not indicate why the mainstream computer user buys a machine or what they install on it.

Robert


|
|
Kirk's 5 Year Mission Continues at:
Star Trek New Voyages
|
|


ddan

Hello all. With hope to eventually shed this "Newbie" tag, I submit this:

It's hard to believe that miturbide doesn't know that everyone has Hobbes
upload access. It's easy. Restrictions boil down to must be your own software.

Here's how:

1. Download (to keep the .xpi if needed again) and install the FireFTP plug-in
for about any version of Firefox. Exit, then re-start Firefox.

2. On Main tab, set Host to "hobbes.nmsu.edu/".

3. On Connection tab, set Remote directory to "/pub/incoming".

4. Click Connect. You should now see the Hobbes directory listing.

5. BE SURE you have a good version to upload, because you can't OVERWRITE
files, have to annoy the web-master (who was nice to me, but I'm sure doesn't
need any extra work).

6. Fill out the .TXT form (see the FTP instructions on Hobbes), and name the .ZIP
file exactly same.

7. Find your files in left panel, select them, click right arrow. Disconnect.

You can use regular browser to see that the magic has actually worked. (Upload
seems MUCH more magical than download).

Since FireFTP makes uploading kind of fun, I ask everyone to rummage around
for whatever unique little utilities or info they have, and do a little to
keep interest up in OS/2...

P.S. Thanks miturbide for announcing my little TIME4Z, FCS4NEW1, and KMPFS
utilities on the OS2WORLD news.

Lumo

Quote from: Saijin_Naib on 2008.05.20, 23:51:27
I'm not exaggerating, a quarter of the price is about right, maybe a third is more accurate.

Ok, I'll bite.

# 2.1GHz Intel Core 2 Duo
# 1GB 667MHz DDR2 SDRAM - 2x512MB
# 120GB Serial ATA Drive @ 5400 rpm
# Combo Drive (DVD-ROM/CD-RW)
# Keyboard (English) / User's Guide
# AirPort Extreme Card & Bluetooth
1099 dollar Macbook at the US Apple Store as of today.

You have 274 (or 366, depending on if it's a quarter or a third of the price) dollars to build a portable computer with the same spec. Go!