RE: The latest Microsoft FUD. This time from BillG, himself.
This type of invasive marketing is why people aren't going to be buying MS products. (Not al people, just those who choose.) If you want to be a MS user, they have you over a barrel, if you *have* to use MS products, they have you over a barrel. Some folks, myself included, have to use MS products to get our work done. Our employer gives us no choice, but when we get home in the evenings, that choice is modified somewhat. I have 2 desktop machines, one runs Redhat 7.0, the other Window ME. I use them for completely different purposes. The WinME machine is used for stuff at the office, the Redhat machine is my programming machine, also for the office, (but they don't know that). Windows users have a choice. They can stay where they are, or move on. This means learning Linux, the Mac, or buying into MS new licensing agreement. I've made my choice. That's why I'm on this mailing list. The best thing for users to do, is let MS be who they are, and if they want to get into this licensing scam that MS is forcing on them, so be it. Be quiet about it, or at least complain to MS. Their users are going to have to force them to change their stance. It won't come from the linux-kernel mailing list. Greg Rollins Network Administrator Teksouth Corp. 205-631-1500 -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Ted Unangst Sent: Saturday, June 30, 2001 10:39 AM To: Dmitri Pogosyan Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: The latest Microsoft FUD. This time from BillG, himself. On Sat, 30 Jun 2001, Dmitri Pogosyan wrote: > Well, this is an old as world argument used to take your freedom away - > 'law obeying citizens have nothing to fear' except that you are opting in, by purchasing the product. > Why not allow police to search your car at every moment they wish ? > If you have nothing to hide, it is just a minor inconvenience, but how > many criminals will be caught ! Let us put permanent roadblocks at > every > entrance to the cities ! microsoft != government. the us constitution only applies to government, not private industries, and certainly wouldn't help you, in canada. > And now I have to ask permission every time I put my own purchased CD in > my computer and explain and prove that I'm not a pirate. Speak about > living in freedom. you purchased it, meaning you wanted it. nobody, except maybe your boss made you buy it, and then you can always get a new job. you have as much freedom as you want, don't use ms products if you don't like them. ted -- "I promise you a police car on every sidewalk." - M. Barry Mayor of Washington, DC - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[OT] Re: The latest Microsoft FUD. This time from BillG, himself.
On Saturday 30 June 2001 16:22, Dmitri Pogosyan wrote: > Well, this is an old as world argument used to take your freedom away - > 'law obeying citizens have nothing to fear' While I'm as interested as anyone else in the exact steps Microsoft takes to drive users to us, I don't see what this has to do with making the kernel better. -- Daniel - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: The latest Microsoft FUD. This time from BillG, himself.
On Sat, 30 Jun 2001, Dmitri Pogosyan wrote: > Well, this is an old as world argument used to take your freedom away - > 'law obeying citizens have nothing to fear' except that you are opting in, by purchasing the product. > Why not allow police to search your car at every moment they wish ? > If you have nothing to hide, it is just a minor inconvenience, but how > many criminals will be caught ! Let us put permanent roadblocks at > every > entrance to the cities ! microsoft != government. the us constitution only applies to government, not private industries, and certainly wouldn't help you, in canada. > And now I have to ask permission every time I put my own purchased CD in > my computer and explain and prove that I'm not a pirate. Speak about > living in freedom. you purchased it, meaning you wanted it. nobody, except maybe your boss made you buy it, and then you can always get a new job. you have as much freedom as you want, don't use ms products if you don't like them. ted -- "I promise you a police car on every sidewalk." - M. Barry Mayor of Washington, DC - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: The latest Microsoft FUD. This time from BillG, himself.
Lionel Elie Mamane wrote: > > On Fri, Jun 29, 2001 at 07:50:36PM -0700, David Schwartz wrote: > > > More likely, Microsoft will display escalating suspicion with > > each install, If they find out that a key is definitely being > > abused, they will stop issuing unlock codes for it. In other words, > > they will cause great inconvenience for pirates and little > > inconvenience for legitimate users. Well, this is an old as world argument used to take your freedom away - 'law obeying citizens have nothing to fear' Why not allow police to search your car at every moment they wish ? If you have nothing to hide, it is just a minor inconvenience, but how many criminals will be caught ! Let us put permanent roadblocks at every entrance to the cities ! Or maybe we should introduce the law so you should report your activities in written form every week to goverment authorities? If you just work, shop, sleep - you have nothing to fear ! Moreover there will be a standard form - available on internet- so one can just tick common answers in the convenience of your home ! And now I have to ask permission every time I put my own purchased CD in my computer and explain and prove that I'm not a pirate. Speak about living in freedom. -- CITA, University of Toronto [EMAIL PROTECTED] 60. St. George Street tel: 1-416-978-7616 (o) Toronto, Ontario, M5S 3H8 tel: 1-416-466-4028 (h) Canada fax: 1-416-978-3921 - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: The latest Microsoft FUD. This time from BillG, himself.
On Fri, Jun 29, 2001 at 07:50:36PM -0700, David Schwartz wrote: > More likely, Microsoft will display escalating suspicion with > each install, If they find out that a key is definitely being > abused, they will stop issuing unlock codes for it. In other words, > they will cause great inconvenience for pirates and little > inconvenience for legitimate users. Well, except that according to Murphy's law, it's obviously Sunday you are trying to install the beast, and Microsoft offices are closed. And on weekdays, you are working, so you don't have time enough to. (Yes you can call on a weekday, get the code (provided they aren't time-locked), and install the Sunday after, but Murphy's law again: either you'll forget, either your disk will screw up your previous installation on Saturday). -- Lionel Elie Mamane RFC 1991 (PGP 2.x) 2048 bits Key Fingerprint (KeyID: 20C897E9): 85CF 986F 263E 8CD0 80FD 4B8C F5F9 C17D OpenPGP DH/DSS 4096/1024 Key Fingerprint (KeyID: 3E7B4B73): 9DAD 3131 3ADA F50B D096 002A B1C4 7317 3E7B 4B73 - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
RE: The latest Microsoft FUD. This time from BillG, himself.
Lew Wolfgang wrote: > It is something that I read somewhere. If memory serves, Microsoft > will allow two installs on the same CD-key. Note that this is > different from the old MS key manager, all you had to do there > was enter the CD-key. There were no real-time checks on how > many times it was installed. You mean they will allow to overlapping installs. That is, you have permission to run the software on two machines. This says nothing about their enforcement scheme. > This http://two.digital.cnet.com/cgi-bin2/flo?y=eBwm0Hm1h0U0c7G0A4 > says, "In the case of Office XP, people can install the software on two > computers, such as a desktop PC and a laptop. But the second > installation requires a phone call to obtain the 44-key unlock code." So the first time you install it, you can do it the easy way. After that, you need to call them to get the code. For all we know, it's as simple as, "I'm the purchaser and I'd like to install it again". > The question remains, "How many times will Microsoft let you install?" > I'll test the process starting on Monday. I have an Office XP that > has been installed once. I'll try it again without giving my name > and keep trying until I reach the limit. I'll say that I'm having > problems with my disk crashing or something. I'll report my findings > here. That's precisely the question, and we have no answer. It is becoming more and more obvious to me that statements such as "If the CD key is used again they just refuse to send the final key" are sheer speculation mixed with a small dose of FUD. More likely, Microsoft will display escalating suspicion with each install, especially if they are in close time proximity or widely varying physical locations (or other suspicious patterns). If they find out that a key is definitely being abused, they will stop issuing unlock codes for it. In other words, they will cause great inconvenience for pirates and little inconvenience for legitimate users. DS - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
RE: The latest Microsoft FUD. This time from BillG, himself.
On Fri, 29 Jun 2001, David Schwartz wrote: > > If the > > CD key is used again they just refuse to send the final key. > > Do you have any evidence to support this statement or is it an assumption? > This is almost never the way such schemes are implemented. The policy is to > send the final key unless there's clear evidence of abuse (such as the CD > key being found on a web site or being reinstalled dozens of times from all > over the planet). Hi David, It is something that I read somewhere. If memory serves, Microsoft will allow two installs on the same CD-key. Note that this is different from the old MS key manager, all you had to do there was enter the CD-key. There were no real-time checks on how many times it was installed. This http://two.digital.cnet.com/cgi-bin2/flo?y=eBwm0Hm1h0U0c7G0A4 says, "In the case of Office XP, people can install the software on two computers, such as a desktop PC and a laptop. But the second installation requires a phone call to obtain the 44-key unlock code." Microsoft is apparently using this technology to enforce subscription plans in New Zealand and Austrailia. The software just dies if you don't send in your mortita. The question remains, "How many times will Microsoft let you install?" I'll test the process starting on Monday. I have an Office XP that has been installed once. I'll try it again without giving my name and keep trying until I reach the limit. I'll say that I'm having problems with my disk crashing or something. I'll report my findings here. Regards, Lew Wolfgang - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
RE: The latest Microsoft FUD. This time from BillG, himself.
> If the > CD key is used again they just refuse to send the final key. Do you have any evidence to support this statement or is it an assumption? This is almost never the way such schemes are implemented. The policy is to send the final key unless there's clear evidence of abuse (such as the CD key being found on a web site or being reinstalled dozens of times from all over the planet). DS - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: The latest Microsoft FUD. This time from BillG, himself.
On Friday 29 June 2001 15:11, Clayton, Mark wrote: > > -Original Message- > > From: Paul Fulghum [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: Friday, June 29, 2001 4:02 PM > > To: Pavel Machek; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Schilling, Richard; > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Henning P. Schmiedehausen; > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Subject: Re: The latest Microsoft FUD. This time from BillG, himself. > > > > > Is this accurate? I never knew NT was mach-based. I do not think NT > > > 1-3 were actually ever shipped, first was NT 3.5 right? > > > Pavel > > > > NT 3.1 was the 1st to ship. > > I still have my 3.1 package all boxed up in the basement. I remember > impatiently waiting for its arrival. What a disappointment it turned > out to be. > > Mark I already answered this on the comphist list, but I've gotten in the habit of trimming linux-kernel from the replies. NT 3.1 was the first release version to ship, but there had been a "beta 1" in late 1992 and a "beta 2" in 1993. (This is why I said I needed my notebook. :) NT 3.1 was obviously numbered that due to the success of Windows 3.1. It didn't fool anybody, of course. But it DID manage to confuse things enough to delay the release of Windows 4.0 (nee 95) for about two years while they tried to shoehorn NT into the consumer space... http://www.jwntug.or.jp/misc/japanization/history.html The dos death march: Dos 1.0 they didn't mean to do until the CP/M deal fell through. DOS 2.0 was documented as being a transitional product until the PC could run Xenix. Dos 4.0 was going to be replaced by OS/2. Dos 6 was going to be replaced by NT. Dos 7 (in windows 95) was the absolutely last version ever, swear on a stack of printouts. Windows 98 tried to avoid mentioning the word "dos". Bill Gates' evil sidekick winnie-me (You can just see him, shaved head, pinkie in corner of mouth, "I shall call it...") tried very hard to hide the presence of dos, actively denying access to command.com wherever possible. What kind of odds are Lloyds of London giving on the presence of DOS in Windows XP at this point? Just curious... And any FURTHER discusson of this belongs on: http://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/penguicon-comphist Really. Rob - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: The latest Microsoft FUD. This time from BillG, himself.
On Fri, 29 Jun 2001, Pavel Machek wrote: > > The biggest improvement would be that users could remain with a version > > that works for them and NOT be forced to pay more money for the same > > functionality (watch out for the XP license virus... also known as > > a logic bomb). > > What is XP license virus? Hi Pavel, I'm not sure it's like a virus, maybe more like a genetic defect. This is Micro$oft's new licensing scheme that made its first appearance with the SR1 edition of Office 2000. I've been subjected to it twice now, with Office 2000 and Office XP. Windows XP will use the same scheme. It seems to be a multifaceted license manager that does the following when installed: 1. Sniffs around the hardware, building a list of what's installed. This serves as a "fingerprint" for the Pea Sea. 2. The user enters the CD "key", a unique serial number for the software you purchased. 3. A new encrypted string containing the sftwe key and the hardware fingerprint is now generated. This new key must be provided to Microsoft where they then generate a third key based on the second. This new key must be entered to "unlock" the software. If this sequence is not followed, Office will run only 50 times, then shut itself down. (I bet it leaves "spoor" somewhere to prevent the average user from just reinstalling from the CD. I heard that Windows XP will run only 5 times before shutdown without the final key. Note that the manager encourages the user to use the automatic method for sending the key to Micro$oft. A form is filled out with name, organization, address, phone number and such before a button is pressed to send your personal profile off to the Borg. The return address has to be valid or you can't get the final, third key. (In all fairness, they will allow telephone key transmittal that can be anonymous. This is what I did from a public phone booth) So, Micro$oft now has lots of information about you. If the CD key is used again they just refuse to send the final key. Further, if your hardware environment changes (adding a new frame buffer, scsi controller, etc) the license manager assumes you copied the whole disk to another computer and are therefore a pirate. It shuts down the package until a new key can be obtained from Micro$oft, presumably after you convince them that you aren't really a crook. "I just added a disk! Please turn my Windows on again! I promise to be good and send you more money in the future.", can be heard across the land. This whole thing will probably be good for the Open Source Movement. We won't have to "pull" users from the Borg, the Borg will start "pushing" them to us. Interesting times in which we live, what? Regards, Lew Wolfgang - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
RE: The latest Microsoft FUD. This time from BillG, himself.
> >I still have my 3.1 package all boxed up in the basement. I remember >impatiently waiting for its arrival. What a disappointment it turned >out to be. > >Mark To say the least. The big thing in the current Windows OS's these days is FAT 32. NT 3.1 and NT 3.5 won't even acknowledge this file system. And the ATAPI.SYS file they used is a joke. The first thing you need to do when you install NT is to install a new ATAPI.SYS that would at least see all your partitions. Windows 2000 is far better in this respect, but it's a bloated pig. And I won't even talk about XP. Minimum memory required for XP is 128 Megs. And this license bullsh*t is just an insult to the consumers. Thank the Heavens for Linux! -- Ted - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
RE: The latest Microsoft FUD. This time from BillG, himself.
> -Original Message- > From: Paul Fulghum [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Friday, June 29, 2001 4:02 PM > To: Pavel Machek; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Schilling, Richard; > [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Henning P. Schmiedehausen; > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: The latest Microsoft FUD. This time from BillG, himself. > > > > Is this accurate? I never knew NT was mach-based. I do not think NT > > 1-3 were actually ever shipped, first was NT 3.5 right? > > Pavel > > NT 3.1 was the 1st to ship. > I still have my 3.1 package all boxed up in the basement. I remember impatiently waiting for its arrival. What a disappointment it turned out to be. Mark - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: The latest Microsoft FUD. This time from BillG, himself.
> Is this accurate? I never knew NT was mach-based. I do not think NT > 1-3 were actually ever shipped, first was NT 3.5 right? > Pavel NT 3.1 was the 1st to ship. Paul Fulghum [EMAIL PROTECTED] Microgate Corporation www.microgate.com - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: The latest Microsoft FUD. This time from BillG, himself.
Hi! > > I'm unimpressed with what Microsoft calls an operating system and > > I'm equally unimpressed with what Unix calls an application layer. > > For the last 10 years, Unix has gotten the OS right and the apps wrong > > and Microsoft has gotten the apps right and the OS wrong. Seems like > > there is potential for a win-win. > > I'm equally unimpressed by their applications - how many macro viruses > exist? How do they propagate? How many times do they change file formats? > How many patches are (re)issued to "fix" the same problem? > > The biggest improvement would be that users could remain with a version > that works for them and NOT be forced to pay more money for the same > functionality (watch out for the XP license virus... also known as > a logic bomb). What is XP license virus? Pavel -- I'm [EMAIL PROTECTED] "In my country we have almost anarchy and I don't care." Panos Katsaloulis describing me w.r.t. patents at [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: The latest Microsoft FUD. This time from BillG, himself.
Hi! > Hmm. This *is* the company that has at least one guy full-time working on > merging their changes back into gcc (with the right Copyright > assignments), and where the guy in question does discuss how to make gcc > work nice with both Apple's application framework and the GPL clone of it. > > Oh, and one intern working right now to improve gcc's errors-and-warnings > code, because that's what the gcc list came up with as a task. > > Sure, that's not many people in such a large company, but it's a vast > difference from MS, and it's also a vast difference from the earlier Apple > from the look-and-feel lawsuit age. Take a look at themes.org. They are basicaly trying to sue anyone who makes something similar to their aqua. Pavel -- I'm [EMAIL PROTECTED] "In my country we have almost anarchy and I don't care." Panos Katsaloulis describing me w.r.t. patents at [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: The latest Microsoft FUD. This time from BillG, himself.
Hi! > I wouldn't be at all suprised if they did. It'd fit in with the history of > NT. (Version numbers really approximate, I don't have my notes with me.) > > NT 1.0: the inherited OS/2 1.x code ported to 32 bit mode, sort of. > > NT 2.0: 1.0 didn't work so let's try porting it to the mach microkernel. > > NT 3.0: that didn't work either, so let's hire Dave Cutler (chief unix hater > at Digital research and ex-head of the VAX VMS operating system) to port VMS > on top of the steaming pile of code that is NT. > > NT 3.5: punch holes in the mach microkernel to get some performance, try to > fix some of the more obvious bugs. > > NT 4.0 stabilized (a bit) because dave cutler (and the team under him) was > still around. They hadn't yet again changed horses in midstream. > Eventually, with the same team working on the same code, it's bound to > stabilize a bit.) Bloated a bit as well, but that's proprietary software for > you. Is this accurate? I never knew NT was mach-based. I do not think NT 1-3 were actually ever shipped, first was NT 3.5 right? Pavel -- I'm [EMAIL PROTECTED] "In my country we have almost anarchy and I don't care." Panos Katsaloulis describing me w.r.t. patents at [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: The latest Microsoft FUD. This time from BillG, himself.
On Mon, Jun 25, 2001 at 08:05:41PM +0200, Andreas Bombe wrote: > On Thu, Jun 21, 2001 at 02:21:18PM -0400, Rob Landley wrote: > > Name one thing Microsoft actually invented. Other than Microsoft Bob. > > were listed and where they bought or stole it from. The only things > that were really Microsoft's invention were, at that time, found to be > a) the .ini config file format (which has spread outside of the MS > world) and b) the annoying paper clip. i don't believe the paperclip was their idea either. the original company or product was named something todo with birds? parrots maybe. 'tis a distant memory. j. -- "Bobby, jiggle Grandpa's rat so it looks alive, please" -- gary larson - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: The latest Microsoft FUD. This time from BillG, himself.
On Thu, Jun 21, 2001 at 02:21:18PM -0400, Rob Landley wrote: > Name one thing Microsoft actually invented. Other than Microsoft Bob. I remember there being a web page where all of Microsoft's "innovations" were listed and where they bought or stole it from. The only things that were really Microsoft's invention were, at that time, found to be a) the .ini config file format (which has spread outside of the MS world) and b) the annoying paper clip. Does anyone have the URL handy? Try finding that in a search engine... -- Andreas E. Bombe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>DSA key 0x04880A44 - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: The latest Microsoft FUD. This time from BillG, himself.
Alan Cox wrote: > > > > Do they include the source? There's a CD of source that you can buy > > > for $20 but gcc isn't listed > > > > I'm not sure if they are allowed to do that. See clause 1 (c): > > > > http://msdn.microsoft.com/msdn-files/027/001/516/eula_mit.htm > Minor note: 1) The above link is now gone... 2) The above EULA was examined very closely by various communications manufactures. If the wording remains the same when the library gets out of BETA there may be some interesting counter EULAs. > Slight oops on their part, but then that license is fairly new. I don't > think it is aimed at the Linux world though. Microsoft are trying to prevent > something else - and its all about lock in again. > > If they prohibit people from linking free software with their own libraries > it allows them to prevent cost effective applications becoming available on > their platform so they can continue to inflate their prices. In paticular > I suspect this is aimed much more at things like OpenOffice, MySql on Windows, > Mozilla and friends. > > Of course in two years time no doubt "in the customers interest" it will be > Microsoft approved developers only , and a while after that nobody else will > be allowed to make apps for their product. > > Alan > > - > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in > the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html > Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: The latest Microsoft FUD. This time from BillG, himself.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Rob Landley) wrote on 22.06.01 in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > On Thursday 21 June 2001 18:49, Alan Cox wrote: > > > > Except that Apple keeps the old code open. Probably because > > > they'll gain nothing from it, and at best, they can appeal to > > > the techies. > > > > A company that seems to write 'you shall not work on open source projects > > in your spare time' into its employment contracts is not what I would call > > friendly or want to work for. Im sure its only a small step to 'employees > > shall not snowboard' 'employees shall not go skiing' - all of course > > argued for the same reason as being essential to the company interest > > This IS the company that had the "I work 90 hours all the time" club with > t-shirts and everything back under Jobs in the early 80's. And far more > recently, where at least one employee got in trouble for "thinking > different' with a parody site involving famous serial killers. > > The "Proprietary frosting" model is fine for leaf-node projects like games. > But if the new layer is infrastructure other people are expected to build on > top of, then what you're really saying is "I want slaves". Hmm. This *is* the company that has at least one guy full-time working on merging their changes back into gcc (with the right Copyright assignments), and where the guy in question does discuss how to make gcc work nice with both Apple's application framework and the GPL clone of it. Oh, and one intern working right now to improve gcc's errors-and-warnings code, because that's what the gcc list came up with as a task. Sure, that's not many people in such a large company, but it's a vast difference from MS, and it's also a vast difference from the earlier Apple from the look-and-feel lawsuit age. For a while, they also paid someone for working on Debian's packaging tool (dpkg) which they now use for Darwin; at the time, that guy was practically the dpkg lead developer. And don't forget MkLinux. Apple is not another Red Hat, but they're not a Black Hat either. MfG Kai - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: The latest Microsoft FUD. This time from BillG, himself.
On Thursday 21 June 2001 18:49, Alan Cox wrote: > > Except that Apple keeps the old code open. Probably because > > they'll gain nothing from it, and at best, they can appeal to > > the techies. > > A company that seems to write 'you shall not work on open source projects > in your spare time' into its employment contracts is not what I would call > friendly or want to work for. Im sure its only a small step to 'employees > shall not snowboard' 'employees shall not go skiing' - all of course argued > for the same reason as being essential to the company interest This IS the company that had the "I work 90 hours all the time" club with t-shirts and everything back under Jobs in the early 80's. And far more recently, where at least one employee got in trouble for "thinking different' with a parody site involving famous serial killers. The "Proprietary frosting" model is fine for leaf-node projects like games. But if the new layer is infrastructure other people are expected to build on top of, then what you're really saying is "I want slaves". Rob - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
RE: The latest Microsoft FUD. This time from BillG, himself.
>Did I mention I'm writing a book on all this? (The history of linux and the >computer industry, going back to World War II...) This makes me the only >person I know who's excited about finding ~50 issues of "Compute" and >"Compute's gazette" from the mid 80's at a garage sale. An the university of >texas's library has been quite a help. So have the used book stores... If your interested in old magazines, I had saved literally dozens of 80's computer magazines, Compute, Computes Gazette, and some others. I just cleaned up the house, but may have some left. I didn't think anyone was interested in this stuff, and threw a bunch away. I would be happy to donate them if I have some left. Let me know offline, as this sounds like an interesting project. B. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: The latest Microsoft FUD. This time from BillG, himself.
On Thursday 21 June 2001 17:49, Schilling, Richard wrote: > > -Original Message- > > From: Rob Landley > > Sent: Thursday, June 21, 2001 9:25 AM > > [snip] > > > BSD forked to death in the 80's. Everybody from AT&T to Sun > > to IBM who saw > > money in it spun off their own incompatable, proprietary version. > > Microsoft also had a UNIX variant, but they gave up on the product . . > .forget why. Because Paul Allen got leukemia and quit the company around 1983. Microsoft was founded by two people: Paul Allen (the techie) and Bill Gates (the marketer, whose father was a lawyer. Gates was a bit technical in the 8-bit days, but the last piece of code he personally wrote that shipped in a product was the text editor for the TRS-80.) In late '79 early '80, they heard the rumors that IBM was pondering a PC, and Paul Allen went "any real computer will run Unix", so they got a license from AT&T and ported the sucker, calling it "Xenix". (MS was a porting house, they made their living porting software (mostly BASIC) from one platform to another in those days, and porting unix was a big thing, so as the name implies: they'd port it anywhere). And then IBM dropped the PC's tech specs on them after they signed non-disclosure and it said "minimum 16k of ram", and they went "okay, we need an embedded OS". So they sent IBM to talk to Gary Kildall at Intergalactic Digital Research (I.E. Kildall's living room) and get CP/M, but the meeting fell through famously. But Allen knew a guy who knew a guy who had reverse engineered CP/M from a store bought API manual as a summer project (Quick And Dirty Operating System). They got a bank loan for $50k, bought it, and offered it to IBM. Remember, the original PC the floppy was optional. Dos 1.0 was only needed if you got the optional floppy, the in-ROM basic (which was the real reason IBM was talking to MS, the rest was just gravy) had support for the casette tape interface built into the original PC. That was the default interface, floppies were an expensive luxury. But microsoft had conditionally licensed to IBM their entire rest of their software catalog (from typing tutor on up), conditional on having a floppy drive to load them from. They went out and got their own version of CPM so their application software deal with IBM wouldn't fall through. And of course IBM had two sources for everything. (As a big evil monopoly, they understood that being on the receiving end, at the mercy of a monopoly supplier, was a bad thing.) They even made Intel license the 8086/8088 design to AMD so they'd have a second source. (And that's how AMD got into the clone business.) DOS 1.0 and CP/M ran EXACTLY the same software, they were two sources for the same thing. At first. Paul Allen didn't give up on Unix, of course. He knew the PC memory would grow and someday would be enough to run Unix, so in he set about making a migration path from DOS to unix. The dos 2.0 manuals went out and said that DOS would someday be replaced with Xenix, and in the meantime here's a lot of unix functionality to get you used to it. He added subdirectories (using \ instead of / only because / was already the command line option indicator. "dir /s". In 2.0 the deprecated that and changed it to "dir -s" as the recommended method, to be unixish.) Plus device drivers, pipes and redirects (hacked onto the CP/M base as best they could), and of course file control blocks were replaced with file handles. The dos 2.0 manual eventual promised they'd give DOS multiple process support (multitasking). Dos 3.0 was mostly based on adding new hardware support, specifically hard drives since the XT was coming out. And it's about this time (1983ish) that Allen got sick and took a leave of absence from microsoft which he never returned from. And Microsoft's technical side fell apart, but not until after they shipped DOS 3. When allen left, two things happened. 1) Gates was left with absolute power within Microsoft and started succumbing to it. (He was always a greedy bastard, but so are steve jobs, larry ellison, the heads of commodore and atari, and just about everybody else in the business. Linus has his "i'm a bastard" speech too...) 2) The technical side of Microsoft imploded (at the mercy of marketing). Xenix was unloaded on the Santa-Cruz operation almost immediately, and Gates allowed microsoft to be led around by the nose by IBM for the next five years or so in place of any in-house technical agenda. (And hence OS/2 1.0)... Did I mention I'm writing a book on all this? (The history of linux and the computer industry, going back to World War II...) This makes me the only person I know who's excited about finding ~50 issues of "Compute" and "Compute's gazette" from the mid 80's at a garage sale. An the university of texas's library has been quite a help. So have the used book stores... Still trying to figure out a title tho
Re: The latest Microsoft FUD. This time from BillG, himself.
> Apple's doing it right now. Hardly.. > Except that Apple keeps the old code open. Probably because > they'll gain nothing from it, and at best, they can appeal to > the techies. A company that seems to write 'you shall not work on open source projects in your spare time' into its employment contracts is not what I would call friendly or want to work for. Im sure its only a small step to 'employees shall not snowboard' 'employees shall not go skiing' - all of course argued for the same reason as being essential to the company interest - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: The latest Microsoft FUD. This time from BillG, himself.
On Thu, Jun 21, 2001 at 12:25:15PM -0400, Rob Landley wrote: > If MS was currently facing BSD rather than LInux, they would have "embrace > and extend"ed it long ago. Hide half of office in the system libraries (just > like windows), come out with a closed-source version, loot the open > competition for any advances but don't share yours... Apple's doing it right now. Except that Apple keeps the old code open. Probably because they'll gain nothing from it, and at best, they can appeal to the techies. And it worked. For months, I heard nothing but how much butt MacOS X would kick and that it'd be like Linux, but have a better application layer. Whatever. No one says that now that it's out. As if Apple would really try to appeal to us. :) -- Michael Bacarella <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Technical Staff / System Development, New York Connect.Net, Ltd. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: The latest Microsoft FUD. This time from BillG, himself.
On Thursday 21 June 2001 04:50, Henning P. Schmiedehausen wrote: > Rob Landley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >Ooh, do I get to say "I told you so"? (LinuxToday buried my submission > > way back under a blurb about caldera, but still...) > > And the quote of "stealing the TCP stack from BSD" is still wrong. Everybody took the BSD tcp stack, including VMS and OS/2. It was the first major lump of code they separated when AT&T started making legal threats around 1983. Did I say stealing? The berkeley people gave it away for free... > And the web browser they have today derives from NCSA Mosaic as > prominently displayed in the "About" box of every single IE version > out. No TBL here. You take microsoft's word for things? Read this: http://www.businessweek.com/bwdaily/dnflash/january/new0122d.htm Various other coverage: http://www.zdnet.com/eweek/news/0120/22aspy.html http://www4.zdnet.com/anchordesk/story/story_587.html And two years later, spyglass still hadn't learned their lesson: http://www.zdnet.com/eweek/stories/general/0,11011,1014310,00.html Rob - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: The latest Microsoft FUD. This time from BillG, himself.
On Thursday 21 June 2001 04:37, Henning P. Schmiedehausen wrote: > > Devils' advocate position: If Linux would not be under GPL but under > BSD license, M$ may have already done so. But consider them porting > one of their monster applications and release it just to find out that > they've linked to GNU readline somewhere because of an QM oversight. I said as much in an article to LinuxToday. (They buried it under a page of commentary about Ransom Love, but they did post it.) http://linuxtoday.com/news_story.php3?ltsn=2001-05-10-002-20-PS BSD forked to death in the 80's. Everybody from AT&T to Sun to IBM who saw money in it spun off their own incompatable, proprietary version. If MS was currently facing BSD rather than LInux, they would have "embrace and extend"ed it long ago. Hide half of office in the system libraries (just like windows), come out with a closed-source version, loot the open competition for any advances but don't share yours... > I'd guess, to them, the risk of having their core code base (their > source of revenue) "infected by the GNU virus" is just too high. The GPL was designed to block embrace and extend. It embraces and extends right back. And it's torquing microsoft off big time. > Hmmm. After all, they're already using FreeBSD. Maybe they will > release "Windows for FreeBSD" with Office. Now that would be an > interesting impact on Linux (I would be over there in seconds =:-) ) Just like AT&T did to free Unix in ~1984. How long before it's "Office for BSD incidentally distributed with a closed-source copy of BSD" mutated into "yet another incompatable proprietary operating system, just with lots of unix code." That wouldn't solve anything. We've been through a few years with netscape as our only viable web browser on linux, how much fun was that? Rember the ben franklin quote about exchanging liberty for safety. Buying short-term gains with long-term sacrifices is a dumb idea. Been there. Done that. Came here to recover. > Regards > Henning Rob - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: The latest Microsoft FUD. This time from BillG, himself.
On 21 Jun 2001 15:48:11 +0200, Daniel Phillips wrote: > On Thursday 21 June 2001 10:46, Henning P. Schmiedehausen wrote: > > My last LinuxExpo talk was also made with PP, > > This makes about as much sense as going to a cocktail party with nose glasses > on. One of the mantras that get hammered into Microsoft employees is "Eat your own dogfood." Which means that people working at Microsoft should attempt to use the company's products throughout the day in order to surface problems and give incentive to those folks to make things better. Obviously, the "EYODF" work doesn't kick in until there is some minimal level of functionality. It may be that Linux/OSS office applications simply aren't useful enough yet for anyone to stomach using them throughout the day. It would be nice to see more Linux folks eating the dogfood and making those applications better, though. For my part, I test Enlightenment, Gnome, XFree86 and Mozilla, in addition to Linux kernels. Miles - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: The latest Microsoft FUD. This time from BillG, himself.
> > You can scream all you want that "it isn't free software" but the fact > > of the matter is that you all scream that and then go do your slides for > > your Linux talks in PowerPoint. > > I think this is an unfair generalization. Not really. In Linus's book he describes that his presentations used to be (and possibly still are?) done in powerpoint. In fact at one point he says "thank god for Microsoft". Given the context, I'm not sure if he was joking or not. Not that it matters. I share Linus's opinion that it's not an issue of hating Microsoft. It's an issue of keeping your energies focused on progress because Microsoft will be irrelevant in the very near future. The momentum is on our side... -- Chuck Wolber| steward: "Are you the pilot?" System Administrator| pilot: "Yes, why?" AltaServ Corporation| steward, handing box to pilot: "Then this is for you." (425)576-1202 | pilot, looking inside box: "Oh, it's a new altimeter." ten.vresatla@wkcuhc | --Chris Kennedy - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: The latest Microsoft FUD. This time from BillG, himself.
> > Do they include the source? There's a CD of source that you can buy > > for $20 but gcc isn't listed > > I'm not sure if they are allowed to do that. See clause 1 (c): > > http://msdn.microsoft.com/msdn-files/027/001/516/eula_mit.htm Slight oops on their part, but then that license is fairly new. I don't think it is aimed at the Linux world though. Microsoft are trying to prevent something else - and its all about lock in again. If they prohibit people from linking free software with their own libraries it allows them to prevent cost effective applications becoming available on their platform so they can continue to inflate their prices. In paticular I suspect this is aimed much more at things like OpenOffice, MySql on Windows, Mozilla and friends. Of course in two years time no doubt "in the customers interest" it will be Microsoft approved developers only , and a while after that nobody else will be allowed to make apps for their product. Alan - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: The latest Microsoft FUD. This time from BillG, himself.
On Thursday 21 June 2001 10:46, Henning P. Schmiedehausen wrote: > My last LinuxExpo talk was also made with PP, This makes about as much sense as going to a cocktail party with nose glasses on. -- Daniel - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: The latest Microsoft FUD. This time from BillG, himself.
Larry McVoy wrote: > You can scream all you want that "it isn't free software" but the fact > of the matter is that you all scream that and then go do your slides for > your Linux talks in PowerPoint. Never used powerpoint. If I need slides I use a (linux-based) word processor and a bigger font than for paper. Or html if I need something more fancy than text. Html works great, and is also nifty if I need to put the stuff on the web for later reference. No conversion needed, and readers don't need anything but the browser they're using. Helge Hafting - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: The latest Microsoft FUD. This time from BillG, himself.
On Thu, 21 Jun 2001, Paul Flinders wrote: > Alan Cox wrote: > > > > http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/news/0,4586,5092935,00.html > > > > > Of course the URL that goes with that is : > > http://www.microsoft.com/windows2000/interix/features.asp > > > > Yes., Microsoft ship GNU C (quite legally) as part of their offerings... > > Do they include the source? There's a CD of source that you can buy > for $20 but gcc isn't listed I'm not sure if they are allowed to do that. See clause 1 (c): http://msdn.microsoft.com/msdn-files/027/001/516/eula_mit.htm Rik -- Executive summary of a recent Microsoft press release: "we are concerned about the GNU General Public License (GPL)" http://www.surriel.com/ http://www.conectiva.com/ http://distro.conectiva.com/ - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: The latest Microsoft FUD. This time from BillG, himself.
> > On Wed, Jun 20, 2001 at 11:09:10PM +0100, Alan Cox wrote: > > > http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/news/0,4586,5092935,00.html > > > > > Of course the URL that goes with that is : > > http://www.microsoft.com/windows2000/interix/features.asp > > > > Yes., Microsoft ship GNU C (quite legally) as part of their offerings... > > Which brings up an interesting question for us all. Let's postulate, for > the sake of discussion, that we agree on the following: > > a) Linux (or just about any Unix) is a better low level OS than NT > b) Microsoft's application infrastructure is better (the COM layer, >the stuff that lets apps talk to each, the desktop, etc). Not completly - the COM layer is (my opinion) part of what propagates some of their security problems. What else would be capable of disabling a cruser so fast (and take two hours to restart)... There appears to be no functional difference between COM and CORBA (based on superficial knowlege only) except specification availability. > I know we can argue that KDE/GNOME/whatever is going to get there or is > there or is better, etc., but for the time being lets just pretend that > the Microsoft stuff is better. > > What would be wrong with Microsoft/Linux? It would be: > > a) the Linux kernel > b) the Microsoft API ported to X > c) Microsoft apps > d) Linux apps > > Since Microsoft is all about making money, it doesn't matter if they > charge for the dll's or the OS, either one is fine, you can't run Word > without them. If you don't need the Microsoft apps, you could strip > them off and strip off the dlls and ship all the rest of it without > giving Microsoft a dime. If you do need the apps or you want the app > infrastructure, you have to give Microsoft exactly what you have to give > them today - money - but you can run Word side by side with Ghostview > or whatever. Microsoft could charge exactly the same amount for the > dll's as they charge for the OS, none of the end users can tell the > difference anyway. Ah yes, raise the Mr. Bill tax... The DLLs ought to be less than half the price of the OS .. after all, they are a small part of the distribution and belong to the application(s). If you attempt to find a full installation of NT (JUST the OS), it will cost ~400+ dollars (US). If you then add Office, add an additional 200. If you want program development, add another 200 to 600, maybe more since I haven't looked recently. For the most part, I wouldn't complain too much about their prices. If the products would work. If they didn't have such horrible security. If the "patches" supplied would also work and not introduce more and different failures. BTW, the prices are actually slightly less than what AT&T, SCO, and others charged for pieces of a unix system when they were originally sold ($600 base os, $600 application development, $600 documentation workbench all values approximate, from memory). > I'm unimpressed with what Microsoft calls an operating system and > I'm equally unimpressed with what Unix calls an application layer. > For the last 10 years, Unix has gotten the OS right and the apps wrong > and Microsoft has gotten the apps right and the OS wrong. Seems like > there is potential for a win-win. I'm equally unimpressed by their applications - how many macro viruses exist? How do they propagate? How many times do they change file formats? How many patches are (re)issued to "fix" the same problem? The biggest improvement would be that users could remain with a version that works for them and NOT be forced to pay more money for the same functionality (watch out for the XP license virus... also known as a logic bomb). > You can scream all you want that "it isn't free software" but the fact > of the matter is that you all scream that and then go do your slides for > your Linux talks in PowerPoint. Not by choice - I'm forced to use M$ crap because the conferences will not accept anything else (yet another monopoly point). Personally, I would prefer to use Applix, StarOffice, WordPerfect, FrameMaker, ... Only one of which is "free". I agree that M$ applications should be available. But until M$ quits appropriating other peoples code and calling it theirs I, for one, don't want to be forced to use them. - Jesse I Pollard, II Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Any opinions expressed are solely my own. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: The latest Microsoft FUD. This time from BillG, himself.
Alan Cox wrote: > > http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/news/0,4586,5092935,00.html > > > Of course the URL that goes with that is : > http://www.microsoft.com/windows2000/interix/features.asp > > Yes., Microsoft ship GNU C (quite legally) as part of their offerings... Do they include the source? There's a CD of source that you can buy for $20 but gcc isn't listed - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: The latest Microsoft FUD. This time from BillG, himself.
On Wed, Jun 20, 2001 at 05:53:44PM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Not I. The slides for my last meeting were done as TIFF files and I used xv to > display them. Plus, the most recent documentation I wrote for one of our > mainframe applications was done with vi and LaTeX. "What, in addition to the > printed copies, you want a copy of the Word document? There is no Word > document. But I'll convert it to Rich Text for you and you can take it from > there." If my employer didn't require me to use them occasionally, I'd delete > every Microsoft product on my laptop. It's not that I have anything against > proprietary software. It's just Microsoft that I despise. I did the slides for my last LUG talk in MagicPoint (apt-get install mgp, or on rpmfind.net, or wherever, maybe even with RH, I don't know). Very clean format - see http://kabuki.sfarc.net/daniel/netfilter/netfilter.mgp -- Daniel Stone <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> "can NE1 help me aim nuclear weaponz? /MSG ME!!" - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: The latest Microsoft FUD. This time from BillG, himself.
On Wednesday 20 June 2001 18:31, Daniel Phillips wrote: > On Wednesday 20 June 2001 23:33, Rik van Riel wrote: > > On 20 Jun 2001, Miles Lane wrote: > > > http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/news/0,4586,5092935,00.html > > > > Yes, he sure knows how to bring Linux to the attention > > of people ;) > > Not to mention the GPL, which I can guarantee you, before today my mom had > *never* heard of. > > -- > Daniel Ooh, do I get to say "I told you so"? (LinuxToday buried my submission way back under a blurb about caldera, but still...) http://linuxtoday.com/news_story.php3?ltsn=2001-05-10-002-20-PS Rob - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: The latest Microsoft FUD. This time from BillG, himself.
On Wed, Jun 20, 2001 at 03:33:45PM -0700, Larry McVoy wrote: > You can scream all you want that "it isn't free software" but the fact > of the matter is that you all scream that and then go do your slides for > your Linux talks in PowerPoint. I think this is an unfair generalization. I'm not even all that clear about what PowerPoint is (I've never seen it, ever). I'm guessing that it lets you display slides in sequence, but that's just from what I've seen of MagicPoint, which someone said at a user meet was a clone of PowerPoint. (And yes, the talk given that day was in fact done with MagicPoint) -- Michael Bacarella <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Technical Staff / System Development, New York Connect.Net, Ltd. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: The latest Microsoft FUD. This time from BillG, himself.
On Thursday 21 June 2001 00:33, Larry McVoy wrote: > You can scream all you want that "it isn't free software" but the fact > of the matter is that you all scream that and then go do your slides for > your Linux talks in PowerPoint. Bad example Larry, most of us do our talks with MagicPoint. I'll probably use KPresenter for the next one, it's pretty slick. I haven't booted Window in almost 2 years, not because I'm forcing myself to stay away, but because I haven't had the need. And yes, I do word processing, make spreadsheets, charts, send emails, you name it. -- Daniel - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: The latest Microsoft FUD. This time from BillG, himself.
Larry McVoy writes: > On Wed, Jun 20, 2001 at 11:09:10PM +0100, Alan Cox wrote: > > > http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/news/0,4586,5092935,00.html > > > > > Of course the URL that goes with that is : > > http://www.microsoft.com/windows2000/interix/features.asp > > > > Yes., Microsoft ship GNU C (quite legally) as part of their offerings... > > Which brings up an interesting question for us all. Let's postulate, for > the sake of discussion, that we agree on the following: > > a) Linux (or just about any Unix) is a better low level OS than NT > b) Microsoft's application infrastructure is better (the COM layer, >the stuff that lets apps talk to each, the desktop, etc). > > I know we can argue that KDE/GNOME/whatever is going to get there or is > there or is better, etc., but for the time being lets just pretend that > the Microsoft stuff is better. > > What would be wrong with Microsoft/Linux? It would be: > > a) the Linux kernel > b) the Microsoft API ported to X > c) Microsoft apps > d) Linux apps > > Since Microsoft is all about making money, it doesn't matter if they > charge for the dll's or the OS, either one is fine, you can't run Word > without them. If you don't need the Microsoft apps, you could strip > them off and strip off the dlls and ship all the rest of it without > giving Microsoft a dime. If you do need the apps or you want the app > infrastructure, you have to give Microsoft exactly what you have to give > them today - money - but you can run Word side by side with Ghostview > or whatever. Microsoft could charge exactly the same amount for the > dll's as they charge for the OS, none of the end users can tell the > difference anyway. > > I'm unimpressed with what Microsoft calls an operating system and > I'm equally unimpressed with what Unix calls an application layer. > For the last 10 years, Unix has gotten the OS right and the apps wrong > and Microsoft has gotten the apps right and the OS wrong. Seems like > there is potential for a win-win. > > You can scream all you want that "it isn't free software" but the > fact of the matter is that you all scream that and then go do your > slides for your Linux talks in PowerPoint. Actually, it wouldn't bother me at all if they did that. If they didn't violate the GPL (i.e. didn't make proprietary changes to the kernel and libc and various utilities). I guess they could make proprietary hacks to X, which I wouldn't want, otherwise I expect that normal X apps would become 2nd class citizens. If people want to pay for M$ office I'd much rather see them using Linux underneath. That way they have a decent OS and the chances of them being slowly weaned away from M$ products as free alternatives become available (or they get comfortable with the idea of free alternatives). Trying to get people to change wholesale is a lot harder. I suspect M$ doesn't want to do this, because while they could keep flogging Office for a long time (I hear it's better than the alternatives), they would find it harder to flog all the smaller ancillary programmes, as there would be more viable alternatives. I expect M$ will hang on to the bitter end. There's also a lot of emotional attachment to their OS which is driving their policy, I bet. Regards, Richard Permanent: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Current: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: The latest Microsoft FUD. This time from BillG, himself.
On Wed, 20 Jun 2001, Larry McVoy wrote: > For the last 10 years, Unix has gotten the OS right and the apps wrong > and Microsoft has gotten the apps right and the OS wrong. Seems like > there is potential for a win-win. I've been hoping for this ever since the rumors of "Microsoft Linux" started popping up. The thing is that it'll probably never happen because Microsoft wouldn't be able to stand having any portion of the system out of their control. We have VMWare, I doubt you'll ever do any better than that... - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: The latest Microsoft FUD. This time from BillG, himself.
Larry McVoy wrote: > > You can scream all you want that "it isn't free software" but the fact > of the matter is that you all scream that and then go do your slides for > your Linux talks in PowerPoint. At the Linux SuperClusters 2000 Conference, MadDog and I were the the only ones with slides done on Linux. Pretty sad! Khalid Aziz Linux Development Laboratory (970)898-9214Hewlett-Packard [EMAIL PROTECTED]Fort Collins, CO - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: The latest Microsoft FUD. This time from BillG, himself.
>You can scream all you want that "it isn't free software" but the fact >of the matter is that you all scream that and then go do your slides for >your Linux talks in PowerPoint. Or AppleWorks (Mac), in my case. Or, if I wanted to be flashy, I'd make the slides up in CorelXARA (which originated on the Acorn and would probably run under WINE today) and move them to GraphicConvertor (Mac) for display. I daresay it's possible to do all that under Linux, but I haven't found such readily-available solutions staring me in the face yet. Incidentally, you don't need a flashy presentation to make an impact. I won a prize this month largely based on a presentation I did - the content was king, the slides were white-on-black text, and I stammered my way through the actual presentation (I'm not good at public speaking). The close runner-up had done a big flashy PowerPoint presentation, was better at public speaking, but hadn't researched his material quite so thoroughly. I use Linux for programming and servers. I still use my Macs for regular day-to-day workstation duty. That's the status quo, and it will only change slowly and with much effort. -- -- from: Jonathan "Chromatix" Morton mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (not for attachments) website: http://www.chromatix.uklinux.net/vnc/ geekcode: GCS$/E dpu(!) s:- a20 C+++ UL++ P L+++ E W+ N- o? K? w--- O-- M++$ V? PS PE- Y+ PGP++ t- 5- X- R !tv b++ DI+++ D G e+ h+ r++ y+(*) tagline: The key to knowledge is not to rely on people to teach you it. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: The latest Microsoft FUD. This time from BillG, himself.
On 06/20/2001 at 05:33:45 PM Larry McVoy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >You can scream all you want that "it isn't free software" but the fact >of the matter is that you all scream that and then go do your slides for >your Linux talks in PowerPoint. Not I. The slides for my last meeting were done as TIFF files and I used xv to display them. Plus, the most recent documentation I wrote for one of our mainframe applications was done with vi and LaTeX. "What, in addition to the printed copies, you want a copy of the Word document? There is no Word document. But I'll convert it to Rich Text for you and you can take it from there." If my employer didn't require me to use them occasionally, I'd delete every Microsoft product on my laptop. It's not that I have anything against proprietary software. It's just Microsoft that I despise. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: The latest Microsoft FUD. This time from BillG, himself.
> What would be wrong with Microsoft/Linux? It would be: > > a) the Linux kernel > b) the Microsoft API ported to X > c) Microsoft apps > d) Linux apps Providing they follow the standards, the GPL and work with the community I certainly have no problems with it. Its not really any different to using Wine. It is clearly possible for a company to reform over time. IBM were the microsoft of a past age, and they seem to have somewhat improved since. Alan - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: The latest Microsoft FUD. This time from BillG, himself.
On Wed, Jun 20, 2001 at 11:09:10PM +0100, Alan Cox wrote: > > http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/news/0,4586,5092935,00.html > > > Of course the URL that goes with that is : > http://www.microsoft.com/windows2000/interix/features.asp > > Yes., Microsoft ship GNU C (quite legally) as part of their offerings... Which brings up an interesting question for us all. Let's postulate, for the sake of discussion, that we agree on the following: a) Linux (or just about any Unix) is a better low level OS than NT b) Microsoft's application infrastructure is better (the COM layer, the stuff that lets apps talk to each, the desktop, etc). I know we can argue that KDE/GNOME/whatever is going to get there or is there or is better, etc., but for the time being lets just pretend that the Microsoft stuff is better. What would be wrong with Microsoft/Linux? It would be: a) the Linux kernel b) the Microsoft API ported to X c) Microsoft apps d) Linux apps Since Microsoft is all about making money, it doesn't matter if they charge for the dll's or the OS, either one is fine, you can't run Word without them. If you don't need the Microsoft apps, you could strip them off and strip off the dlls and ship all the rest of it without giving Microsoft a dime. If you do need the apps or you want the app infrastructure, you have to give Microsoft exactly what you have to give them today - money - but you can run Word side by side with Ghostview or whatever. Microsoft could charge exactly the same amount for the dll's as they charge for the OS, none of the end users can tell the difference anyway. I'm unimpressed with what Microsoft calls an operating system and I'm equally unimpressed with what Unix calls an application layer. For the last 10 years, Unix has gotten the OS right and the apps wrong and Microsoft has gotten the apps right and the OS wrong. Seems like there is potential for a win-win. You can scream all you want that "it isn't free software" but the fact of the matter is that you all scream that and then go do your slides for your Linux talks in PowerPoint. -- --- Larry McVoy lm at bitmover.com http://www.bitmover.com/lm - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: The latest Microsoft FUD. This time from BillG, himself.
On Wednesday 20 June 2001 23:33, Rik van Riel wrote: > On 20 Jun 2001, Miles Lane wrote: > > http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/news/0,4586,5092935,00.html > > Yes, he sure knows how to bring Linux to the attention > of people ;) Not to mention the GPL, which I can guarantee you, before today my mom had *never* heard of. -- Daniel - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: The latest Microsoft FUD. This time from BillG, himself.
On Wed, 20 Jun 2001, Alan Cox wrote: > > http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/news/0,4586,5092935,00.html > > > Of course the URL that goes with that is : > http://www.microsoft.com/windows2000/interix/features.asp > > Yes., Microsoft ship GNU C (quite legally) as part of their offerings... As well as: http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/press/2000/Apr00/WinUNIXPR.asp where they announce distributing ActiveState's Perl 5.6 as part of their toolset. (Which they funded the development of...) Seems they are willing to use Open Source if it suits their purposes... [EMAIL PROTECTED] | Note to AOL users: for a quick shortcut to reply Alan Olsen| to my mail, just hit the ctrl, alt and del keys. "All power is derived from the barrel of a gnu." - Mao Tse Stallman - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: The latest Microsoft FUD. This time from BillG, himself.
> http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/news/0,4586,5092935,00.html > Of course the URL that goes with that is : http://www.microsoft.com/windows2000/interix/features.asp Yes., Microsoft ship GNU C (quite legally) as part of their offerings... Alan - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: The latest Microsoft FUD. This time from BillG, himself.
On 20 Jun 2001, Miles Lane wrote: > http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/news/0,4586,5092935,00.html Yes, he sure knows how to bring Linux to the attention of people ;) Rik -- Executive summary of a recent Microsoft press release: "we are concerned about the GNU General Public License (GPL)" http://www.surriel.com/ http://www.conectiva.com/ http://distro.conectiva.com/ - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
The latest Microsoft FUD. This time from BillG, himself.
http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/news/0,4586,5092935,00.html - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
