Re: [ubuntu-uk] Judge bans Microsoft Word sales
> I disagree that everyone should use Plain English, however; if you're > not sure what a word means, look it up and extend your vocabulary :) +1 -- every day's a school day. 2009/8/16 William Anderson > Paul Sutton wrote: > >> Alan Lord (News) wrote: > >>> I disagree. Making *everything* open source would be pyrrhic panacea. > >>> Competition is good. Competition is what has spurned the FOSS movement > >>> and proprietary vendors alike. Trying to eradicate the proprietary > >>> market is unrealistic and would stifle innovation. > > > > what does "pyrrhic panacea" mean? Would it be possible to use Plain > > English please, so people know what you are talking about > > A pyrrhic (pirr-ik) victory means winning something at a terrible cost > to yourself, referring to King Pyrrhus of Epirus, who fought and won > battles against the Romans in 280 BC and 278 BC, but lost a great number > of his soldiers, including key personnel and his close friends. > > A panacea (pan-ah-see-ah) means something that can solve all problems, > or a medicine or remedy that can cure all ills and diseases, and extend > life. It refers to Panakea (Πανάκεια), the Greek goddess of healing, > who was said to heal the sick with potion. > > So I guess from those two definitions, Alan means that making everything > open source would be something that could solve all problems, but at a > terrible cost to us all. > > I disagree that everyone should use Plain English, however; if you're > not sure what a word means, look it up and extend your vocabulary :) > > -n > > -- > ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com > https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk > https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/ > -- ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/
Re: [ubuntu-uk] Judge bans Microsoft Word sales
Paul Sutton wrote: >> Alan Lord (News) wrote: >>> I disagree. Making *everything* open source would be pyrrhic panacea. >>> Competition is good. Competition is what has spurned the FOSS movement >>> and proprietary vendors alike. Trying to eradicate the proprietary >>> market is unrealistic and would stifle innovation. > > what does "pyrrhic panacea" mean? Would it be possible to use Plain > English please, so people know what you are talking about A pyrrhic (pirr-ik) victory means winning something at a terrible cost to yourself, referring to King Pyrrhus of Epirus, who fought and won battles against the Romans in 280 BC and 278 BC, but lost a great number of his soldiers, including key personnel and his close friends. A panacea (pan-ah-see-ah) means something that can solve all problems, or a medicine or remedy that can cure all ills and diseases, and extend life. It refers to Panakea (Πανάκεια), the Greek goddess of healing, who was said to heal the sick with potion. So I guess from those two definitions, Alan means that making everything open source would be something that could solve all problems, but at a terrible cost to us all. I disagree that everyone should use Plain English, however; if you're not sure what a word means, look it up and extend your vocabulary :) -n -- ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/
Re: [ubuntu-uk] Judge bans Microsoft Word sales
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 James Tait wrote: > Alan Lord (News) wrote: >> I disagree. Making *everything* open source would be pyrrhic panacea. >> Competition is good. Competition is what has spurned the FOSS movement >> and proprietary vendors alike. Trying to eradicate the proprietary >> market is unrealistic and would stifle innovation. > what does "pyrrhic panacea" mean? Would it be possible to use Plain English please, so people know what you are talking about Paul -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iEYEARECAAYFAkqIMpEACgkQaggq1k2FJq2pqgCeNkZLor8Fb6nNgRhHgATjNux0 phsAnRWlRZe6N4iBxTl467Z4FhJyG9M5 =rFZU -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/
Re: [ubuntu-uk] Judge bans Microsoft Word sales
On Sunday 16 Aug 2009 09:30:59 David King wrote: > Why is competition good? > Because competition drives innovation. For companies competition means they could lose market share and profit, unless they keep "improving" their product. So it's entirely seen as a threat to their bottom line. In FOSS competition means someone has produced a better application/distro than yours, making you want to improve yours. In *most* cases there are no monetary considerations only the respect and admiration of your peers. Both sides compete, but in different ways. George -- ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/
Re: [ubuntu-uk] Judge bans Microsoft Word sales
Why is competition good? Personally, I think co-operation is much better. I though that FOSS was all about co-operation, and people making software that people actually need, rather than coming up with a new upgrade (like MS Office 2007) just because the makers need to make more money. Competition creates losers. With FOSS, everyone can be a winner. David King > > Alan Lord (News) wrote: > >> I disagree. Making *everything* open source would be pyrrhic panacea. >> Competition is good. Competition is what has spurned the FOSS movement >> and proprietary vendors alike. Trying to eradicate the proprietary >> market is unrealistic and would stifle innovation. >> > > > -- ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/
Re: [ubuntu-uk] Judge bans Microsoft Word sales
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Alan Lord (News) wrote: > I disagree. Making *everything* open source would be pyrrhic panacea. > Competition is good. Competition is what has spurned the FOSS movement > and proprietary vendors alike. Trying to eradicate the proprietary > market is unrealistic and would stifle innovation. But isn't this the cornerstone of Free Software? Because the source code is available to all and may be re-used under compatible licenses, and the Free Software community isn't concerning itself with playing silly patent games, everyone is competing on a level playing field. If one product develops an innovative solution that sets it apart from the rest, it naturally becomes the favoured product -- because it is better, not because users are locked into it. When its competitors catch up and implement that innovation themselves, all are forced to look for something else to set them apart from the pack, and thus the software keeps improving. In addition, if a particular set of developers doesn't like the way one product is going, they are free to fork the project and create their own version. This practice itself often drives innovation for the betterment of both projects. Compiz/Beryl/Compiz Fusion is a good recent example of this. Compiz was forked, and continued to focus on the architecture while its fork, Beryl, focused more on the effects. Both were excellent for different reasons and eventually merged back into Compiz Fusion. I remember hanging out on the Samba mailing lists back when Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton (LKCL for short) forked the code into Samba TNG to develop PDC functionality for Samba, and thinking what an incredible development model this Free Software allowed - in spite of the frequent flame wars! The fact that many Free Software products are also based on open standards only makes it easier for users to switch between competing products and bolsters this cycle of continual improvement. While I agree that there will almost certainly continue to be a mixture of proprietary and Free software, I don't agree that removing proprietary software from the equation would stifle innovation. JT - -- - ---+ James Tait, BSc|xmpp:jayte...@wyrddreams.org Programmer and Free Software advocate | VoIP: +44 (0)870 490 2407 - ---+ -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iEYEARECAAYFAkqHTFIACgkQyDo4xMNTLibDpwCfRtN77+dIE0xbHJ8aqBzkzR/j 6UYAmgOxEdfB1fZGytVZ0ZJD5G3CVmPR =Xf4l -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/
Re: [ubuntu-uk] Judge bans Microsoft Word sales
On 14/08/09 11:03, David King wrote: > All software patents are bad. Although there might be a short term > benefit for software like OpenOffice, if businesses think they cannot > buy MS Word, or they literally cannot buy it, or they have it but are > afraid to use it now, then they might go for OpenOffice. Software patents in general suck. The problem is largely US centric. It doesn't - currently - impact the EU or most of the rest of the world. > As OpenOffice is given away free, I doubt that i4i would try to sue for > any use of XML in OpenOffice. They could happily go after Sun/Oracle who own the copyright to OOo but ODF (the native file format for OOo), from what I have understood, does not infringe this particular patent. In fact it was a major issue with IS29500 (OOXML) and one of several serious criticisms of the "standard". > But if this dents MS Office sales and gets more people using OpenOffice > then it might have a positive benefit, although I expect MS will settle > and sales of MS Office will continue. MS will almost certainly win/wriggle out of this. But in general terms this whole thing is *bad*. It elevates the perception that one can patent ideas that are not terribly novel or innovative. It does not help FOSS in the slightest. > It is also kind of ironic, given that MS threatened to sue the open > source software community for undisclosed infringements on its patents. > Maybe they need a taste of their own medicine. Perhaps, but MS threatened certain vendors of Linux, not the community per se. Redhat is their main target but they have stood their ground and made a good case so far; unlike the cowards/desperados like Xandros and Novell. > The best result would be for everyone to move to patent-free software, > and just make everything open source, which is probably something that > Microsoft is still strongly opposed to, as their business model demands > profits from sales rather than from support. I disagree. Making *everything* open source would be pyrrhic panacea. Competition is good. Competition is what has spurned the FOSS movement and proprietary vendors alike. Trying to eradicate the proprietary market is unrealistic and would stifle innovation. Al -- ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/
Re: [ubuntu-uk] Judge bans Microsoft Word sales
2009/8/14 David King : > [snip] > It is also kind of ironic, given that MS threatened to sue the open > source software community for undisclosed infringements on its patents. > Maybe they need a taste of their own medicine. Since Microsoft are seen as having such deep pockets, they get sued for infringement a lot. Maybe they think it's their turn now. > The best result would be for everyone to move to patent-free software, > and just make everything open source, which is probably something that > Microsoft is still strongly opposed to, as their business model demands > profits from sales rather than from support. Patent-free software doesn't preclude businesses from selling it, although it might be hard for some proprietary companies to get used to that idea. http://academiccommons.columbia.edu:8080/ac/bitstream/10022/AC:P:29800/1/STLR-Vol10-Torrance.pdf That PDF shows an academic study that concludes that patents don't help innovation. More studies like this might help change the tide. Cofion/Regards, Neil. -- ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/
Re: [ubuntu-uk] Judge bans Microsoft Word sales
All software patents are bad. Although there might be a short term benefit for software like OpenOffice, if businesses think they cannot buy MS Word, or they literally cannot buy it, or they have it but are afraid to use it now, then they might go for OpenOffice. As OpenOffice is given away free, I doubt that i4i would try to sue for any use of XML in OpenOffice. But if this dents MS Office sales and gets more people using OpenOffice then it might have a positive benefit, although I expect MS will settle and sales of MS Office will continue. It is also kind of ironic, given that MS threatened to sue the open source software community for undisclosed infringements on its patents. Maybe they need a taste of their own medicine. The best result would be for everyone to move to patent-free software, and just make everything open source, which is probably something that Microsoft is still strongly opposed to, as their business model demands profits from sales rather than from support. David King Tony Pursell wrote: > On 12 Aug 2009 at 18:20, Harry Rickards wrote: > > >> Thought this might be of interest... >> >> - Original Message >> Subject: [Sussex] Judge bans Microsoft Word sales >> > > >> This could be which breaks camels back on the idea of software patents >> and how very dumb it all is. >> It all down to fact that it using XML. Microsoft has be order to stop >> selling ALL copies of Word in USA. >> >> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/8197990.stm >> - -- >> > > Not quite 'down to the fact that it is using XML', I think. i4i's own press > release says, > > "The jury agreed with i4i that certain versions of Microsoft's Word 2003 > and Word 2007 products use “extensible mark up language”, or XML, > in a way that infringes i4i’s U.S. Patent No. 5,787,449." > > Note it says "... uses ... XML, in a way that infringes ..." > > This is far from saying that the use of XML infringes the patent. > > I don't know the ins and outs of the judgement, but the patent > describes a method of separating the content (raw data) and tags > (metadata) into separate files. This is the example in the patent:- > > A SGML (or XML) document:- > > > > The Secret Life of Data > > > Data is hostile. > > The End > > > is decomposed into:- > > The Raw Content > > The Secret Life of DataData is hostile. The End > > and:- > > A Metacode Map > > Element No Element Char Posn > 10 > 2 0 > 3 23 > 4 23 > 539 > 6 46 > > The patent describes various advantages of doing this such as a > person can produce a version of the document formatted in a > particular way (requiring a change to the metadata file) even though > they do not have permission to change the content. > > Personally, I think this is just the sort of patent we need to stop. It > describes a fairly simple algorithm that anyone could think up to solve > a problem like this and wouldn't think twice about it being the subject > of a patent. If this sort of thing is patentable, it makes me wonder how > many patents I have infringed in the systems I have designed over the > years. > > Tony > > > -- ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/
