Linspire Signs Patent Pact With MS 386
RLiegh sends us to an AP article reporting that Linspire has signed a patent deal with Microsoft. The company, which started out life as "Lindows," joins a growing list of patent agreements reached between Microsoft and vendors. Linspire will be granted a license to use True Type Fonts and "various code" that would allow for Linspire users to use voice on Windows Live Messenger as well as the usual patent protection for Linspire's customers. In return, among other things, Linspire will make Microsoft's search engine the default search on PCs shipped with their OS. Kevin Carmony, the CEO for Linspire, approached Microsoft a year and a half ago, according to the article.
Well isn't that special? (Score:5, Insightful)
Allow yourselves to be assimilated, and we will drop all litigation. Hell, we'll even let you call yourselves a "vendor".
Resistance is futile, indeed...
Re:Well isn't that special? (Score:5, Insightful)
I understand that these kind of small Linux vendors need to make money, but why are they signing up to this?
I can only think its cold hard cash talking. Both Linspire and Xandros have just signed their death warrants (Novell at least has other options).
Begun the Microsoft (Clone) wars has.
Its because they can't attack Ubuntu directly ... (Score:5, Insightful)
- Ubuntu and Lindows have a deal regarding "click-n-run", etc., and that future Lindows distros will use Ubuntu as the base.
-
Microsoft can't attack Ubuntu directly
- So Microsoft attacks their partner.
No, there's no "... PROFITRe:Its because they can't attack Ubuntu directly . (Score:4, Informative)
But more importantly look at the details of the deal. So far as I can tell, this stuff only covers the use of proprietary stuff with GPLed/third party offerings. Outside the idea of a GPLed program potentially using them, it won't effect the GPLv3 status at all _IF_ the agreement is specific in what code or IP the patent protection covers and that code isn't inside a GPLed program.
I think this might be another case of jumping the gun on too little details. The reaction to Novell's deal was way overblown and once the details were released, it appeared to no cover anything that would competing with microsoft blah blah blah. People said Novell got screwed. Well they did, by the GPL leaders who reacted over a bunch of misplaced hype. None of this was about the potentials of contaminating OSS. it is all about dealing with Microsoft. You don't even know the specfics of the deal and are accusing "Microsoft attacks" already.
At best, this just shows MS's effort to fracture the GPLv3. When enough companies need to stick around that projects will be forked or uninformed people implode over using the GPLv3 while having deals like this and become angry enough to make an ass of themselves it will be their doing. MS is likely attempting to do a divide and cause conflict within as their strategy of dealing with OSS and it is going to be highly successful.
Re:Its because they can't attack Ubuntu directly . (Score:5, Insightful)
We need to completely drop any Linux vendor that signs a deal with Microsoft. Change distributions to a "clean" one, remove any currently installed software, and contact the vendor for refunds on any boxed software purchased through them. I don't expect anyone to get refunds, but the calls will serve as a reminder.
This is serious people.
Re:Its because they can't attack Ubuntu directly . (Score:4, Interesting)
It appears that rights to use MS codecs was not unlimited and Linspire wanted to continue with that 'feature' of their distro. My guess is that alot of the motives behind this was the extension of the licensing for those codecs. Like in the Novell deal, Microsoft probably 'requires' the fake IP protection crap or else any other deal would fail or cost too much. It's typically how they operate.
How this will impact the Click-n-Run deal with Ubuntu will be something to look at since I'm sure Microsoft would not want Linspire to just hand out those codecs to just anybody.
I will warn others to not believe this is about Microsoft collecting fees from Linux. Microsoft runs by Windows and without Windows, they fall. Therefore, all this IP licensing stuff is about killing Linux or killing corporate use of Linux one way or another. They've shown before that they're willing to spend billions just to protect the Windows monopoly/gravy-train and Linux is a threat. IMO.
LoB
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Well isn't that special? (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Well isn't that special? (Score:5, Interesting)
As someone who sells Linux
It'll be a cold day in h*ll before I ship a PC with Microsoft Search as the default.
---
http://www.xephi.co.uk/ [xephi.co.uk] for Linux without MS Search
Now, let's see what Linspire was saying before... (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Or, "Extortion: Microsoft's New Business Model."
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Because of *BSD, Windows is better than it would have been without it. That is a good thing.
And when someone uses BSD code for a commercial purpose, It remains in BSD: they cannot 'close' the code. So it's more like - "See this wing? It's a great design. You can copy it if you like. I'm sure it will make you fly better."
It also means that if I develop something using BSD code, I have the Freedom to release that something however I like. I value that Fr
I want in! (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
3. Profit?
Wow, I wish I had done that 10 years ago. I'd be rich!
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
The LInux business community... (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:The LInux business community... (Score:5, Insightful)
Even Ubuntu? I think you are wrong, but we will see, won't we.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:The LInux business community... (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:3)
Cross-licensing in business is the norm and, if, like Linspire, you want a piece of home market, some accommodation with reality, the proprietary DVD codec, Windows 95% share, etc., is necessary.
Re:The LInux business community... (Score:5, Insightful)
A little perspective here, please.
* Novell sold out because, despite their purchases of Ximian & SuSE, they never really "got" Linux; they were just trying to shore up a rapidly dying Netware product while continuing business along the same paradigms that killed it. Witness the resulting exodus of several core SUSE developers, further reducing the company's understanding of Linux; frankly I've seen Novell Linux brands as almost defunct for some years now. (go on, flame away...)
* Xandros sold out because their market share and community was miniscule. They sought to steal Windows market share, but (unsurprisingly) didn't have the resource to tackle Redmond. Xandros are already defunct and starting to smell; they just don't know it yet. (go on, flame some more...)
* Linspire haven't really recovered since having their teeth pulled, and they really don't "get" the security issue. The whole distro is very much Kevin Carmony's baby, and seems to be very fluid while it tries to find a profitable niche. Ubuntu's just broken into the territory it was trying to win (i.e. preinstalled mainstream linux), so I think the distro will die soon. Strangely, though, I don't think that Linspire has sold out, exactly, it's following in its father's footsteps; it understands business, not OS, and is evolving into a kind of "software accessibility enabler". Personally I detest the proprietary shit its peddling, but Ubuntu's already proven there's a demand for that.
So MS has munched on the low-hanging fruit. Sad, but not unexpected; the old & weak are always the first to go in war & business. What remains is :
* Several hundred non-commercial distros, top of the list is Debian, the epitome of idealism.
* Ubuntu - very smart, idealistic, breaking into the mainstream.
* Redhat - very smart, idealistic, pwns the enterprise Linux sector and employs the majority of kernel hackers (and just ballsed up royally with its recent partnership - *Symantec*, for gods' sake! - but they should weather it ok).
* Mandriva - still kicking, playing interesting tunes on 3D desktop usability.
* Various other commercial appliance distros e.g. firewalls, Tivo, etc.
* One lone idealistic guy with who owns the damn trademark.
So let's not moan doom & gloom too early, eh?
Now, if someone rings tomorrow to tell me that Torvalds just sold Linux(tm), then you might have a point. But the *source* will still be out there & owned by the community that developed it. There is now a minimum level of code & application quality that proprietary software houses must meet; and while they don't, there will always be an underdog.
Best regards,
Conrad
Re:The LInux business community... (Score:4, Informative)
Ubuntu went so far as to create a "restricted driver manager" that tells you when you're using binary drivers, why you shouldn't, and what you can do about it.
If you call this "peddling proprietary shit", then I don't think you understand more than one of those words.
Shuttleworth interview: June 1st, 2007 (Score:4, Informative)
Red Hat Still Gets It (Score:3, Insightful)
Don't forget Red Hat. They turned down Microsoft. They definitely still "get it" in terms of maintaining an open source distribution. Not making business arrangements with companies that tick off the FOSS community is only part of the good behavior expected of companies making money of FOSS software.
Red Hat is still a big contributor to the Linux kernel, Gnome and the OSS community in general. With the exception of Red Hat Network (paid service) all the products they've built (system config tools)
O rly? (Score:5, Funny)
Re:O rly? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:O rly? (Score:4, Insightful)
All Microsoft is doing is going after the fringe Linux distros that have no real user base. These fringe players have nothing to lose. Now, if Ubuntu or Redhat/Fedora jump ship, then that will be news. Though I don't see it happening. Redhat has enough money to fight it out in court. Ubuntu is based where software patents are not valid so they don't have to worry.
Re: (Score:2)
Actually, I wonder if the others have done so (Score:2)
Is this really that bad of a situation? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Is this really that bad of a situation? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Hint: all the contributors to, say, the linux kernel, keep the copyright to their code, but agree to license it under the GPL v2.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
e.g from the template header for GPL software: This program is free software; you can redistri
Re: (Score:2)
That assumes:
-that patent laws apply
-that the trial is actually done: apart from SCO, I don't see other companies doing this.
Even if they do business with MS, I doubt Linspir
Re:Is this really that bad of a situation? (Score:4, Interesting)
From the current GPL3 draft, section 11:
A contributor's "essential patent claims" are all patent claims owned or controlled by the contributor, whether already acquired or hereafter acquired, that would be infringed by some manner, permitted by this License, of making, using, or selling its contributor version, but do not include claims that would be infringed only as a consequence of further modification of the contributor version. For purposes of this definition, "control" includes the right to grant patent sublicenses in a manner consistent with the requirements of this License.
Each contributor grants you a non-exclusive, worldwide, royalty-free patent license under the contributor's essential patent claims, to make, use, sell, offer for sale, import and otherwise run, modify and propagate the contents of its contributor version.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
So if the deals do not include wording that specifically allows Novell to grant sublicenses to its users in accordance with GPL provisions, this me
Re: (Score:2)
If other distros really want the MS code, I guess they'll have to sp
Re: (Score:2)
III. Prohibited Conduct [usdoj.gov]
A. Microsoft shall not retaliate against an OEM by altering Microsoft's commercial relations with that OEM, or by withholding newly introduced forms of non-monetary Consideration (including but not limited to new versions of existing forms of non-monetary Consideration) from that OEM, because it is known to Microsoft that the OEM is or is contemplating:
1. developing, distributing, promoting, using, selling, or licensing any software that competes with Microsoft Platform Software or any product or service that distributes or promotes any Non-Microsoft Middleware;
2. shipping a Personal Computer that (a) includes both a Windows Operating System Product and a non-Microsoft Operating System, or (b) will boot with more than one Operating System; or
3. exercising any of the options or alternatives provided for under this Final Judgment.
Nothing in this provision shall prohibit Microsoft from enforcing any provision of any license with any OEM or any intellectual property right that is not inconsistent with this Final Judgment. Microsoft shall not terminate a Covered OEM's license for a Windows Operating System Product without having first given the Covered OEM written notice of the reasons for the proposed termination and not less than thirty days' opportunity to cure. Notwithstanding the foregoing, Microsoft shall have no obligation to provide such a termination notice and opportunity to cure to any Covered OEM that has received two or more such notices during the term of its Windows Operating System Product license.
Nothing in this provision shall prohibit Microsoft from providing Consideration to any OEM with respect to any Microsoft product or service where that Consideration is commensurate with the absolute level or amount of that OEM's development, distribution, promotion, or licensing of that Microsoft product or service.
Yes, this is really bad! (Score:3, Informative)
Why? Because these agreements don't protect the developers. In the long run, it won't do Linspire or whoever any good if they're legally allowed to sell Linux, but the community is dead.
This is how Microsoft "cuts off the air supply" of Free Software.
That's how they've always done business (Score:5, Interesting)
For instance, most companies lock down their computers. I can't even install quick time on ours - which means that unless it works with windows media, I don't visit the website. Many websites know that - so they don't use Quicktime formats. It's a neverending circle.
If I were google, I'd be thinking about doing the same thing in reverse. Get your office suite working and then begin package it free on every computer manufacturer that you can negotiate with.
Re: (Score:2)
I'd rather have distributions and programmers choose google as default because it's good.
What MS does now is saying: "We know other search options are better, that's why we pay you to make our's default".
What are you waiting for? (Score:5, Interesting)
Red Hat , Ubuntu please do the rest of the honours. I have no freaking idea what MS has in his pocket that all these companies have agreed to MS terms of so called *patent* protection.Hell yes, i am paranoid but that so only because MS is involved in all of these pacts, i am not at all comfortable taking the bullshit.
Why is Linux community silent on a whole? Only thing they can do is host a site called as showusthecode.com and challenging Mr Balmer. And MS responded by making one more Linux company its ally. Now i am really getting worried about my submitted code as GPL. Is this just me or something is really cooking up at Redmond?
Re:What are you waiting for? (Score:5, Interesting)
Why is Linux community silent on a whole?
Good god, man! Are you serious? The Linux community isn't silent about anything. Novell has experienced a backlash, and the CEO had to go so far as to address it publicly. That's not insignificant, in my mind.
Now i am really getting worried about my submitted code as GPL. Is this just me or something is really cooking up at Redmond?
I'm struggling with that, too. Trying to figure out how serious a concern this is. My one solace at the moment is that what we've really got is Microsoft managing to rope Novell, and then two bit players in the game. Xandros and Linspire? Microsoft isn't exactly taking down the titans of the Linux world.
They did get Novell, and I agree that's not small potatoes - but the general opinion really seems to be that as well as getting hosed, Novell also got conned by the boys from Redmond. In the fallout - RedHat specifically rebuffed Microsoft's public offer.
Many people have compared this to the SCO fud-fest that got going - and that actually seems to be a more apt analogy the further we go. A couple of small-frys have caved in -- in their own defence, they're not equipped for a battle with Microsoft, and we must assume these are businessmen and not fanboys.
I expect Microsoft will continue to pick off the small distros, trying to build some PR momentum before training their guns on the larger players in the Linux industry. Not dissimilar to SCO's approach.
What happens then, is what tells us what's really going on here...
Re: (Score:2)
Microsoft's probably attempting to game the legal system with all of this.
Dude, what the FAQ??? (Score:3, Funny)
I feel as if the world's been turned upside down.
Or maybe the true nature of computer businesses has been revealed. In the end, it's just a bunch of greedy b=$)/"%...
Oink oink [google.com].
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
That was Novell's deal. Do we know if Xandros and Linspire got paid by MS?
Is Microsoft the new Styx? (Score:5, Funny)
That is, as long as I'm buying
Never (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
it is a good thing (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
- and if the chaff is Red Hot and the product Sun's OpenOffice what then?
The linux community has expanded far beyond the ideologues and enthusiasts that populate Slashdot.
Re: (Score:2)
Open Office shouldn't be the singular option any more than Microsoft Office should be.
Divide and conquer (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm very curious what will happen with these agreements with Novell, Xandros and now Linspire when gpl v3 arrives. And don't forget, the list of companies signing agreements with Microsoft will keep on growing.
But it seems these companies do not handle in the best interest of the community anymore, but only to serve their paying customers.
Greed, anyone?
Or ... Embrace, Extend, Extinguish? (Score:4, Interesting)
YESSSS! Give that customer another mod point.
But rather than trying to "divide and conquer" the FOSS community, I'd suggest it's a new chapter in Microsoft's "embrace, extend, extinguish" strategy. Getting these companies to sign agreements covers the "embrace" part. The "extend" part is, perhaps, the will-not-sue covenant: it offers an extra warm/fuzzy feeling for the customer.
I'm very curious what will happen with these agreements with Novell, Xandros and now Linspire when gpl v3 arrives.
Maybe this is the "extinguish" part. AFAIK, the companies who have signed the agreements could no longer include updated versions of code that has gone to GPL3. So
Re:Divide and conquer (Score:4, Insightful)
Microsoft is doing what they have always done. Made deals with other companies that in the long run, put Microsoft on top and kills the other company (if possible). IBM and Red Hat won't play this game, they are in business to prosper for a long time. Novel was stupid, and made a bad deal...they may yet survive it. It wont be the first mistake they have survived. That is why Microsoft got them in on the deal first. If these small frys had signed up first. Novel would have known it's a trap and not done the deal. So Novel survives, and all these dumb little you have to buy me Linux distros go bye bye. Somehow the Linux community will survive.
It is good that the business world has recognized the value of Linux. But Linux is not just composed of companies who have paid programmers to add things they need to GNU/Linux. It is made up of programmers who for their own reasons, want to work on this and add stuff to GNU/Linux. It is also world wide, so even these shenanigans in the US will not halt linux from moving on.
Who knows, even if Microsofts wet dream were to come through, and you could not sell a linux distro in the US, and it could not be used in a business environment. People in the US would still download, and help improve Linux.
Linux is not going away. The community will still be here, and it will still grow. Also, I think other countries like China or developing thrid world nations will standardize on it which would force readoption of Linux in the US at some point.
Truthfully, Eve has already bitten the apple. Linux is here to stay in the US. The military does not want to see it go away. Large companies, like Google or banks, rely on it and would not want to see it go away. IBM, who has the power to fight on this issue wants linux as well.
In the meantime we just have to wait and see how this plays out. I hope it is more of a XBox/Xbox 2, we loose money on every sale but will make it up on volume decision from Microsoft. Instead of the Micosoft of the Netscape/Wordperfect era.
Re:Divide and conquer (Score:5, Interesting)
Sure they will talk and talk, but they wont actually do anything. They have as much to lose from ridiculous software patents as anyone else. If microsoft start suing people over patents, then a large number of companies will start suing them back, including big companies like ibm and sun, which could have significant impact upon microsoft's products.
The biggest risk, comes from the small companies who have a few patents but no products. They have nothing to lose, you cant sue them because they dont have any products anyway, their entire business is litigation.
The more things change... (Score:5, Insightful)
I look forward to Microsoft's statement on Friday about how great it is that companies like Linspire are recognizing the need to properly licence Microsoft patents and blah, blah, blah...
Followed, on Monday, I guess, by a statement from Linspire CEO Kevin Carmony that they never admitted to infringing on Microsoft patents and that they never talked about it, and that Linspire infringes on no one's patents, and, and, and ...
Hold on just minute (Score:2)
'Free' in business terms doesn't exist. It makes investors very nervous as how on earth can you b
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Hold on just minute (Score:4, Insightful)
Of course not. That's why the biggest on-line success stories are based on free software (Google, Amazon, others). That's why most fortune-1000 companies use free software. That's why Linux has been the fastest-growing OS for several years. (Not that it means much, as it's also still behind Apple in terms of desktop deployment.)
The patent agreements are to increase the fears, not allay them. Right now, you can use Linux freely. You can download a copy and install it on all your computers, whether you have one or one thousand or one million. The BSA can't bust down your door and count your Linux seats. (Well, they can, but there's nothing they can do about it.)
Microsoft aims to change that perception. They want people to believe that Linux has the same licensing requirements as MS-Windows. They want to reduce people's freedoms, or at least change their perception of those freedoms.
If you can support a company like that, be my guest. I won't. I refuse to use their software. I will never develop for their software. Not that my threats keep Ballmer up at night or anything, but they aught to realize they are alienating their own customers, which is *never* a good business strategy.
Churning 'em out before GPLv3 (Score:3, Interesting)
Doesn't Apple have the patent for TrueType fonts? (Score:2)
------
Under the agreement, Linspire will license Microsoft code related to Voice over Internet Protocol, Windows Media files and TrueType fonts. With the addition of the Microsoft code to Linspire's operating system, users will be able to voice-chat with Windows Live Messenger buddies, watch Windows Media video and audio files on open-source media players, and view and create documents using familiar typefaces.
------
Now, unless I'm mistaken Ap
Re:Doesn't Apple have the patent for TrueType font (Score:2)
Re:Doesn't Apple have the patent for TrueType font (Score:2)
Re:Doesn't Apple have the patent for TrueType font (Score:3, Informative)
However, Adobe subsequently opened up their formats, and Apple pretty much lost interest in improving TrueType further. They shipped QuickDraw GX (based on TrueType), but pretty much killed it immediately by refusing to license any of it back to Microsoft. It has been replaced with Apple Adv
Guesses on the next Distro to be Assimilated (Score:2, Insightful)
I suspect that microsoft won't bother with the huge number of non-commercial distros so that leaves Red Hat, Ubuntu, mandriva, Turbo Linux and few others.
Mark Shuttleworth said
Re: (Score:2)
The distros of choice for the OEM market? Dell? The big box retailer like Walmart and Target?
Look around you. The home user. The small businessman. These are not sophisticated technical hobbyists. These are not ideologues. They are the polar opposite of the Slashdot Geek and they have money to spend.
Re: (Score:2)
Xandros and Linspire aren't in there ANYWHERE.
The half hearted attempts by Walmart and Target don't really count. It remains to be seen whether or not Dell's current half hearted attempt will be at all visible.
Linspire goes onto the ultracheap bluelight special boxes that places like Target, Frys and Walmart like to sell from time to time. Of those three, Frys is barely visible and then only to geeks. The Target/Walmart boxes aren't even on the radar.
There isn't yet a "Lin
Thanks ESR! (Score:4, Informative)
Linux, It's About Choice, or... (Score:2, Troll)
Isn't it about choice? You can choose Linspire if you want to have those features in place. Or, you can choose another distro.
Or, are we going to say, "You are free to choose, as long as you don't make these choices?"
Most "Freedom of X" movements turn into extreme hypocrits at the point where someone decides to be exercise free choice in an opposing direction.
I do not think that word means what you think... (Score:4, Insightful)
I do not think that word means what you think it means.
You are not free to make choices that restrict my freedoms. Full stop.
Part of freedom is about maintaining freedom. The problem with deals like Linspire and Novell and Xandros is this: they are complicit in Microsoft's attempt to control free software. If they are successful, they have contributed to the reduction of my freedoms.
This isn't a matter of, "You are free to do as I say." This is a matter of, "Don't tread on me." This is a matter of, "Your right to swing your fist ends just before my nose." This is a matter of, "Those fuckers are trying to destroy a beautiful thing."
You are free to use Linspire. Go ahead. But as you find yourself free to do what Microsoft says, remember: it was your choice.
And choices have consequences.
Re: (Score:2)
So, are you going on record as opposing my freedom to accept this so-called control? Do you really want to enforce your version of freedom on me? Isn't that what Bush is doing in the Middle East? We are forcing them to accept what we consider Freedom. It's for their own good that they not be able to choose their own path? What if we gave them true freedom of choice. Then, they would be free
I'll tell you what I did (Score:2, Insightful)
Perhaps MS will cause the consolidation we need. (Score:2)
What if Microsoft continues to do deals with various second-tier Linux vendors? And what if Linux users and customers, by and large, shun those vendors? (Ok, Novell wasn't a second-tier vendor but they're already being shunned.)
And what if Red Hat and Canonical continue to refuse to sign, because, y'know, people are actually *using* their Linux distros in large numbers? Could the Linux-
The new face of Microsoft (Score:2)
That's really funny (Score:5, Interesting)
- Truetype is an APPLE innovation
- Truetype was developed over 20 years ago, so any patents pertaining to such have long run out. Even if there were valid claims, APPLE would have to be the one to pursue the claims. Somehow I cannot see Apple doing this.
- Fonts aren't copyrightable, based on numerous court precedents (note: a font is distinct from a typeface: a font is a typeface with a style, weight, size applied)
A typeface dscriptor (a
So, licensing truetype fonts to Linux distributions? Ha. I hope these linux vendors are not paying so much as a dime for these "agreements"
Re: (Score:2)
Re:That's really funny (Score:4, Informative)
Even funnier is the fact that Red Hat released replacements to the common TT fonts [redhat.com] under a GPL license. The full-hinted versions will be released circa September 2007.
Where the fuck are all the other companies in sponsoring stuff like this?
Microsoft unwittingly promotes GPL3 (Score:2)
Msft deal targets screwed-up companies (Score:3, Informative)
"Xandros are about to go BK (and this deal guarantees it), desperation
creates mistakes. EV1 was headed by a business incompetent. Novell had just had
Hovsepian parachute in with a desperate need to impose his authority despite a
shaky understanding of the business.
Seeing a pattern yet... only screwed up companies went for the deals. Knowing
that its real hard to take SCOX or MSFTs few success's totally seriously."
Come to think of it, scox was heading towards certain bankruptcy before msft got
involved. And let's face it folks, Linspire was never much of a distro.
The real Linux heavyweights: Redhat, Debian, Ubuntu, etc. Have flatly stated that they have no interest in msft's patent deals.
Mark Shuttle gives excellent commentary on the scam . . er, I mean deal, in this interview [mybroadband.co.za].
The patents are an afterthought (Score:5, Informative)
Re:This will devide the boys from the men (Score:5, Funny)
Re:This will devide the boys from the men (Score:4, Insightful)
Why?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Because Linus caught the FSF sleeping on the kernel work and showed the world that building a world-class OS kernel just isn't that hard?
Re:This will devide [sic] the boys from the men (Score:4, Interesting)
None of which is to denigrate the Linux people in any way. They've done a great job in raising the profile of Open Source / Free Software (and they are the same thing) to the point where an entrenched monopoly is running scared.
As for Hurd, well, that failed simply because it's a microkernel and microkernels plain don't work. Hurd is designed around the idea of building fences where they look pretty, irrespective of how much traffic may have to pass through them. Linux is designed around the idea of building fences where as little traffic as possible ever has to pass through them, no matter how ugly it may look to an outsider with no understanding of what those fences are there to do. The existence of layers is natural, but the boundaries between them are determined by cold, hard mathematics. Attempting to adjust those boundaries will ultimately be futile.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
These distros target end-users who don't give a damn about the GPL and never will.
Re: (Score:2)
So GPL3 is about not being free to make a choice?
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It wasn't directed at any specific person, just the group of Linux-heads complaining about certain companies "siding with the enemy"
It is worse than you think (Score:5, Insightful)
But I see this dark cloud with some silver lining. We will know which companies actually are part of the Linux community and which ones are not. So far Redhat and Ubuntu have vocally expressed that they will not do any such deals with Microsoft. There may be others but I am unaware of any at this time.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
However, it could be worse, MS could just have ignored all these companies and pushed MS Linux or even a Linux Subsystem for NT as an alternative for business and left every Linux distributor to fend for themselves in the commericial market. This would be worse...
MS Creating a Linux Distro would be a great thing for Linux/Open Source. Apart from the positive PR from MS endorsing Linux as a true alternative platform. Any technically superior enhancements they develop would be available to all other Distros.
Open source should not be about stopping large companies from making money. If they release the changes back into the community then I don't mind if MS becomes a successfull Linux vendor.
Not about shutting down companies (Score:3, Interesting)
See, right now, you have the freedom to download and install Linux on as many machines as you desire. Imagine a corporation with thousands of computers. Imagine the license fee savings alone, let alone the freedom of modifying the system to fit your business model, rather than fitting your business model to your software. Right now nobody can tell you that you must purchase a per-seat license, and you don't have the right to m
Re: (Score:2)
You must oppose GPLv3 if you want true freedom. True freedom is allowing the developer or the user to develop, install, and use what they want on the OS. If you put in provisions that limit this, if I can't run a closed app on an open OS, then I don't have freedom.
Or, is the movement so afraid that thier position is so tenuous that they have to stifle that ability?