Stephen Samuel writes "Groklaw host PJ has dissected the 'patent peace' agreement between Linspire and Microsoft, and has determined that what Linspire agreed to is next to useless for many users. Essentially, under the agreement Linspire software is almost unusable: 'You can't share the software with others, pass it on with the patent promise, modify your own copy, or even use it for an "unauthorized" purpose, whatever that means in a software context. You must pay Linspire for the software, but then the "covenant" says to use Linux, you must also pay Microsoft. That payment doesn't cover upgrades. Linspire said it was absorbing the initial fees, but I don't know about upgrades. New functionality means you lose your coverage or presumably must pay again.'"
To be honest I don't think they have a choice now.
In the eyes of the 'nix community they are tainted by this agreement and they will probably avoid on principal, so they must be banking that the new features (ttf, WMP10, DRM) are enough to tempt in people who do not know better.
I'd wish them luck but surely this had to be them shooting themselves in the foot and waving goodbye to their future business.
Much as I truly despise them, you have to admire MS for the effectiveness of this particular FUD c
they must be banking that the new features (ttf, WMP10, DRM) are enough to tempt in people who do not know better.
DRM as a feature?
You're right though - it will be interesting how the buying public reacts to this. The market will decide between truly free software like Ubuntu, which requires users to jump some admittedly easy hoops before playing restricted media, or Linspire, which makes media playing immediate, at the expense of giving up freedoms.
I think the million-dollar issue with the included media codecs is legality. When you pick up Linspire, you have the benefit of knowing it'll work and that it's legit. On Ubuntu, in the US, most of the solutions violate patents (which may or may not be valid). Personally, I think patents on things like VC-1 or MPEG standards are stupid, but they're there.
Then there's the DRM. Currently, WMP DRM only works on Windows. If MS releases something for Linspire/Novell that allows DRM'd content playback, thos
My wife is a good example. She has an older Dell laptop but long admired my PowerBook, and wanted a new laptop for her birthday. So we bought her a MacBook Pro. So I set it up for her (which mostly involved adding the MAC address to the wireless access list and installing a couple of apps) and turned her lose with it. Almost the first comment she made to me was that her favorite site (some home design TV show thing) wasn't showing the videos. Sure enough, HGTV's Design Star (I think it's called) site uses a
I don't think it's reasonable to expect a less-technical user like my wife to figure out that a video codec is unsupported
Lots of videos don't work out of the box on Windows either. People either chase down the codecs themselves or get their resident geeks to get them. Many also end up with trojans or viruses like Zlob as a result.
Clicking the Automatix link in Ubuntu doesn't seem that difficult to me, and it's certainly much safer than playing codec roulette on Windows.
Linspire have always targetted Windows switchers. They know full well that hardcore geeks would never use Linspire. The Linux community means nothing to them.
First of all, despite the rhyming, your comment is unnecessarily hostile. Linspire adoption is a good thing for Linux, and Linspire itself is a good thing for Linux-- right now Linspire is the easiest way to get a legal MP3 or DVD player for your Linux computer and that's unlikely to change in the near future. Secondly, the market that Linspire is aiming towards doesn't give a flying crap about: 1) software licenses 2) patents 3) irrational hatred of Microsoft
Leave those three particular concerns to every other
right now Linspire is the easiest way to get a legal MP3 or DVD player for your Linux computer and that's unlikely to change in the near future.
The fact you live in a country with authorities dumb enough to approve stupid laws doesn't make something bad a good thing, either way I found that the same people you later mention as don't giving a flying crap about software licenses don't care about dubious laws either. Getting ubu
Every time someone says something like this I feel like the guy in a conspiracy movie that knows the truth and can't get anyone to believe him.
How many times do you have to be lied to and/or fucked over by Microsoft before you too will develop this completely healthy and rational hatred of their bullshit antics and tactics?
How many illegal acts by Microsoft that are used to crush competition, which in many cases (probably even most) has had superior technology, will it take before you treat them like th
Also, if you do live in the US, and you do want DVD on your Linux box, you could just buy Mandriva [mandriva.com] which comes with LinDVD to watch your DVDs legally. Sure it's not open source software, but it seems to me that if you're really that worried about the legal issues, and actually want to watch DVDs on your computer (as opposed to your home theatre), then there are options available to you.
You can still get Linspire and do everything you always wanted. It's just money you pay to Microsoft to keep them from trashing your store^W^W^Wsueing for patent infringement.
As a matter of fact it's not necessary to wait for a public comment from ESR to know his views. If anything, these events can only reinforce his views that he wants "to see Microsoft broken on the wheel not by government fiat but by enlightened consumer choice". (Source: Halloween Documents FAQ [catb.org]
Isn't he on the linspire board or something?
According to this post [zdnet.com] apparantly by Linspire's CEO Eric is (or at least still was on Feb 23, 2007) "one of many un-paid volunteers of the Freespire [freespire.org] Leadership Board". I wouldn't be surprised if Eric reconsiders his involvement in that project in reaction to Linspire's agreement with Microsoft, but it's his choice of course.
Isn't it much more like Linspire/Microsoft Agreement makes Linspire useless? Additionally, that is an understatement also since the general idea of useless is that you won't get anything good from it. In this scenario, it should be Linspire/MS Agreement Toxic to Users.
Isn't it much more like Linspire/Microsoft Agreement makes Linspire useless?
Darn! Bet MS never saw that coming!
Sidenote: Do any of these companies signing these agreements actually read them? Because so far most of the agreements seem to be designed to stop the Linux distributor from distributing Linux. Either that or there's some massive get-out clause in all of them which everybody else has missed.
1. get a technology adopted by most of the linux community, no matter if it's FOSS 2. Suddenly, Microsoft recalls it has a patent covering that technology. 3. Now everyone who wants to keep using the technology in those unfortunate countries where software is patentable must get a deal with linspire or microsoft. 4. Profit!
I guess that's what will happen with a bigger fish like Novell.
As far as I can tell, you're still free to treat the GPLed software (whether GPL2 or GPL3) like GPL software and ignore the Linspire/Microsoft agreement. It's just that, if you do that (or are so stupid as to do something like use your system to share your printer ('using it as a server), play quake, balance your books, share your internet connection or do thousands of other things that many people expect computers to do, you won't be protected by it.
(either that, or Linspire is in violation of the GPL,
Yes, Linspire has become useless. What company wants that legal baggage? Once again, Microsoft is adversarial.
The Groklaw analysis needs further translation. In my opinion, the contract says, effectively:
1) Microsoft can do anything it likes.
2) You have no rights.
Microsoft operating systems need constant attention that costs 10x as much as the original sale price, in my experience. According to Microsoft, you have no right to a good product.
I don't think this agreement is relevant to users at all.
Basically, Microsoft says "we won't sue Linspire users as long as they only do X, Y and Z".
That doesn't mean in any way that anyone is preventing Linspire users from doing whatever they want. They can do A, B and C, just like Redhat users can. Microsoft just doesn't promise anymore not to sue them, just as it never promised not to sue Redhat customers. Which doesn't matter much, because Microsoft is just full of wind anyway.
by Anonymous Coward
on Monday July 23 2007, @02:52AM (#19953191)
I think they have a great business-plan
1. Start a Linux distribution 2. Get Microsoft's attention 3. Get millions from Microsoft (more then they will ever earn selling it), agreeing to everything Microsoft ask. 4. Go out of business
I think more distributions should do it... (as long the really serious ones don't)
Microsoft's tactics in providing "patent agreements" remind me of the SCO days when they made an assumption that Linux "belongs" to them because of some vague "infringements". Based on this assumption, they start doing wonky things like charging $699 per seat for the right to use Linux, and other such nonsense.
MS is operating along the same lines. The assumption is that you owe Microsoft something for using Linux, hence the need for such agreements between MS and Linux vendors.
It's classic FUD, but I don't know if MS would actually sue anyone. Unlike SCO Microsoft has a bottomless pit of money, and yet MS may not be large enough to successfully try and destroy Linux via patent infringement lawsuits.
We'll see how it all plays out. Will Microsoft embarass themselves the same way SCO did? One thing's for sure, if Microsoft decides to play the patent game, they too are at risk of getting countersued for whatever patents they infringe (and based on how many software patents are out there, there's sure to be some).
I don't think your looking at this in the correct terms. Linspire will be releasing some Microsoft tech like audio and video codecs along with some document formating stuff and a few other things in their releases. When a third party distributes microsoft's products, they/you would be owing Microsoft indirectly for the use of those products when you buy that third party software. Something that gets me is that this is just another choice for people. I don't understand what all the fus is over. I mean the peo
Linspire will be releasing some Microsoft tech like audio and video codecs along with some document formating stuff and a few other things in their releases.
Linspire says that for now they won't charge users for these things. They may charge for upgrades and maintenance releases of their Microsoft proprietized "click-and-run" (CNR) distributed packages. If a Linspire user doesn't pay any charges set by Linspire, or Linspire doesn't pay Microsoft even if the user pays Linspire, the user is not covered by the Microsoft pledge not to sue (and the agreement actually doesn't protect users anyway). When a Linspire user downloads a CNR package, Microsoft now will be able to track the users identity. If the user gets a Microsoft tainted CNR component, Microsoft can then demand the user allows Microsoft or their agent (BSA, perhaps?) to audit all their software. If the user refuses, Microsoft can sue them for infringement, aided by the CNR server records.
This deal is nowhere near as benign as you try and describe. Remember, this is a deal with Microsoft. If they can't find IP violations in a linux distribution, they'll put it there and then cry "victim".
"We've had an issue, a problem that we've had to confront, which is because of the way the GPL (General Public License) works" There should be no problem as
My guess is that they don't intend to sue anyone, they are just using FUD to try to limit the damage Linux is doing to Windows sales to the least profitable area of business - the home desktop. Developers, business users and server usage are all excluded from their patent promises, as is Free distribution via the GPL, something that threatens their business model at its core.
"It's classic FUD, but I don't know if MS would actually sue anyone. Unlike SCO Microsoft has a bottomless pit of money, and yet MS may not be large enough to successfully try and destroy Linux via patent infringement lawsuits."
I agree completely with you, except:
Linux datacenters (I run one), admins, and developers should be thanking their lucky stars for IBM. They and they alone have enough legal strength and money to scare Microsoft. But it gets better!
Wait and watch for the interesting times as the SCO/EVERYBODY lawsuits wind down.
Prediction: IBM sues Microsoft into the crapper once the SCO thing is resolved. At the end of the ten year lawsuit, Microsoft is irrelevant- but IBM have open sourced it's patent portfolio.
Then again... I am probably wrong and we'll be running Windows "Orbital View" and paying a penny a keystroke.
SCO was a trial balloon for Microsoft. Though Microsoft's pipe fairy, SCO got a hot cash injection. They started making wild claims, which drove their stock up quite nicely, thank you.
Then they started suing, and everything went downhill. SCO discovered they actually had to *prove* something. So, we've been fortunate enough to witness a corporation spinning faster and faster until rotational velocity rips it apart. It's kinda cool.
Here's what Microsoft learned from SCO: *accusations work.* They work very, very well. Make vague, unsubstantiated claims. Oh, don't go as far as Darl McBride. He's an ass. Instead, insinuate. Make a few direct claims, let those claims disappear, then play on the doubt those claims left behind.
It's working surprisingly well. The one thing that's backfiring, though, is that Microsoft has associated their name with Linux, in a strange approving sort of way. This is PR that Linux couldn't buy. I have non-geek people asking me about Linux these days, people who'd never heard of it before.
Anyway, Microsoft will never take this to court. They would be complete fools to disregard the SCO effect.
Unlike most other Linux distributions, Linspire was conceived primarily as a business enterprise. Consider this a buyout, albeit one that harms affirms FUD affecting all other distributions. Also consider how the beating that Linspire has taken from MS in the past may affect their willingness to stand strong in the face of MS threats now - however vacuous.
While I won't miss Linspire I am interested to know the future of Robertson's only real valued contribution to the GNU/Linux family of operating systems
So I'm no Kreskin... but M$ has never been subtle about it's desire to pretty much play Mongul Horde all over the face of modern computing. I think this is clearly M$ pulling an old tried and true lan out of their own gamebook and simply reverting to business as usual. I'm guessing the plan will look something like;
Swallow a few tiny Linux distros whole, and at least assimilate them sufficiently to make certain that they can sing and dance like another Borg Drone.
Claim that they're just like all the other Linux players, except they have that fresh new minted by M$ smell, ummmmm can't you just smell it.
Play to the businesses that have migrated to Linux, and say "Y'all can come back home now, we're ready to give you want you're craving."
All the while embedding their own crap throughout these bastard Linux babies, copywriting and patenting new code and software functionality, and DRM, and spyware, and embedded bits of their toxic dreck throughout the distros.
They'll try to lay claim to things that don't belong to them, but they'll plead they were just trying to cover their proprietary code, muddy up the copywrite water and try desperately to tie real innovation up in a rats nest of layers, so in 5 to 7 years when they release their next real OS, Linux will be sufficiently hamstrung so they have a chance to compete. Or I'm guessing that's at least their hope.
In the meantime, they'll vascilate between pretending to play nice, making vague, obscure, or veiled threats, making strategic partnerships with folks who want to coexist peacably (with absolutely no intention of playing nice), and all the while looking for ways to slip a sharp instrument between the 5th and 6th rib of this upstart OS that has caused them so much grief.
Have I missed anything? Probably. Y'know, if they put aside this whole Genghis Kahn, I gotta own the whole freakin world mentality, and just started committing themselves to doing good things for humanity... the rest would take care of itself. Oh well. This is going to be an interesting show! Who's got the popcorn!
That post got modded Interesting, but didn't get any replies, so I'm really not sure whether Linspire is alive in the corporate segment, which should be the segment that worries about patent suits... like SCO sued Daimler-Chryssler (?) and lost face.
I can't imagine a company like Linspire would inspire any confidence in knowledgable markets like in Asia... The manner in which they caved in during the Lindows trademark dispute with Microsoft was suspicious and intriguing as well.
At a guess, just how many customers does Linspire have, if any? A few hundreds? In which case, I think/. must simply ignore this deal and related news - it doesn't matter much.
The agreement is contradictory to the GPL license. The Agreement is null and void because of the contradiction with the license.
It should also be noted that Microsoft... bill gates got his start by porting BASIC and then yelling piracy because he wasn't delivering in a reasonable amount of time.
Second was the sale of MSDOS to IBM but Microsoft did not, at the time of selling it to IBM, own it nor had they even contacted the creator if it.
Is this another example of MS profiting off of what they do not own or
Actually, once upon a time, Linspire had Microsoft up against the ropes with regards to the Windows trademark, for various reasons. Suddenly Microsoft left Linspire alone and settled with them instead of trying to force them to change their name a second time. The rumor was that Linspire had Microsoft dead with use of the generic term "windows" citing prior use in computers before Windows 1.0. Don't hold me to it, but that's what I seemed to have gathered from following the case peripherally. Kevin Carmon
hopefully it is small enough to be under M$ radar.
Who cares? I'd wager that the whole operation is undertaken for the benefit of businesses, who potentially hate risk. However, Microsoft is banking on the fact that IT Management and CIOs are complete dimbulbs who are shaking in their boots because they may get sued by mighty Microsoft. It didn't work with SCO and it won't work now with the MS version of patent trolling.
In addition I want to see them pull that stunt off in Europe, where software patents are not only not recognized, but where the EU comm
I care because I don't want to be forced to decide to ignore it or switch distros if they were to be next to sign an agreement with MS.
Gee, maybe when you are considering a distribution, you should consider what kind of contract [debian.org] you are entering into when you weigh the pros and cons of the distro.
Your about right. However, it did have the click and run software installation service that solves dependency issues and all sort of like madrake's URMPI. It at one time was attempting to get win4lin to the point that you could run MS executables like you were in windows but that didn't last long after the hurdles proved to be too high. The thing about linspire is that it wasn't ever intended for the geek who wants to change everything, compile kernels, write code, modify code and all that sort of stuff. It
If they ever get CNR 7 up and running, that might be another claim to fame. Support for
Debian
Fedora
Freespire
Linspire
OpenSUSE
Ubuntu Original timetable was Q2 2007. Current timetable is "in a few weeks" and "soon".
Their original claim to fame was that you would be able to seamlessly run Windows apps on what was then called Lindows. Somewhere between that promise and the actual release of Lindows 1.0, they had a falling out with Codeweavers, and Codeweavers terminated their business relationship with Lindows:
Neither Codeweavers nor Lindows had much to say in public that I am aware of, but there have been rumors that the main issue was that Lindows wasn't too keen
A Microsoft contract limits what you can do with what they perceive to be their property.
This is the crux of the matter.
They do *not* "perceive [it] to be their property." They *claim* it is their property, but refuse to prove in any way, shape, or form that it *is* their property.
So.
The rest of your post is essentially mumbling about contract law, of which you come close to admitting you know almost nothing. You are saying your opinion is worth more than someone who actually knows something about contract
All I can say is... (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
In the eyes of the 'nix community they are tainted by this agreement and they will probably avoid on principal, so they must be banking that the new features (ttf, WMP10, DRM) are enough to tempt in people who do not know better.
I'd wish them luck but surely this had to be them shooting themselves in the foot and waving goodbye to their future business.
Much as I truly despise them, you have to admire MS for the effectiveness of this particular FUD c
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
DRM as a feature?
You're right though - it will be interesting how the buying public reacts to this. The market will decide between truly free software like Ubuntu, which requires users to jump some admittedly easy hoops before playing restricted media, or Linspire, which makes media playing immediate, at the expense of giving up freedoms.
May the best distro win...
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Then there's the DRM. Currently, WMP DRM only works on Windows. If MS releases something for Linspire/Novell that allows DRM'd content playback, thos
DRM formats are a "feature" to users (Score:3, Interesting)
So I set it up for her (which mostly involved adding the MAC address to the wireless access list and installing a couple of apps) and turned her lose with it. Almost the first comment she made to me was that her favorite site (some home design TV show thing) wasn't showing the videos. Sure enough, HGTV's Design Star (I think it's called) site uses a
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Lots of videos don't work out of the box on Windows either. People either chase down the codecs themselves or get their resident geeks to get them. Many also end up with trojans or viruses like Zlob as a result.
Clicking the Automatix link in Ubuntu doesn't seem that difficult to me, and it's certainly much safer than playing codec roulette on Windows.
Re:All I can say is... (Score:4, Interesting)
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Flamebait)
Secondly, the market that Linspire is aiming towards doesn't give a flying crap about:
1) software licenses
2) patents
3) irrational hatred of Microsoft
Leave those three particular concerns to every other
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
After this stupid covenant, it isn't.
The fact you live in a country with authorities dumb enough to approve stupid laws doesn't make something bad a good thing, either way I found that the same people you later mention as don't giving a flying crap about software licenses don't care about dubious laws either. Getting ubu
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
irrational hatred of Microsoft
Every time someone says something like this I feel like the guy in a conspiracy movie that knows the truth and can't get anyone to believe him.
How many times do you have to be lied to and/or fucked over by Microsoft before you too will develop this completely healthy and rational hatred of their bullshit antics and tactics?
How many illegal acts by Microsoft that are used to crush competition, which in many cases (probably even most) has had superior technology, will it take before you treat them like th
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Ah well (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Ah well (Score:4, Informative)
It's just money you pay to Microsoft to keep them from trashing your store^W^W^Wsueing for patent infringement.
Parent
ESR (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:ESR (Score:4, Informative)
As a matter of fact it's not necessary to wait for a public comment from ESR to know his views. If anything, these events can only reinforce his views that he wants "to see Microsoft broken on the wheel not by government fiat but by enlightened consumer choice". (Source: Halloween Documents FAQ [catb.org]
Isn't he on the linspire board or something?
According to this post [zdnet.com] apparantly by Linspire's CEO Eric is (or at least still was on Feb 23, 2007) "one of many un-paid volunteers of the Freespire [freespire.org] Leadership Board". I wouldn't be surprised if Eric reconsiders his involvement in that project in reaction to Linspire's agreement with Microsoft, but it's his choice of course.
Parent
Agreement useless to users? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Agreement useless to users? (Score:5, Insightful)
Darn! Bet MS never saw that coming!
Sidenote: Do any of these companies signing these agreements actually read them? Because so far most of the agreements seem to be designed to stop the Linux distributor from distributing Linux. Either that or there's some massive get-out clause in all of them which everybody else has missed.
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
1. get a technology adopted by most of the linux community, no matter if it's FOSS
2. Suddenly, Microsoft recalls it has a patent covering that technology.
3. Now everyone who wants to keep using the technology in those unfortunate countries where software is patentable must get a deal with linspire or microsoft.
4. Profit!
I guess that's what will happen with a bigger fish like Novell.
Re: (Score:2)
(either that, or Linspire is in violation of the GPL,
Microsoft's adversarial behavior costs $$$, again. (Score:2)
The Groklaw analysis needs further translation. In my opinion, the contract says, effectively:
1) Microsoft can do anything it likes.
2) You have no rights.
Microsoft operating systems need constant attention that costs 10x as much as the original sale price, in my experience. According to Microsoft, you have no right to a good product.
Re:Agreement useless to users? (Score:4, Interesting)
Basically, Microsoft says "we won't sue Linspire users as long as they only do X, Y and Z".
That doesn't mean in any way that anyone is preventing Linspire users from doing whatever they want. They can do A, B and C, just like Redhat users can. Microsoft just doesn't promise anymore not to sue them, just as it never promised not to sue Redhat customers. Which doesn't matter much, because Microsoft is just full of wind anyway.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Basically, Microsoft says "we won't sue Linspire users as long as they only do X, Y and Z".
Where X, Y and Z include paying Microsoft.
Great business-plan (Score:4, Interesting)
1. Start a Linux distribution
2. Get Microsoft's attention
3. Get millions from Microsoft (more then they will ever earn selling it), agreeing to everything Microsoft ask.
4. Go out of business
I think more distributions should do it... (as long the really serious ones don't)
SCO Deja Vu (Score:5, Interesting)
MS is operating along the same lines. The assumption is that you owe Microsoft something for using Linux, hence the need for such agreements between MS and Linux vendors.
It's classic FUD, but I don't know if MS would actually sue anyone. Unlike SCO Microsoft has a bottomless pit of money, and yet MS may not be large enough to successfully try and destroy Linux via patent infringement lawsuits.
We'll see how it all plays out. Will Microsoft embarass themselves the same way SCO did? One thing's for sure, if Microsoft decides to play the patent game, they too are at risk of getting countersued for whatever patents they infringe (and based on how many software patents are out there, there's sure to be some).
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Something that gets me is that this is just another choice for people. I don't understand what all the fus is over. I mean the peo
Re:SCO Deja Vu (Score:5, Insightful)
This deal is nowhere near as benign as you try and describe. Remember, this is a deal with Microsoft. If they can't find IP violations in a linux distribution, they'll put it there and then cry "victim".
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
What's all the fuss about? Well lets see what the CEO of Microsoft has to say about the deal:
http://blog.seattlepi.nwsource.com/microsoft/archi ves/108806.asp [nwsource.com]
"our job has got to be to help our customers get interoperability"
Sounds reasonable
"We've had an issue, a problem that we've had to confront, which is because of the way the GPL (General Public License) works"
There should be no problem as
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
MS is operating along the same lines. The assumption is that you owe Microsoft something for using Linux, ...
Using MS Windows for so many years is *why* I switched to Linux.
I guess I owe them for that. But now they want to charge you for it?
Re: (Score:2)
My guess is that they don't intend to sue anyone, they are just using FUD to try to limit the damage Linux is doing to Windows sales to the least profitable area of business - the home desktop. Developers, business users and server usage are all excluded from their patent promises, as is Free distribution via the GPL, something that threatens their business model at its core.
Re:SCO Deja Vu (Score:4, Insightful)
I agree completely with you, except:
Linux datacenters (I run one), admins, and developers should be thanking their lucky stars for IBM. They and they alone have enough legal strength and money to scare Microsoft. But it gets better!
Wait and watch for the interesting times as the SCO/EVERYBODY lawsuits wind down.
Prediction: IBM sues Microsoft into the crapper once the SCO thing is resolved. At the end of the ten year lawsuit, Microsoft is irrelevant- but IBM have open sourced it's patent portfolio.
Then again... I am probably wrong and we'll be running Windows "Orbital View" and paying a penny a keystroke.
But one can hope.
Parent
SCO conspiracy theory (Score:4, Insightful)
SCO was a trial balloon for Microsoft. Though Microsoft's pipe fairy, SCO got a hot cash injection. They started making wild claims, which drove their stock up quite nicely, thank you.
Then they started suing, and everything went downhill. SCO discovered they actually had to *prove* something. So, we've been fortunate enough to witness a corporation spinning faster and faster until rotational velocity rips it apart. It's kinda cool.
Here's what Microsoft learned from SCO: *accusations work.* They work very, very well. Make vague, unsubstantiated claims. Oh, don't go as far as Darl McBride. He's an ass. Instead, insinuate. Make a few direct claims, let those claims disappear, then play on the doubt those claims left behind.
It's working surprisingly well. The one thing that's backfiring, though, is that Microsoft has associated their name with Linux, in a strange approving sort of way. This is PR that Linux couldn't buy. I have non-geek people asking me about Linux these days, people who'd never heard of it before.
Anyway, Microsoft will never take this to court. They would be complete fools to disregard the SCO effect.
Parent
Hit and Run. (Score:2)
While I won't miss Linspire I am interested to know the future of Robertson's only real valued contribution to the GNU/Linux family of operating systems
Missing the point... (Score:5, Insightful)
So I'm no Kreskin... but M$ has never been subtle about it's desire to pretty much play Mongul Horde all over the face of modern computing. I think this is clearly M$ pulling an old tried and true lan out of their own gamebook and simply reverting to business as usual. I'm guessing the plan will look something like;
Have I missed anything? Probably. Y'know, if they put aside this whole Genghis Kahn, I gotta own the whole freakin world mentality, and just started committing themselves to doing good things for humanity... the rest would take care of itself. Oh well. This is going to be an interesting show! Who's got the popcorn!
Linspire/Microsoft Agreement Useless to Users (Score:2)
Does Linspire have any market share? (Score:3, Interesting)
That post got modded Interesting, but didn't get any replies, so I'm really not sure whether Linspire is alive in the corporate segment, which should be the segment that worries about patent suits... like SCO sued Daimler-Chryssler (?) and lost face.
I can't imagine a company like Linspire would inspire any confidence in knowledgable markets like in Asia... The manner in which they caved in during the Lindows trademark dispute with Microsoft was suspicious and intriguing as well.
At a guess, just how many customers does Linspire have, if any? A few hundreds? In which case, I think
lets make Linspire retire... (Score:2)
The Agreement is null and void because of the contradiction with the license.
It should also be noted that Microsoft
Second was the sale of MSDOS to IBM but Microsoft did not, at the time of selling it to IBM, own it nor had they even contacted the creator if it.
Is this another example of MS profiting off of what they do not own or
Re:Groklaw?? How about objective analysis instead? (Score:5, Insightful)
How about reading the article and point out some actual errors in it?
I did, and most points she makes seem valid to me...
What facts did you use for your objective analysis of groklaw?
Parent
You surely "get the facts" (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Kevin Carmon
Re: (Score:2)
hopefully it is small enough to be under M$ radar.
Who cares? I'd wager that the whole operation is undertaken for the benefit of businesses, who potentially hate risk. However, Microsoft is banking on the fact that IT Management and CIOs are complete dimbulbs who are shaking in their boots because they may get sued by mighty Microsoft. It didn't work with SCO and it won't work now with the MS version of patent trolling.
In addition I want to see them pull that stunt off in Europe, where software patents are not only not recognized, but where the EU comm
Read the contract! (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The thing about linspire is that it wasn't ever intended for the geek who wants to change everything, compile kernels, write code, modify code and all that sort of stuff. It
Re: (Score:2)
Support for
Debian
Fedora
Freespire
Linspire
OpenSUSE
Ubuntu
Original timetable was Q2 2007. Current timetable is "in a few weeks" and "soon".
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Somewhere between that promise and the actual release of Lindows 1.0, they had a falling out with Codeweavers, and Codeweavers terminated their business relationship with Lindows:
http://www.newsforge.com/article.pl?sid=02/04/05/0 335256 [newsforge.com]
Neither Codeweavers nor Lindows had much to say in public that I am aware of, but there have been rumors that the main issue was that Lindows wasn't too keen
Re: (Score:2, Troll)
Ya gotta ask? (Score:3, Funny)
That's right. "My Computer." (Among others. Stop yer quibbling.)
Who owns that icon?
That's right. Microsoft.
Ah! I think I see your problem. (Score:3, Interesting)
This is the crux of the matter.
They do *not* "perceive [it] to be their property." They *claim* it is their property, but refuse to prove in any way, shape, or form that it *is* their property.
So.
The rest of your post is essentially mumbling about contract law, of which you come close to admitting you know almost nothing. You are saying your opinion is worth more than someone who actually knows something about contract