PDA

View Full Version : Steve Ballmer going after OSS again



tagginannie
February 21st, 2007, 12:40 PM
Steve Ballmer repeats his threats against Linux (http://news.com.com/Ballmer+repeats+threats+against+Linux/2100-7344_3-6160604.html?tag=nefd.top) saying "open source is "open source is not free" and Novell will help In return for M$ to strongly recommend SuSE if any one wants to dual boot Linux and Windows. And now Red Hat wants in on the deal Red Hat joins Microsoft interoperability (http://www.cbronline.com/article_news.asp?guid=913F6357-25B0-460C-B4C9-683A1A926401)
effort (http://www.cbronline.com/article_news.asp?guid=913F6357-25B0-460C-B4C9-683A1A926401)

Two distros that I want be using any more .



Suzy:KS

darkhatter
February 21st, 2007, 01:04 PM
This is going to be hard for fan girls/boys to understand so I'll try and explain:

Ballmer has walked into a mall and said "I have c4 strapped to my body and I'm going to blow it up". We don't know if he actually has c4 on his body, but because he keeps saying this all our shoppers are leaving our store because they don't want to die. What Novell and I guess Red Hat are doing is if Ballmer does have c4 and he blows himself up he won't do it in their store.

Novell and Red Hat are a company in the end, if they are losing money they need to do fix it.

Let the flame war begin

:popcorn:

Edit: its early ignore the typos

slayerboy
February 21st, 2007, 01:18 PM
Why does it seem as if MS is going after RPM based distros? Or are the RPM based distros going to Microsoft?

Either way, I'm done with RPM-based distros, regardless if they are affiliated with MS or not. I'd rather have stable Debian packages over RPMs laced with c4. I loved PCLinuxOS, and still do, but the fact that it's RPM-based scares me. Not that I think Texstar would ever join MS, but being that it's RPM-based, there could be some MS contributions in the future to RPM packages and I'm not about to put up with that.

Unless my tiny bit of knowledge about RPM's is completely off-base. Even then I'm liking Edgy a lot and am looking forward to seeing what Fiesty has in store. I just hope that if MS ever approaches Ubuntu, that they do the right thing and tell MS to take a long walk off a short pier!

Tomosaur
February 21st, 2007, 02:27 PM
Unfortunately for MS, they can never 'beat' open-source. There's no central place to go to, it's kind of like air.

reyfer
February 21st, 2007, 02:57 PM
Steve Ballmer repeats his threats against Linux (http://news.com.com/Ballmer+repeats+threats+against+Linux/2100-7344_3-6160604.html?tag=nefd.top) saying "open source is "open source is not free" and Novell will help In return for M$ to strongly recommend SuSE if any one wants to dual boot Linux and Windows. And now Red Hat wants in on the deal Red Hat joins Microsoft interoperability (http://www.cbronline.com/article_news.asp?guid=913F6357-25B0-460C-B4C9-683A1A926401)
effort (http://www.cbronline.com/article_news.asp?guid=913F6357-25B0-460C-B4C9-683A1A926401)

Two distros that I want be using any more .



Suzy:KS

Seems like somebody at that news site misunderstood Red Hat's involvement, check this http://blogs.zdnet.com/microsoft/?p=270

Mateo
February 21st, 2007, 03:32 PM
until he actually says what Microsoft code has been stolen, sounds like scare tactics.

justin whitaker
February 21st, 2007, 03:38 PM
Well, first he blames the pirates for poor sales of Microsoft operating systems. Then he blames Open Source.

This despite the fact that Microsoft has a near monopoly on OEM operating systems. You can't walk into Best Buy and say: "Give me an Ubuntu desktop!".

It is simply the latest in a long round of moves to cover up the fact that Microsoft is directionless, and is putting out crap products.

ComplexNumber
February 21st, 2007, 04:16 PM
Unless my tiny bit of knowledge about RPM's is completely off-base.
bullseye!


tagginannie
its just hot air.

dtruesdale
February 21st, 2007, 04:23 PM
Accusations without proof, in court would never make it. So in saying that it's all hear say and baseless. Enterprise people got scared cause who wants to lose money over something you could prevent if it's true (which it is not). It people know but CEO's and CFO's don't and if they lose money they lose their bonuses so they are not gonna chance it. It all comes down to money.

darkhatter
February 21st, 2007, 04:31 PM
its not really "rpm" distro that they are going after, its the major ones

BarfBag
February 21st, 2007, 04:35 PM
The Red Hat partnership still hasn't been confirmed. They've been in talks with Microsoft (which has been confirmed), but partnership is still speculation.

The FSF was going to make an official decision on the MS-Novell partnership "within two weeks" (that was what I heard last week). Does anybody have details on this?

dca
February 21st, 2007, 04:46 PM
Ballmer's more pissed that certain companies (Novell & Red Hat) can take something that is essentially free (Linux kernel, GNU, etc) and make millions of dollars on providing support for it. The real go-getter or insult is that this free stuff is actually killing their market share on the server side. The virtualization dealie is another sore spot because I don't know of anyone that would virtualize a Linux distro through Windows server. No, everyone is taking Linux and doing the opposite because it lessens the chances of crashing an entire system.

dkohen
February 21st, 2007, 05:02 PM
I don't see the problem.

Ten years ago Microsoft said nothing about FLOSS and Linux, they ignored it totally.

Five years ago they said "FLOSS is not a sustainable model/Linux is not a threat"

Now they are putting out millions of $ to make sure that they can coexist with Linux, they use FLOSS themselves both internally and in some of their products.

Five years from now....

We'll know Ubuntu has really arrived when MS start bad-mouthing Ubuntu and try to make deals with Canonical at the same time.

BTW: What Redhat has done makes perfect sense - it's not that different from the way that a lot of Ubuntistas run samba or various virtual machines because we have to coexist with MS. Not pretty, but, at least for now, a necessity. JBoss needs to work with Windows - they're not selling out, they're making sure their product works the way people want it to - which is something we all need to aim for.

jclmusic
February 21st, 2007, 05:27 PM
its not really "rpm" distro that they are going after, its the major ones

i agree, but i think it's more the major business distros. they want to scare big business away from linux,

ice60
February 21st, 2007, 06:12 PM
i agree, but i think it's more the major business distros. they want to scare big business away from linux,

how does that work?? i thought it meant businesses will now use linux because there's no chance of being sued. MS is selling suse to its customers and making sure its software works alongside linux.

shows how much i know lol

tagginannie
February 21st, 2007, 06:31 PM
how does that work?? i thought it meant businesses will now use linux because there's no chance of being sued. MS is selling suse to its customers and making sure its software works alongside linux.

shows how much i know lol

I've been wanting to know how that works also. I asked hubby but as usual he is useless when it has any thing to do with PC's LOL

Suzy:KS

Tomosaur
February 21st, 2007, 06:41 PM
MS aren't selling suse so much as promising not to sue you if you go ahead and install it. It's basically racqueteering, although there are a number of legitimate 'benefits' - the main gist is that if you use Suse - a distro which Microsoft can now leverage, Microsoft won't utterly destroy you or you business.

racoq
February 21st, 2007, 07:22 PM
I wonder if this fashion sticks along the most popular distros, what it will be Mark's / Canonical position, if microsoft tries a approach for a similar deal with ubuntu. Will he change its mind and cut a similar deal?

Don't forget what today is true may change in the future.

I hope that Mark's it is intelligent enough, to maintain its position, and refuses this type of deals with microsoft

dca
February 21st, 2007, 07:32 PM
No, they're going after the money-makers. Novell (SuSE) & RH. Even though Canonical is big, there outside the US so patents don't apply and it'd be a waste of their time. Now, if Canonical was approached by M$ in the same fashion as the other than I'll share the "it's not so bad" ideology.

Wow, this is gonna' be interesting...

billdotson
February 21st, 2007, 07:47 PM
what legitimate claims do they have for the "stealing" of their intellectual property?? Bill Gates bought QDOS (later changed to DOS) from a guy that pretty much ripped off some other guys CP/M operating system.

What could Linux possibly be infringing upon.. the fact that it is an operating system?

racoq
February 21st, 2007, 07:54 PM
what legitimate claims do they have for the "stealing" of their intellectual property?? Bill Gates bought QDOS (later changed to DOS) from a guy that pretty much ripped off some other guys CP/M operating system.

What could Linux possibly be infringing upon.. the fact that it is an operating system?

I think that Apple could sue microsoft with the same line of thoughts, they copied MacOSX in the first place. This all "neat" eye candy that microsoft developed for windows vista, are a more sophisticated copy of the ideas from macos (the well known "gadgets" and user interface effects)

ssam
February 21st, 2007, 08:04 PM
the open invention network (http://www.openinventionnetwork.com/) would make it very hard for microsoft to sue anyone using open source over software patents. If they tried IBM, NEC, Novell, Philips, Red Hat and Sony would all counter sue.

lyceum
February 21st, 2007, 08:57 PM
I read an article (I think in Linux Format?) where they asked MS what they were talking about with the whole "FOSS ripping of MS" thing. Here is my best interpretation of what they are talking about.

If I make a box and paint it blue and call it "intellectual property" then you make a box, with a different shade of blue and a different substance (I use wood, you use metal) you are stealing my idea, or my "intellectual property." How you sue and prove that is something else all together. But, I do not think they are talking about lines of code.

This does not stop me from thinking Steve Ballmer is an idiot and needs to put up or keep his mouth shut.

argie
February 21st, 2007, 09:00 PM
Is Microsoft actually using anything the OIN has patented?

justin whitaker
February 21st, 2007, 09:02 PM
I read an article (I think in Linux Format?) where they asked MS what they were talking about with the whole "FOSS ripping of MS" thing. Here is my best interpretation of what they are talking about.

If I make a box and paint it blue and call it "intellectual property" then you make a box, with a different shade of blue and a different substance (I use wood, you use metal) you are stealing my idea, or my "intellectual property." How you sue and prove that is something else all together. But, I do not think they are talking about lines of code.

This does not stop me from thinking Steve Ballmer is an idiot and needs to put up or keep his mouth shut.

Don't discount this so fast. Microsoft has a fleet of very talented lawyers, and very deep pockets. If they decided to assert some IP right (maybe the "START" menu is trademarked, as an example) they can put a torpedo in the bow of any FOSS project they target.

They have time, and they know the legal system. Could many of the Linux distributions or FOSS projects actually outlive Microsoft in court? Ballmer is many things, but not an idiot. Microsoft must have some basis for making these claims, no matter how spurious it seems.

lyceum
February 21st, 2007, 09:08 PM
Don't discount this so fast. Microsoft has a fleet of very talented lawyers, and very deep pockets. If they decided to assert some IP right (maybe the "START" menu is trademarked, as an example) they can put a torpedo in the bow of any FOSS project they target.

They have time, and they know the legal system. Could many of the Linux distributions or FOSS projects actually outlive Microsoft in court? Ballmer is many things, but not an idiot. Microsoft must have some basis for making these claims, no matter how spurious it seems.

You are correct. Right now they are just using FUD. I hate that. In school no one really worried about the kid that threatened to beat you up, it was the one beating up the other kids that was scary :)

There was a really good South Park that made fun of the music industry for going after Napster. I would love to see one about Ballmer and MS going after the FSF and Linux. :D

getaboat
February 21st, 2007, 09:32 PM
If you can't beat 'em, join 'em.
Buy Novelle and/or RH.
Divide and Rule.
OSS2?

ssam
February 21st, 2007, 10:16 PM
Is Microsoft actually using anything the OIN has patented?

The OIN members have a lot of patents. IBM alone has more patents than microsoft, http://www.ibm.com/news/us/en/2006/01/2006_01_10.html , though a lot of them are hardware. if microsoft aren't infringing on novell's patents why are ms paying novell $348 million? http://www.linux-watch.com/news/NS7235986827.html

kaamos
February 21st, 2007, 10:30 PM
What could Linux possibly be infringing upon.. the fact that it is an operating system?

Fat32 for example. And the totally retarded software patent legistation in the US seems to cause that any piece of non-trivial software is going to infringe someones patents. So when you have something as huge as the linux kernel and not to mention all the other stuff in the distros, there is always the possibility that you theoretically could be sued for something.

bobbybobington
February 21st, 2007, 11:55 PM
Every major player has an arsenal of patents, but its very much a nuclear war type situation. They all infringe on each others IP, but they don't sue each other because of retaliatory suits and they would have nothing to gain. But here comes this group of small (relatively speaking ) Linux companies taking away M$' market share. Each linux company by itself doesn't have the patent arsenal to really damage m$, and they could be easily crushed (I doubt even redhat could survive a SCO vs. IBM scenario). Why doesn't m$ do this off the bat? A lot of their customers use Linux. Instead they use their IP arsenal as a threat to extort $ from the major business linux companies, thus hedging their bets on Linux's success.

jcconnor
February 22nd, 2007, 12:34 AM
Any code that was "reverse engineered" to provide compatibility - SMB, NDIS, etc. - is a ripe target for the type of IP attacks that Ballmer is suggesting. By providing those within a default distribution and by providing support for those items, a company is, by default, gaining an advantage by "potentially" infringing on IP and patents.

Not saying that those are, or that there is a case (I'm definitely not a lawyer!!) but if millions of dollars are at stake - look at SCO v. IBM - it becomes a juicy target. As a publicly traded companies Novell has a responsibility to its shareholders to ensure that they won't suck millions down the drain fighting something like that, even if in the end, they could win.

Look at what happened the last time Novell tried to take on MS. Wasn't pretty. I no longer need my Netware certifications. Anybody want to buy them from me?? :)

Whether is right, wrong or indifferent, it is a whole lot easier.

Daveski
February 22nd, 2007, 12:35 AM
They have time, and they know the legal system. Could many of the Linux distributions or FOSS projects actually outlive Microsoft in court?

Ah, the wonderful Justice System which favours the rich - or does it just favour making laywer rich?

darkhatter
February 22nd, 2007, 01:06 AM
The lawyers working for Novell and Red Hat are smarter then we are, regradless of if you want to accept it. If Novell made this deal and Red Hat is talking with Microsoft then I think what Ballmer is saying is more then just F.U.D.....

PrinceArithon
February 22nd, 2007, 04:40 AM
I'm tired of Ballmer when is someone going to shoot him??

I'm serious I would love to do it myself...

Polygon
February 22nd, 2007, 05:58 AM
patenting of ideas and "intellectual property" is just stupid in its own right... Ive heard a really good quote that the only things that should get patented are the things you physically bring to the patent office, and this patenting of ideas and ways of doings things (like code) is stupid

and i honestly think this is just scare tactics. They have released nothing about what it could be, and if they do release it, they would just rewrite it or work around the area that is IP protected. problem solved.

billdotson
February 22nd, 2007, 06:05 AM
I would advice against shooting anyone.

I don't understand why Microsoft isn't broken up by the US gov't. It is clearly a monopoly with over 90% of the market share. Even though there is Apple, Microsoft has entrenched itself in the market and uses it's money to keep itself together.

Technically every OS maker could sue any other OS maker simply because the other company's OS also communicates to hardware.

Why do all major companies have to be so greedy?

By the way Microsoft your old operating system DOS was bought from SOMEONE ELSE for $50000 and that guy that they bought it from had pretty much copied Gary Kildall's CP/M OS.

There are good reasons for copyright law and such but big companies that are just using the law to keep competition down is ridiculous, especially programs and Operating systems that people but alot of work into so that they are free.

I would love to see Steve Ballmer and Microsoft try to sue me or anyone else for using Ubuntu.
I would simply make a counter-argument that has the same validity as theirs by saying that making the red, blue, yellow and green Windows logo was a picture I drew years ago.

Man why do companies have to be so greedy. The thing is that there are even greedier corporations out there like the oil companies and the entertainment industry.

lyceum
February 22nd, 2007, 02:24 PM
Check this out, looks like noone likes Ballmer :)

http://technology.guardian.co.uk/weekly/story/0,,2017954,00.html

"It might look like it from reactions such as the Mini-Microsoft blog, which complained in its headline: "Stop Him [Ballmer] Before He Speaks Again!" "

cantormath
February 22nd, 2007, 02:30 PM
Steve Ballmer repeats his threats against Linux (http://news.com.com/Ballmer+repeats+threats+against+Linux/2100-7344_3-6160604.html?tag=nefd.top) saying "open source is "open source is not free" and Novell will help In return for M$ to strongly recommend SuSE if any one wants to dual boot Linux and Windows. And now Red Hat wants in on the deal Red Hat joins Microsoft interoperability (http://www.cbronline.com/article_news.asp?guid=913F6357-25B0-460C-B4C9-683A1A926401)
effort (http://www.cbronline.com/article_news.asp?guid=913F6357-25B0-460C-B4C9-683A1A926401)

Two distros that I want be using any more .



Suzy:KS
I wish...........

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v446/cantomath/Graphics/FBI.png

samjh
February 22nd, 2007, 04:33 PM
patenting of ideas and "intellectual property" is just stupid in its own right... Ive heard a really good quote that the only things that should get patented are the things you physically bring to the patent office, and this patenting of ideas and ways of doings things (like code) is stupid

and i honestly think this is just scare tactics. They have released nothing about what it could be, and if they do release it, they would just rewrite it or work around the area that is IP protected. problem solved.

The problem is not with intellectual property. Protection of intellectual property is vital if IP-based businesses are to survive in a competitive environment. Almost the entire computing and publishing industries depend on this, as do many scientific and traditional engineering industries (eg. chemical, mechanical, mining, etc.). It is a means of protecting the inventors of an idea, and forcing innovation by making competitors develop different and better ways to accomplish the same task or produce similar products. It's not perfect, but it's at least better than absolutely no IP protection.

The real problem is with ill-qualified patent assessors. Not that the assessors themselves are to blame... rather it is the system of hiring and training them. Most of them simply do not have the necessary background, experience, or training, to assess technical patent applications like software patents. If assessors were adequately trained for purpose, there would be lot less frivolous patents being granted.

AllenGG
February 22nd, 2007, 05:36 PM
Hold it ! you're all jumping the gun ! Ballmer is FUD personified, true.
But the reality is that Microsoft is heading toward the Service for Dollars industry, like the Geek Squad (http://www.geeksquad.com/). And this opinion is significant:
From Groklaw: (http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=2007022115484663)
Mr.Joseffer (page 27, line 17) and Mr. Waxman (page 29, line 10 and page 38, line 25) said that software is not patentable.

Ok, where does that leave Microsoft ? and wierd Steve ?

Anyone read Groklaw ? try it.
Allen:cool:

graabein
February 22nd, 2007, 11:57 PM
I wouldn't pay no attention to that crack pot. Microsoft is PI company no 1 anyhow. Developers developers developers and good night.

PrinceArithon
February 23rd, 2007, 12:02 AM
I think I just have a problem. I get entirely too annoyed when someone acts like him. I really try my best not to. I just can't help it.

cantormath
February 27th, 2007, 06:44 PM
An open letter to Ballmer
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v446/cantomath/mickeypoem.jpg

hkgonra
February 27th, 2007, 07:07 PM
Accusations without proof, in court would never make it. So in saying that it's all hear say and baseless. Enterprise people got scared cause who wants to lose money over something you could prevent if it's true (which it is not). It people know but CEO's and CFO's don't and if they lose money they lose their bonuses so they are not gonna chance it. It all comes down to money.

What you miss is that it will never make it to court.

MS has enough money to bankrupt Suse or Redhat before it even gets to court.

The whole basis of civil litigation in this country is bullying. Whoever has the biggest bully wins.