08.10.08
Stand Up Against Silverlight, Microsoft’s Anti-competitive Weapon
Microsoft’s abuse (exploitation) of the Olympics is something that was covered here before [1, 2, 3, 4]. It’s a timely subject now that GNU/Linux users actively complain. The same old arguments and explanations need not be repeated, but here are some bits of interest for those who wish pursue or address this fiasco, which could be just the beginning of more. Even the Microsoft-obedient New York Times covered this problem:
Olympics Online, With a Hook
[...]
But for many industry executives who compete with Microsoft, the world’s largest software company, the Silverlight strategy recalls a federal antitrust case in which Microsoft was found guilty of using its market muscle to stifle competition from the Web.
Well, Microsoft’s CEO considers GNU/Linux to be the #1 competitor, which he has already excluded from the European championship. As Groklaw has made very clear, Moonlight is out of the question and it’s proof that Mono is “The Road To Hell”. Sadly enough, people like de Icaza and companies like Novell stand in the way of regulators. They help Microsoft.
“If a broadcaster that affects you uses Silverlight, you should protest.”Formal complaints by industry giants have already been filed to tackle this and more such complaints continue to come.
Silverlight is about The Microsoft Web and antitrust lawsuits are in progress. Don’t forget what Gates did to Netscape, very much deliberately and against the law. Video evidence is still up there for people to view and the clips are fortunately available as Ogg Theora, not Silverlight.
If a broadcaster that affects you uses Silverlight, you should protest. The authorities are rarely responsive, however, with a few exceptions. The likes of Rob Enderle poison their minds, so resistance is seen as extreme to those unaware of the long history of systematic abuse. Diplomats are an easy target. █
DS said,
August 10, 2008 at 12:28 pm
I think the linux community needs to create something tangible that consumers can use. Instead of complaining if the community can do better to promote applications developed by them or in this case work together on making moonlight happen, it seems better use of energy.
Roy Schestowitz said,
August 10, 2008 at 12:32 pm
Moonlight is a patent trap, RIA is not needed for video and shall an RIA be needed, JavaFX is GPL-ed.
Victor Soliz said,
August 10, 2008 at 4:06 pm
We already got something better, thanks.
Oh, and moonlight does not even work for the olympics, you’d see a lot of publicity about how MS’ little trick to make the olympics require silverlight is fine because of moonlight, but moonlight can’t play the olympics, though it will be a fine way to catch corrupt reporters, I guess.
larry said,
August 10, 2008 at 4:45 pm
Do you freetard really have to bitch this loud? Heck, write your own LinuxLight, LinuxLash, LinuxFx or Linux-friggin-whatever so that you can provide a compelling alternative to SilverLight and might actually get used. M$ is not preventing you from doing that FFS. If you cannot, then drop the bitching please. This world could use less crying babies.
Ziggyfish said,
August 10, 2008 at 8:50 pm
larry, look up software patients, then look at what patients are claimed in SilverLight and that will answer your question.
macamba said,
August 11, 2008 at 7:56 am
Bloody Whiners.
Victor Soliz said,
August 11, 2008 at 8:29 am
larry, macamba, it seems you are the ones bitching. We already have a lot free alternatives to this nonsense, here’s a little secret: The web is better without these things, as in much better, accessibility comes to mind, portability comes to mind. Etc, etc, etc.
Roy Schestowitz said,
August 11, 2008 at 8:34 am
Yeah, just like we were ‘whining’ about the BBC denying taxpayers who use GNU/Linux from watching shows they’ve already paid for.
BBC is the just like NBC. Just prepend the “MS” to it (MSNBC).
Is it the BBC that pissed off Linux users in the UK, only to later propose some second-class alternative (as if GNU/Linux is for second-class citizens)?
The same BBC whose technical chief left and is now facing anti-trust claims?
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/08/08/kangaroo_extension/
The BBC that cannot even keep its data safe?
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article4481621.ece
The same BBC whose technical (media) department, the one that tell you about GNU/Linux, is headed by a Microsoft executive?
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2008/jul/15/bbc.digitalmedia?gusrc=rss&feed=media
The same BBC that passed lots of money to Microsoft for nothing?
http://www.defectivebydesign.org/blog/iPlayerProtestReport
The same BBC that lied about DRM, got grilled by the parliament and could not justify the huge expenses and snubbing taxpayers who upgraded to GNU/Linux, Microsoft’s #1 rival (according to Microsoft’s CEO))?
http://www.openrightsgroup.org/2008/01/10/bbc-director-general-grilled-by-mps-on-iplayer/
The same BBC that overspent £36m?
http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/technology/s/1051855_bbc_website_36m_overspend?rss=yes?rss=yes
The same BBC that became Microsoft’s advertising department (at taxpayers’ expense)?
http://opendotdotdot.blogspot.com/2008/05/bbc-has-drunk-its-brain.html
The same BBC that lets Bill Gates publish his own promotional dross as though he’s a journalist, at taxpayers’ expense?
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/12/14/bill_gates_bbc_secrets/
The same BBC that rewrites history about Microsoft, glorifies an already-convicted Gates, and markets spyware (Vista) at taxpayers’ expense?
http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=37411
The same BBC that lies to GNU/Linux users to get them off its back?
http://opendotdotdot.blogspot.com/2008/04/has-bbc-duped-us-over-iplayer.html
The same BBC that behaves no better than the Chinese government and does not cover major protests?
http://www.defectivebydesign.org/iPlayerProtest
The same BBC that actually invited Microsoft over for visits?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/technology/2008/07/remoulding_microsoft_for_the_w.html
Someone ought to look into NBC and the whole situation around Silverlight. The European Commission already does that.
spartan2276 said,
August 12, 2008 at 6:52 am
Wow, this is fucking hopeless, it does not matter what we do in the end we get shafted left and right. Mark my words they will hi-jack the web, they’ve already started working on destroying apache/php from the inside out.
Roy Schestowitz said,
August 12, 2008 at 7:04 am
They are too frail (especially on the Web) to achieve this goal. That’s why they need Yahoo and some other things.
You’re being pessimistic. Awareness is probably key.
spartan2276 said,
August 12, 2008 at 7:39 am
Dude I hope you are right because, I will hate to have to go back to using windows on my PC. I rather not use at all. Also they are trying to use XAML for the web which uses the WPF/E framework and this is how they want to take down HTML. So even though they don’t have Yahoo they do have a backup plan and if entities such as NBC keep doing their bidding then how do we stand a chance?
alex said,
August 12, 2008 at 8:00 am
It’s not whining to highlight abuse and unfairness. But the person (DS) is right that applications are the only way to win. Trouble is every proprietary player sees the Microsoft strategy of locking people into their control as the best commercial strategy to making lots of money which is at odds with the simpler aims of Free Software authors (as opposed to the Linux community who are specifically OS kernel producers) which are to produce good software that has a use.
Roy Schestowitz said,
August 12, 2008 at 8:26 am
spartan2276,
There is more than one investigation into this in Europe. The States also expressed concerns (specially about XAML) and brought scrutiny when the oversight of Microsoft expired. Now, hopefully Apache will be smart and Microsoft less potent over time. That whole “Midori” and “7″ vapourware seems like too little, too late. Don’t let this demoralise you and by all means say “no” to Silverlight.
cortada-flash-js said,
September 12, 2008 at 10:32 pm
ok larry the paytard, what you must understand is that there are better alternatives already.
Iceman said,
December 23, 2008 at 11:17 am
There are paid bloggers out there to discredit all sorts of things. Do you think that Microsoft can afford to pay people such as “Larry” and “Macamba” to write a few nasty words to discredit this article? Pay the naysayers no heed, for it is quite possible that they are being paid to take the wind out of our sails. Just more phony PR designed to keep the masses stupid. Keep up the great work and thanks for sharing all this information.