- PCBSD 7.0 Review
PCBSD is a nice distribution for new users to the “alternative” operating systems as it is pointed towards new users, but advance users would not be disappointed. It is nice to see that PCBSD is progressing nicely, but there is still that issue of no 64 bit support as they have done it once in the past but strictly release their distribution for 32bit support only.
- X3 Reunion Still Actively In Development
Back in July we shared that X3: Reunion, one of the latest PC game titles being ported to Linux by Linux Game Publishing, was still in development. This game continues on where X2: The Threat had left off (a game ported to Linux earlier by LGP) and was developed by Egosoft and released for Microsoft Windows in 2005.
- Using G OS 3.0 to access Google programs
Before recent fuss over the new Google Chrome browser, I was looking at another new freebie that may give the average user a better idea of where the search giant is headed. And it isn’t even a Google product.
G OS 3.0 Gadgets is a Linux release, based on the pop/mainstream Ubuntu, that gives Google’s various online strategies an opportunity to strut their stuff.
- tmxxine : Muppy Interview
- Is Linux the greatest threat to Windows Vista?
The various distributions of Linux most likely pose the greatest threat to Windows Vista overall- why you ask?
- New Pint-Sized PC Packs a Punch
Although the company is playing close to the chest with its technical specifications, I was able to find out that the Xpack operating system is Linux-based and built around a fast processor with plenty of RAM and even some local flash storage.
- Eight Monitors With ATI Linux Graphics
With the most recent Catalyst 8.9 Linux driver release there is support for MultiView on FireGL and FirePRO graphics cards. This allows the user to use multiple graphics cards together in order to build a single X server that spans all of these displays. With some motherboards such as the ASUS P5E64 WS Professional having four PCI Express x16 slots, you can have four graphics cards and if each one provides two DVI ports you then can have yourself an eight-monitor setup. Each monitor can be configured through the AMD Catalyst Control Center Linux Edition.
- Mesa 7.2 Has Been Released
- VMware seeks “a skilled Open Source/Linux expert”
- A very minimal desktop
- Why Don’t You Throw Your Cube into an Aquarium?
Sausagenmuff has created a jaw-dropping Linux desktop featuring a cube, saltwater and fish. Now all of us have seen cool Compiz screenshots/screencasts, but this one takes the cake.
- Distributions I’m looking forward to
- 15 Great Quotes from Torvalds and Stallman about Free and Open Source Software
“To be able to choose between proprietary software packages is to be able to choose your master. Freedom means not having a master. And in the area of computing, freedom means not using proprietary software.”
-Richard M. Stallman
- New GoblinX Screenshots
- Linux: the girlfriend test
Our writer subjects Linux to the most exacting useability test yet devised: his girlfriend
- Interview with Walter Bender of Sugar Labs
I’m happy to tell you that Sugar is still being distributed with the OLPC. Sugar is now in the hands of a half a million children and teachers worldwide, Bender says.
- The sweet features of Fedora – Smolt
- The Bizarre Cathedral – 23
Digital Tipping Point: Clip of the Day
Larry Augustin, GNU Linux business visionary 26
Digital Tipping Point is a Free software-like project where the raw videos are code. You can assist by participating.
Send this to a friend
When Pamela Jones, better known as PJ, started Groklaw, a web site devoted to covering and explaining legal cases in the news of interest to the Free Software and Open Source communities, she preferred to remain anonymous and showed no desire to become well-known. Groklaw nevertheless became extremely popular very quickly, and it quickly established itself as the place to go for information on latest developments in the SCO litigations. It also covers news about patents, standards, licenses, and numerous other topics of interest to Groklaw’s readers. It corrects misinformation, otherwise sometimes known as FUD, or fear, uncertainty and doubt. And it’s a site where a large group of volunteers do group legal research.
Jones was recently honored with a Knowledge Masters Award for Innovation by the Knowledge Trust and the Louis Round Wilson Academy, an annual award given to individuals who “further the creative and innovative use of, and balanced access to, the world’s recorded knowledge.” She also was one of the five winners this year of a Google-O’Reilly Open Source Awards at OSCON, in her case for “Best FUD Fighter.” In this Q & A, she explains how Groklaw operates, what its purposes include, and where it is likely to head in the future.
Q: Groklaw appears to have established itself as an authority in areas where law meets technology. Can you foresee a point in the future where Groklaw will shift its focus away from Linux and open source in favor of coverage of issues like censorship, copyrights, and fair use?
Pamela Jones: We cover copyrights and fair use now. Basically, Groklaw covers IP law, because that’s my area of training, and I try to cover litigation of interest to the community, so I’m doubtful that anything would ever take us away from Linux and FOSS.
It’s core. I don’t think I’d ever expand into censorship. We don’t cover politics at all on Groklaw.
Q: Many people have been anticipating the demise of SCO since its controversial litigation began. After 4 long years, signs of an inevitable demise started to appear and even materialize. Has the Groklaw community ever offered any sympathy to SCO? Was there an attempt to separate the managerial and legal aspects of SCO from more technical ones?
PJ: People say that now, that they always thought SCO would fail, but I remember it differently. When Groklaw began, as I remember it,
we stood pretty much alone.
As for sympathy, I made a decision early on to concentrate only on the entities, ideas, and actions, not on individuals. I don’t want ad hominem comments either. It’s unseemly, hurtful, and unnecessary.
Personally, I have never wished for SCO’s “demise”, as you put it. I would be happier if they’d simply altered course and stayed in the Unix and Linux business. They certainly could have. It’s sad to see people losing their jobs because of management decisions to chase such a strange litigation strategy. Had SCO chosen to stay in the Linux business, they could have made money. Red Hat is.
If FUD over Linux was the goal instead, then SCO must bear responsibility for the results of that decision. I can’t admire such a course. But, yes, I feel for the people as people. I don’t lose empathy for fellow humans, even when I disapprove of their conduct.
However, SCOsource was in my opinion an improper attempt to make money from the hard work of others, without a legitimate basis, and to make the market believe Linux was legally tainted when it was not. And had it been successful, it would have caused a lot of harm to human beings and businesses in the FOSS community, who have every right to compete in the marketplace without such harassment. So I have empathy for them even more so.
It’s a bit like seeing an adult steal candy from a baby. If you saw that adult with a flat tire, you’d stop and help him. He’s a fellow human in distress, after all. But when he grabs the baby’s candy, you’ll still step in, because it’s wrong for a grownup to steal a baby’s candy, just because he wants it and thinks he can get away with it.
Q: Looking ahead, which cases does Groklaw have its eyes on? Groklaw seems to be already engaged in covering the NetApp-Sun Microsystems case, but are there are other cases that will consistently receive attention?
PJ: Obviously, patent cases are now stage front and center. But we also have an arrangement now where any lawyer can contact me and ask technical questions of our members. I mean any, by the way.
Let’s say he or she faced doing a deposition of a technical expert. Asking Groklaw for tips in advance can be helpful. It’s an added resource.
Q: What would be your advice to firms which hold what they believe to be valuable intellectual assets that bring no revenue? Should these firms consider resorting to legal action? Does it matter if the legal case might invoke the wrath of open source development communities?
PJ: I don’t give legal advice. But on your last question, I think it’s not a question of the community’s “wrath”. It’s a question of knowledge. If a company files a silly lawsuit, the community will recognize it for what it is.
What is so unique about IP and FOSS is that computers are a relatively recent thing. So is FOSS. So there are people still alive who remember very well the early days, the beginnings. That has implications for prior art searching, for example. It had implications in the SCO litigation, because when SCO made broad claims in the media, there were people saying, “That’s not so. I was there. It was like this…”
That can make a significant difference legally.
Q: Groklaw’s coverage of OpenXML/ODF affairs has become symbolic of the powers of collaboration in an Internet era. It showed that stories can explored at a level of detail that is overlooked or unexplored by traditional media. Do you think that journalism can be improved by pooling the knowledge of more people? How about reduced editorial control? Are the benefits outweighed by the danger of publicly exposing details that are too sensitive?
PJ: I do believe that people want more information than they get from the traditional media. Groklaw is Exhibit A for that proposition, and with no space constraints, why not give it to them? You don’t have to have reduced editorial control just because a lot of people are contributing. The Linux kernel, for example, is like a pyramid, with Linus and Andrew Morton at the top of the point. Anyone can contribute, but nothing goes into the kernel ultimately unless they approve it, so there is a filtration system. Groklaw is the same.
“I can imagine, however, a circumstance where Groklaw might petition a court for more transparency, but it hasn’t happened yet.”And Groklaw isn’t just journalism. That is part of it, but it’s not all of it. I’m not trying to be the New York Times. It’s a collaborative site, where we research together.
Legal research as a group does present questions of sensitivity. There are rules by the courts sometimes about confidentiality. I invariably abide by those rules. I can imagine, however, a circumstance where Groklaw might petition a court for more transparency, but it hasn’t happened yet. But I know that being able to keep certain matters confidential in the legal process is very important. Here’s why: anybody can sue anybody. They may not win, but they can start the process. Now, if all you had to do to spill everyone’s private life and business matters in public was to sue them or be sued, no one would want to participate in the legal process, even if they had a legitimate complaint. It’s vital that individuals and businesses be able to resolve disputes without all their private business secrets and personal matters being made public. So I respect those rights, just as I’d want my own privacy to be respected.
That’s a difference between doing Groklaw and writing software. There aren’t such privacy issues in software development.
Q: About a year ago, the notion of “crowdsourcing” was introduced. It was akin to open-source reporting and a few months ago, some people argued that it failed miserably due to lack of consensus, hidden interests, and complexity. What would be your advice — from an editorial point-of-view — to those who fail to coordinate a joint (or multi-player, so to speak) publication? What model would be most effective?
PJ: I’d say you need a pyramid setup in any collection of information. Consensus can’t work as well. Some people know more than others about a subject, so they need to have more influence. That is the essence of a meritocracy. You want no barriers to entry to contribute information. That informational flow must be totally free. But as it filters upward, you need people you can trust, who actually are skilled in that area and have the expertise to know what is valuable information and what is junk. And you need a person at the end of the process to make final decisions. That is how Groklaw is set up. So is the Linux kernel.
“You want no barriers to entry to contribute information. That informational flow must be totally free.”It certainly can and does happen that folks contribute information without even knowing why it matters legally. I might recognize an angle that they have no awareness of because they have no legal-related training or experience, but they still end up contributing the most meaningful piece. Or members will see some technical point that I absolutely wouldn’t have noticed or known about at all. I have people who are skilled in that area to advise me on picking out the gems there, and I am not so foolish that I overrule them, because I know what I know and what I only sort of know. So everyone contributes what they know best. Over time, I find out who is good at what tasks, so that’s what I ask them to do more of.
But you have to have a final decision maker, or a group. Otherwise, you end up doing nothing but discussing process and whether or not to do Z or X or Y.
Q: The depth of coverage and scale of Groklaw is immense. How do you manage to locate past writings of yours and organize resources that you use to conduct research?
PJ: I wrote it, so I remember it. I know how Groklaw is set up, and I remember the general order of events, so I can go through the Archives by date or by keyword. We also have a search engine.
Computers are wonderful, but so is the human brain. When you have a lot of human brains working together, it’s powerful. The other day, for example, I wrote an article about a SCO filing, and I didn’t remember one very important detail about the APA between Santa Cruz and Novell, an amendment which altered the terms. An anonymous reader left a comment that reminded me of that amendment. That happens a lot. And when it happens, I’ll add it to the article, to make it more useful not only now but for historians.
That is the secret of Groklaw, so many thousands of skilled people who each may remember one piece of the whole that the rest of us forgot and when you add all such contributions together, it’s really valuable. I learn a lot from Groklaw myself.
Q: Have you ever had any regrets about being unable — whether because of time constraints or physical capacity — to closely follow and cover a particular issue?
PJ: Yes. There have been several cases I wanted to follow in more depth but just lacked the time.
Q: At times, Groklaw appears to set its focus on ethical and humanitarian causes. Were there any times when you felt like you could serve your readers better by stepping outside the realms of technology altogether in order to cover completely different topics? Let’s assume that preferences, background, and interests of the existing readers are not an issue here.
PJ: No. I like doing what I’m doing. I care about being a decent, ethical person, and obviously the entire community felt a moral outrage at what SCO was doing, so that’s probably why you got that impression, but Groklaw isn’t cause-based. I’m realistic, and I have no illusions about remaking the world. I’m merely trying to explain one piece of it.
Groklaw is an experiment in applying open source principles to legal research, and that is where we’ll keep our flag planted. It’s not about causes. I don’t belong to any such organizations personally.
“Groklaw is intended to be a bridge between the legal and the technical communities, so they can cooperate.”I try my best to explain in accessible language what is going on in the courts. That’s it. There is one cause, I guess you could say. Groklaw is intended to be a bridge between the legal and the technical communities, so they can cooperate.
When they each understand what the other does and why, they can help each other so that eventually court decisions are more solidly based on how the tech actually works, what it can and can’t do. I see that cooperation as an urgent need, for two reasons: everyone today can be a publisher on the Internet. So everyone needs to understand how the law works. And second, computers and the Internet are new enough that many lawyers and judges are not yet up to speed on the tech, and that can result in decisions that are unworkable or just legally bizarre. That causes pain, cynicism about the law, and even market results that are counterproductive and very costly to fix. So spreading technical knowledge to the legal community and legal knowledge to the tech community is ultimately helpful in preventing such problems. That’s the hope, anyway. █
Originally published in Datamation in 2007
Send this to a friend
In recent coverage [1, 2, 3] which was centerd on Intellectual Vultures [sic], a clear connection with Microsoft was shown. The company seems to be serving as a tool, inspired and conceived by Microsoft itself. Those who are watching ZDNet closely will find Microsoft being described as “the biggest patent troll in the world.” Legal harassment need not be direct if Microsoft accumulates industry partners and friends who do their ‘dirty laundry’ [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15].
Microsoft has turned into the biggest patent troll in the world. The only thing that makes any sense is that some attorney in their employ is considering that a defensive move to prevent other bottom feeders from suing Microsoft. I certainly hope that is the reason for that patent otherwise it makes no sense. If they try to enforce that patent I hope and it needs to get shut down by the courts.
In any case it puts a new light on the GPL for me.
Over in Europe, Digital Majority drew attention to this talk on the subject of software patents.
It matters which sort of legal protection you take. Felix van Kourten argues why patent law suits software so badly and why we are better off with copyright law. Oct 10 he will speak at the Kiel Linux and Open Source Days.
Software is by all means ‘protected’ (a word better off never used). Work is protected not at the level of simple pertinent concepts but at the level of actual implementation. That’s the way it should be, otherwise we might as well restrict people’s speech because it conveys ideas that may have been heard or expressed somewhere else (but phrased differently).
The recent protest in Europe seem to be making some more headlines right now and it can’t be positive publicity for EPO, which will come under increased pressure and scrutiny. Here is Expatica writing about the strike.
Patent examiners and other staff of the European Patent Office (EPO) demonstrated outside the European Commission offices Thursday, demanding a thorough re-examination of the EPO.
The staff union, SUEPO, say that lowering the quality of patents will have a disastrous effect on innovation which will affect every consumer. Their ‘Save The EPO’ campaign is not aimed at increasing wages but in reinforcing patent quality.
In the face of ‘treaty man’ McCreevy [1, 2], the EPO absolutely must learn from the sordid mess caused by the USPTO’s lenience. This is probably not related to the economic crisis directly, but it could be part of it. Excessively-lenient patentability guidelines drive research and development to other countries where manufacturing is cheaper, minds are freer, and there is a great deal of reuse.
Restriction of this kind is an artificial limitation, which causes great harm to competitiveness. Much like DRM shows, you cannot enable or spur creativity through disablement, imposition of heavy fines, and reduction of dissemination. You just lock yourself out of the universal market that way. You wake up when it’s only too late and regret is not a valid excuse. █
Send this to a friend
Some friend, eh?
The value of Netware skills is said to be declining, much like the technology itself [1, 2]. To be fair, it is not just Netware that’s affected by an overall trend, which may or may not favour Free software (systems integration and architecture skills). Here’s the punch:
For instance, IT certifications among those with the largest market value declines in the past 12 months included Microsoft Certified Professional+Internet (MCP+I) with a 40% decrmicrosoft-takes-froease. Pay for IBM Certified Advanced Application Developer — Lotus Notes/Domino, Novell/Certified Internet Professional (CIP) and Novell/Certified Novell Engineer (CNE) each shrunk by 25%.
More of Novell’s ‘legacy stuff’ keeps showing up in the news, indicating that problems with Novell software persist. From Computer World:
“One of my projects was to put in a Novell print server station that would print out labels in the assembly area,” says fish. “Rather than buy a new computer, I decided to put one together from several old 486 workstations that had been outdated and parted out.”
And fish’s Franken-PC works — mostly. It boots up and it can log into the Novell network, but after a while, the system locks up.
Problems with Novell servers have also just driven another school from Novell to Microsoft. It’s probably representative of a trend.
Frequent and extreme activity on one of the Novell servers has been causing it to crash, making the network drives inaccessible until the server reboots.
Right now, computers are having to support both the Novell and Microsoft Client environments, though ITS is working on switching over to the Windows Client.
We recently showed how Microsoft is 'stealing' from Novell's GroupWise. Is this the company that Novell is serving in so many ways? Why? Has Novell forgotten the past so quickly? Microsoft never cared about the welfare of Novell and, in order to prove this, appended at the bottom is a USENET post from 4 days ago. █
From: Rex Ballard <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Subject: Re: [Rival] Microsoft is Not Buying Citrix and Novell (Yet)
Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2008 16:15:42 -0700 (PDT)
> Roy Schestowitz wrote:
> > —–BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE—–
> > Hash: SHA1
> > Is Microsoft buying Citrix? Novell!?
> > ,—-[ Quote ]
> > | Given a choice in the matter, Microsoft would happily bury Linux and
> > | open source in the IT trash-heap, but buying Novell wouldn’t get them
> > | one whit closer to that goal. That’s one of the reasons why Microsoft
> > | finds Linux so annoying. Unlike proprietary software companies, they
> > | can’t simply crush or buy it out of existence. As soon as they smashed
> > | one open-source company, another would pop up with the exact same
> > | software.
Microsoft was able to derail attempts by SCO, Novell, and Sun to bring
UNIX into the desktop market by making a series of deals with the UNIX
vendors and with the OEMs which made it possible for Microsoft to get
the OEMs to participate in a collusion scheme to exclude these other
competitors, especially with Windows 3.1, and it’s bundling with
With Novell, they told Novell that if they didn’t cancel the desktop
project that Microsoft would go into the file and print server market
with NT. Little did Novell’s board of directors know that Microsoft
planned to release a server that would knock NetWare out of the market
Sun wasn’t able to get the hardware vendors to write drivers for SunOS
and the Sun/386 machines, and Sun wasn’t quite willing to cross-
license to the other OEMs. They did cross-license to a company called
Solborne, who made a very profitable Unix workstation and laptop until
Windows 3.1 collapsed the market.
Later, when Sun tried to introduce Solaris/86 as a desktop system,
Microsoft made the deal to put Java on the PC. However, Microsoft
added their own “extensions” and took away the platform independent
character of Java, which was Microsoft’s way of making sure that Sun
did not re-introduce Solaris on an Intel Desktop platform.
As for OS/2, that is well published record and the more significant
details were disclosed in the Antitrust case.
Microsoft’s tactic against Linux has been to tie the OEM’s hands.
This included adding new restrictions on modifications to the boot
sequence. The agreement didn’t expressly forbid adding boot managers
and multiple partitions, but Microsoft just never approved the
requests, leaving the requests unanswered. Since the OEM license
required the OEM to get prior written permission, simply not answering
the request was sufficient to hold them in check.
> > | So, for now, they’ll work grudgingly with Novell, but buy Novell? It’s
> > | just not going to happen.
Microsoft may do what they did with SCO, holding enough of a
controlling interest to name key board members such as the treasurer,
who can give them details about who is buying what products, so that
Microsoft can “hammer them”, using software audits, CAL audits, and
other harassment tactics to force those customers back into the
> > | Now, if Microsoft 7, or Vista Mark Two as I’m
> > | beginning to think of it, flops as badly as Vista, then maybe Microsoft
> > | will start considering changing its way.
The problem for companies like Dell, HP, Lenovo, and Acer is that they
can’t really wait for Windows 7 or some other form of vaporware. As
it is, about 1/2 the machines they are selling are selling at a loss.
In some cases, even the extended warranties aren’t making up the
loss. The retailers have also had a bad year. Back to School season
was a dismal mess. Many stores are still sitting on unsold (un-
The only bright spot seems to be the Linux powered Sub-Notebooks, such
as the ASUS EEE and the Acer Aspire. The Acer Aspire was sold out so
quickly that Circuit City couldn’t keep up with the demand. Every
store in New Jersey was sold out. The ASUS EEE is also having trouble
keeping up with demand.
Ironically, the HP sub-notebooks on display were running XP, and that
seems to have dampened demand for their product on display.
Internationally, Linux laptops are getting more popular than ever, and
more and more stores are offering Linux laptops from Acer, ASUS, and
Everex as well as some lesser known companies like C4. Laptops with
“No OS” are also selling very well (since Linux can easily be
installed). The problem for Vista laptops is that they require so
much extra RAM, Disk, and CPU, that they are priced at almost double
the price of the Linux machines and almost triple the price of the “No
For the first time in 30 years, customers are saying “NO” to all the
extra hardware just to get the latest version of Vista, which doesn’t
give them that much more than XP with similar 3rd party software, and
XP gives them more flexibility.
> > | So, talk to me again about
> > | Microsoft buying Novell, or here’s a scary thought, Red Hat, in two
> > | years time and I might have a different answer.
If they have anything to buy it with. Remember that Microsoft has
been using their cash hoard to finance pre-sales of Vista, and they
aren’t getting back the return they expected. In addition, the stock
has gone from 37/share to $25/share – a loss in equity value of nearly
$108 billion in net value.
Dell has also dropped about $12/share or about $24 billion in equity
HP is cutting 24,600 Jobs – and hoping to subsidize PC losses with
Consulting from it’s purchase of EDS.
> > | For now, though,
> > | Microsoft is getting what it wants from both Citrix and Novell without
> > | buying either one and that’s more than good enough for the boys from
> > | Redmond.
Microsoft’s primary goal with both deals was to make Wnidows (2008 or
Vista) a viable “Host” operating system instead of Linux. And make
that version proprietary.
The tactic worked. Microsoft can now act as “host” on Xen.
Furthermore, Microsoft can get royalties for the commercial version of
Ironically, this may back-fire, since most contributors to Xen were
under the impression that their source code would be protected from
proprietary predators like Microsoft.
I think we are already seeing a backlash in the form of other Open
Source hypervisors, as well as OSS controls.
The commercial server vendors, especially IBM, Dell, and HP, are
pushing VMWare, partly because it can use Linux as a lighter weight
“host” kernel with very lightweight libraries thanks to it’s plain-
> Don’t trust any of them. Their staff, management, tech guys, tech gurus,
> sales staff are all cretins focused on moneterizing everything their way
> under their own control and ideals.
I would agree with this assessment. Novell has collapsed to
Microsoft’s demands again, and has again backed off their desktop
efforts, as did Red Hat. Too bad too, because SUSE has one of the
best desktop environments of any Linux distributor, including Ubuntu.
The commercially supported SLED is very reliable, installs easily, and
automatically installs the optimal video and audio drivers.
> Open source doesn’t allow them that
> and they will loose and ruin everything they touch taking with them a whole
> bunch of suckers like SuSE staff with glitter and gold that has no value
> outside of their own circles.
Not sure what actual pressure was used against SUSE, but Microsoft
typically uses the carrot as bait, and the baseball bat to make sure
you get into the cage after taking the bait.
Unfortunately, right now, Microsoft is losing it’s market power with
Apple’s average profit on an iMac or iBook is as high as 60%.
Loss on a Vista PC is often as high as 20%.
> There was a time I had many SuSE distros.
> Now everything is wiped clean and replaced with Linux distros that
> have value closer to Open Source than to Micoshaft Corporation
> funded Novel and their crappy infection which they still choose to
> call in a dishonest way as SuSE.
A Novell/Microsoft deal could bring value. For example:
- Microsoft could license XP libraries to Novell for use with WINE.
- Microsoft could license XP to Novell as an “appliance
Any Linux/Microsoft combination assures Microsoft of royalties from
OEMs, and also assures the OEMs the higher profit associated with
Linux or UNIX on the PC desktop or Laptop.
The biggest problem for Microsoft is that OEMs might decide to go “All
Linux” with more and more machines, and leave it to Microsoft to deal
with any piracy issues, since it’s not really the OEM’s responsibility
to enforce Microsoft’s copyrights.
The OEMs might even go so far as to offer an XP “appliance” – and not
even install Windows, but install Linux instead, with a “how to” for
installing the XP appliance under the virtualized desktop.
If Microsoft doesn’t learn to “play nice” with Linux, they might very
quickly find themselves being bumped out of the market entirely.
Keep in mind that Corporate IT departments were given a mandate in
2001 to plan and implement a migration strategy that would allow the
company to switch to a Microsoft-free environment if Microsoft
attempted to “force feed” a new version of Windows they didn’t want.
The Corporations have made it pretty clear that they do not want
Vista, and many are taking an aggressive stand against Office 2007.
Microsoft could find itself being “booted out the door” faster than
they realize unless they start to “play nice” with Linux.
Send this to a friend