Comments on: Microsoft Threatens Red Hat Again, Uses Novell as Excuse http://techrights.org/2008/10/18/microsoft-fud-red-hat/ Free Software Sentry – watching and reporting maneuvers of those threatened by software freedom Tue, 07 Feb 2012 14:00:35 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Roy Schestowitz http://techrights.org/2008/10/18/microsoft-fud-red-hat/comment-page-10/#comment-29006 Roy Schestowitz Mon, 20 Oct 2008 16:15:30 +0000 http://boycottnovell.com/2008/10/18/microsoft-fud-red-hat/#comment-29006 Fine. Please inform Glyn then. Stop throwing accusations at sites you dislike merely for quoting another. By the way, the Ina Fried shill has not thrown those threats (by proxy) for the first time here. A couple of months ago s/he mentioned Red Hat out of the blue in some post about cross-licensing deals. Microsoft is still using mouthpieces and it is /THEM/ you should criticise; not me, not Glyn, thank you very much. :-) Please try to recognise the /real/ threats, not those who merely /inform/ about it. Fine. Please inform Glyn then. Stop throwing accusations at sites you dislike merely for quoting another.

By the way, the Ina Fried shill has not thrown those threats (by proxy) for the first time here. A couple of months ago s/he mentioned Red Hat out of the blue in some post about cross-licensing deals. Microsoft is still using mouthpieces and it is /THEM/ you should criticise; not me, not Glyn, thank you very much. :-)

Please try to recognise the /real/ threats, not those who merely /inform/ about it.

]]> By: AlexH http://techrights.org/2008/10/18/microsoft-fud-red-hat/comment-page-10/#comment-28998 AlexH Mon, 20 Oct 2008 14:15:34 +0000 http://boycottnovell.com/2008/10/18/microsoft-fud-red-hat/#comment-28998 Well, we know what road is paved with good intentions. Making a statement about a contributor putting patents in Apache is conjuring demons where there are none. Intentional or not, it's still FUD. Well, we know what road is paved with good intentions.

Making a statement about a contributor putting patents in Apache is conjuring demons where there are none. Intentional or not, it’s still FUD.

]]> By: Roy Schestowitz http://techrights.org/2008/10/18/microsoft-fud-red-hat/comment-page-9/#comment-28997 Roy Schestowitz Mon, 20 Oct 2008 14:11:17 +0000 http://boycottnovell.com/2008/10/18/microsoft-fud-red-hat/#comment-28997 If he suggests that Microsoft will try to poison Apache/Hadoop with software patents, then I disagree with him because they don't need to do this. Knowing Glyn's history (we also correspond sometimes), he didn't intend to FUD Apache; he aggressively works to defend Free software from many dangers, including software patents. I still suggest you contact Glyn. If he suggests that Microsoft will try to poison Apache/Hadoop with software patents, then I disagree with him because they don’t need to do this. Knowing Glyn’s history (we also correspond sometimes), he didn’t intend to FUD Apache; he aggressively works to defend Free software from many dangers, including software patents.

I still suggest you contact Glyn.

]]> By: AlexH http://techrights.org/2008/10/18/microsoft-fud-red-hat/comment-page-9/#comment-28996 AlexH Mon, 20 Oct 2008 14:06:32 +0000 http://boycottnovell.com/2008/10/18/microsoft-fud-red-hat/#comment-28996 Ok, so now we're clear on the question: is Glyn's article about the potential danger of software patents in Apache FUD or not? Ok, so now we’re clear on the question: is Glyn’s article about the potential danger of software patents in Apache FUD or not?

]]> By: Roy Schestowitz http://techrights.org/2008/10/18/microsoft-fud-red-hat/comment-page-9/#comment-28995 Roy Schestowitz Mon, 20 Oct 2008 14:01:11 +0000 http://boycottnovell.com/2008/10/18/microsoft-fud-red-hat/#comment-28995 No, your question as I read it was about whether /you/ thought Groklaw had been FUDding Apache merely by quoting Glyn. No, your question as I read it was about whether /you/ thought Groklaw had been FUDding Apache merely by quoting Glyn.

]]> By: AlexH http://techrights.org/2008/10/18/microsoft-fud-red-hat/comment-page-9/#comment-28994 AlexH Mon, 20 Oct 2008 13:59:37 +0000 http://boycottnovell.com/2008/10/18/microsoft-fud-red-hat/#comment-28994 It wasn't a rhetorical question, and I'm not sure why you think I was "daring you to read my mind" given I stated the question in extremely simple terms. But anyway, it appears you think that it's not FUD to say that Microsoft will be putting patented code into Apache... well. That speaks volumes, I guess. It wasn’t a rhetorical question, and I’m not sure why you think I was “daring you to read my mind” given I stated the question in extremely simple terms.

But anyway, it appears you think that it’s not FUD to say that Microsoft will be putting patented code into Apache… well. That speaks volumes, I guess.

]]> By: Roy Schestowitz http://techrights.org/2008/10/18/microsoft-fud-red-hat/comment-page-9/#comment-28993 Roy Schestowitz Mon, 20 Oct 2008 13:56:13 +0000 http://boycottnovell.com/2008/10/18/microsoft-fud-red-hat/#comment-28993 Alex asked a rhetorical question, daring me to read his mind. My guess and answer is "No". Alex asked a rhetorical question, daring me to read his mind. My guess and answer is “No”.

]]> By: Michael Meyers http://techrights.org/2008/10/18/microsoft-fud-red-hat/comment-page-8/#comment-28992 Michael Meyers Mon, 20 Oct 2008 13:51:27 +0000 http://boycottnovell.com/2008/10/18/microsoft-fud-red-hat/#comment-28992 Oh Boy ... :D Once again you are avoiding the question but are just babbling along ... The questions wasn't what Alex would, in your opinion, deny or not, but, to quote it, "You asked me if I thought it was FUD; what do you think?". So, perhaps, since the question is now clearly pointed out, you manage now to answer it? Oh Boy … :D

Once again you are avoiding the question but are just babbling along …

The questions wasn’t what Alex would, in your opinion, deny or not, but, to quote it, “You asked me if I thought it was FUD; what do you think?”.

So, perhaps, since the question is now clearly pointed out, you manage now to answer it?

]]> By: Roy Schestowitz http://techrights.org/2008/10/18/microsoft-fud-red-hat/comment-page-8/#comment-28988 Roy Schestowitz Mon, 20 Oct 2008 13:31:23 +0000 http://boycottnovell.com/2008/10/18/microsoft-fud-red-hat/#comment-28988 Groklaw found it worthy of inclusion and quoting. Alex would deny that it's FUD because it is not quoted by a site he disagrees with. Groklaw found it worthy of inclusion and quoting. Alex would deny that it’s FUD because it is not quoted by a site he disagrees with.

]]> By: Dan O'Brian http://techrights.org/2008/10/18/microsoft-fud-red-hat/comment-page-8/#comment-28986 Dan O'Brian Mon, 20 Oct 2008 13:14:44 +0000 http://boycottnovell.com/2008/10/18/microsoft-fud-red-hat/#comment-28986 The last question he asked, maybe? The last question he asked, maybe?

]]> By: Roy Schestowitz http://techrights.org/2008/10/18/microsoft-fud-red-hat/comment-page-8/#comment-28985 Roy Schestowitz Mon, 20 Oct 2008 12:46:26 +0000 http://boycottnovell.com/2008/10/18/microsoft-fud-red-hat/#comment-28985 Which question? Which question?

]]> By: AlexH http://techrights.org/2008/10/18/microsoft-fud-red-hat/comment-page-8/#comment-28984 AlexH Mon, 20 Oct 2008 12:44:02 +0000 http://boycottnovell.com/2008/10/18/microsoft-fud-red-hat/#comment-28984 @Roy: I think it's highly enlightening that you won't answer a simple question.... ;) @Roy: I think it’s highly enlightening that you won’t answer a simple question…. ;)

]]> By: Michael Meyers http://techrights.org/2008/10/18/microsoft-fud-red-hat/comment-page-7/#comment-28983 Michael Meyers Mon, 20 Oct 2008 12:38:23 +0000 http://boycottnovell.com/2008/10/18/microsoft-fud-red-hat/#comment-28983 LMAO Boy, you are such a wiener. Microsoft is spreading some unfounded claims, someone stop the press, that's a new one ... not. Only thing I'm missing is the obligatory Novell libel. LMAO Boy, you are such a wiener.

Microsoft is spreading some unfounded claims, someone stop the press, that’s a new one … not.

Only thing I’m missing is the obligatory Novell libel.

]]> By: Roy Schestowitz http://techrights.org/2008/10/18/microsoft-fud-red-hat/comment-page-7/#comment-28982 Roy Schestowitz Mon, 20 Oct 2008 12:02:22 +0000 http://boycottnovell.com/2008/10/18/microsoft-fud-red-hat/#comment-28982 You claimed that repeating it is FUD. Why don't you contact Glyn? It's clearly something he wrote that you disagree with, but you vent out your frustration at this site. You claimed that repeating it is FUD. Why don’t you contact Glyn? It’s clearly something he wrote that you disagree with, but you vent out your frustration at this site.

]]> By: AlexH http://techrights.org/2008/10/18/microsoft-fud-red-hat/comment-page-7/#comment-28981 AlexH Mon, 20 Oct 2008 11:50:27 +0000 http://boycottnovell.com/2008/10/18/microsoft-fud-red-hat/#comment-28981 Groklaw doesn't offer commentary or opinion. You asked me if I thought it was FUD; what do you think? Groklaw doesn’t offer commentary or opinion.

You asked me if I thought it was FUD; what do you think?

]]> By: Roy Schestowitz http://techrights.org/2008/10/18/microsoft-fud-red-hat/comment-page-7/#comment-28980 Roy Schestowitz Mon, 20 Oct 2008 11:42:33 +0000 http://boycottnovell.com/2008/10/18/microsoft-fud-red-hat/#comment-28980 I included a large block of text. Since you previously insinuated that Groklaw does not spread what you referred to as "FUD", perhaps you should, at this moment, check out: http://www.groklaw.net/newsitems.php " * What Comes After “Embrace, Extend”? * 11:27AM October 10/19/08, 2008 * Alongside that embracing, we have some potential extending: Few will have noticed, but Microsoft's Jim Kellerman just announced that he and a Microsoft colleague have "been cleared to contribute patches again" to Apache, and specifically to the Hadoop project. This is how it will go. Purely in order to “improve” the performance of Apache and Hadoop on the Windows platform, Microsoft will helpfully offer some really cool hacks....which will of course only work on the Windows platform. This will effectively fork the Apache/Hadoop/whatever code – all for the good of their communities. Of course, there may be some “patented” technologies in there, but Microsoft will promise never, ever to sue anyone using this “optimised” open source – cross its heart and hope to die. Look for Microsoft to get involved with other leading open source projects in the same way. - Glynn Moody, ComputerWorld UK" I included a large block of text. Since you previously insinuated that Groklaw does not spread what you referred to as “FUD”, perhaps you should, at this moment, check out:

http://www.groklaw.net/newsitems.php

” * What Comes After “Embrace, Extend”?
* 11:27AM October 10/19/08, 2008
* Alongside that embracing, we have some potential extending:

Few will have noticed, but Microsoft’s Jim Kellerman just announced that he and a Microsoft colleague have “been cleared to contribute patches again” to Apache, and specifically to the Hadoop project.

This is how it will go. Purely in order to “improve” the performance of Apache and Hadoop on the Windows platform, Microsoft will helpfully offer some really cool hacks….which will of course only work on the Windows platform.

This will effectively fork the Apache/Hadoop/whatever code – all for the good of their communities. Of course, there may be some “patented” technologies in there, but Microsoft will promise never, ever to sue anyone using this “optimised” open source – cross its heart and hope to die. Look for Microsoft to get involved with other leading open source projects in the same way. – Glynn Moody, ComputerWorld UK”

]]> By: AlexH http://techrights.org/2008/10/18/microsoft-fud-red-hat/comment-page-7/#comment-28977 AlexH Mon, 20 Oct 2008 11:39:30 +0000 http://boycottnovell.com/2008/10/18/microsoft-fud-red-hat/#comment-28977 Thanks for trying to malign me Roy, but didn't attribute it to you; I said you repeated it. Thanks for trying to malign me Roy, but didn’t attribute it to you; I said you repeated it.

]]> By: Roy Schestowitz http://techrights.org/2008/10/18/microsoft-fud-red-hat/comment-page-6/#comment-28965 Roy Schestowitz Mon, 20 Oct 2008 11:25:29 +0000 http://boycottnovell.com/2008/10/18/microsoft-fud-red-hat/#comment-28965 The quote “there may be some “patented” technologies” comes from Glyn Moody. Perhaps you should head over to ComputerWorld and debate this with Glyn, who is always open for discussion. You did not show me saying that there are patents in Apache/Hadoop (I was saying about something else that it was predictable. If anything, your explanation above seems like misattribution that fits well with your pattern of crusading against this Web site. The quote “there may be some “patented” technologies” comes from Glyn Moody. Perhaps you should head over to ComputerWorld and debate this with Glyn, who is always open for discussion. You did not show me saying that there are patents in Apache/Hadoop (I was saying about something else that it was predictable.

If anything, your explanation above seems like misattribution that fits well with your pattern of crusading against this Web site.

]]> By: AlexH http://techrights.org/2008/10/18/microsoft-fud-red-hat/comment-page-6/#comment-28962 AlexH Mon, 20 Oct 2008 11:19:21 +0000 http://boycottnovell.com/2008/10/18/microsoft-fud-red-hat/#comment-28962 Sorry, but no. You <a href="http://boycottnovell.com/2008/10/18/pressures-for-wamp/#comments" rel="nofollow">repeated the blog post</a> which said "there may be some “patented” technologies in [Hadoop]", and called it "Predictable" and said they did the same thing to PHP. You asked <a href="http://boycottnovell.com/2008/10/18/pressures-for-wamp/#comment-28440" rel="nofollow">if I thought that was FUD</a>, and of course it is. But it still remains up there. So your revisionist history doesn't work. Patents were mentioned with regards to Apache. Sorry, but no. You repeated the blog post which said “there may be some “patented” technologies in [Hadoop]“, and called it “Predictable” and said they did the same thing to PHP.

You asked if I thought that was FUD, and of course it is. But it still remains up there.

So your revisionist history doesn’t work. Patents were mentioned with regards to Apache.

]]> By: Roy Schestowitz http://techrights.org/2008/10/18/microsoft-fud-red-hat/comment-page-6/#comment-28959 Roy Schestowitz Mon, 20 Oct 2008 11:15:06 +0000 http://boycottnovell.com/2008/10/18/microsoft-fud-red-hat/#comment-28959 There was no mentioning there of patents. That second part of the post was a reference to .NET, not Web server software. Only *then* was the notion of patents introduced. There was no mentioning there of patents. That second part of the post was a reference to .NET, not Web server software. Only *then* was the notion of patents introduced.

]]>