05.14.09
Posted in FUD, GNU/Linux, Microsoft, Windows at 11:00 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
Summary: Microsoft-sponsored Net Applications raw data is secret, different from what it’s claimed to be; more resistance to GNU/Linux and opposition from Microsoft sympathisers
AS SEVERAL readers have stated, there is a lot of anti-GNU/Linux venom in the press these days. A lot of it is reliant upon lies, which if repeated frequently enough, obviously become true in the minds of the less prudent observers.
Remember Net Applications? Those whom we have always recognised as FOSS-hostile reporters are repeating these lie over and over again in the press, just as some press parrots another lie about Windows being on 96% of sub-notebooks (or more). It’s a lie, and it’s no surprise that it comes from a friend of Microsoft (NPD). As for Net Applications, those just joining the discussion may also wish to read prior posts:
Sam Varghese has decided to investigate some more and he shared his findings in this new article of his. To quote a few portions:
I wrote to Net Applications on May 6, with the operative part of my query being: “Can you please elaborate as to the methodology employed to obtain these statistics and the geographical regions which are covered? I searched your site for information but could not find anything.”
Back came an automated reply which gave me reason for hope; it said, among a host of other things, “Messages are normally answered within 24 hours on weekdays.” But that was the end of the matter. A week later I am none the wiser as to how the statistics were collected and what geographical area they cover.
[...]
If one wants to look at anything other than the statistics as provided by Net Applications, one has to subscribe to something called “Geolocation Upgrade” and pay – the options cost anything from $US300 to $US1000.
But on that page, one does get an indication of the reach of the statistics. One option available is geolocation segmentation – “country, region, designated market area, city and postal code and combination reports for browsers, operating systems and search engines.” And it adds: “Postal code segmentation is for the US, UK and Canada only.”
Another option, titled demographic upgrade, is available for the US only. No mention of China, India or Brazil, three rather large countries where sizeable numbers of the six billion humans who populate our world live.
It is surprising that nobody has thought to ask these questions – it doesn’t take much intelligence to do so. There has been considerable angst among some at what they call under-reporting of the degree of Linux take-up on the desktop.
A KDE developer has just responded to this FUD from Net Applications as well.
You may have seen that, according to NetApps Linux is used by 1% (or in words – one percent) of online users. There’s one thing to note, and that is the fact that not all Linux users are using it to surf, and that some are changing their user agent strings to mimic IE on Windows. The other, probably more important thing is that NetApps base their studies mostly on surfers from US of A.
What is it about installed base which makes it so hard to measure? Is it the fact that people are usually forced to buy an operating system they do not actually choose? Speaking of which, the site nakedcomputers.org has just been launched to address this issue and other people are coming up with explanations for the guarding of monopolies.
With Folk Like This GNU/Linux Needs No Enemies
[...]
Since I am no longer fond of Microsoft products and have never been fond of Apple much I wondered how Kim handles questions about GNU/Linux a.k.a. Linux. Some searches on her site point to Linux questions that are only covered under her premium content. While I am curious how Kim answers these questions I am not curious enough to pay to find out. I also did some web searching with AltaVista and found that Kim has a regular column in the Gannett owned USA Today. Her last column there that had Linux in the title was in 2003. I read the column and discovered the typical “Linux is a command-line OS”, which it is not, and “GNU/Linux is only for tinkerers”, meaning geeks, information.
[...]
There are more “experts” like Kim out there on the WWW that make their living off of Microsoft created problems. For the most part they all denigrate adoption of GNU/Linux by average desktop PC users. After all, these “experts” are invested in Microsoft as their cash cow and do not want to kill that beast. I understand their motivation to keep people on Microsoft products even though I find this motivation repugnant. GNU/Linux is definitely ready to be used by average users buying preloaded desktop systems. The typical Microsoft “expert” is just not ready for GNU/Linux it seems.
There is a lot of hostility directed towards GNU/Linux these days. People are naturally resistant to change (justification of one’s own lifestyle), so the more ubiquitous GNU/Linux becomes, the more resentment towards it will appear publicly. Maybe it’s a good thing because it is an indication of growth which proves scary to some. █
“There’s a lot of Linux out there — much more than Microsoft generally signals publicly — and their customers are using it…”
–Paul DeGroot, a Directions On Microsoft analyst
Permalink
Send this to a friend
Posted in GNU/Linux, Microsoft, Novell, Red Hat, Servers, SLES/SLED at 10:31 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
Summary: Linux Magazine, whose writer works for Novell, advertises Novell with a contest and beyond
BACK in January we wrote about a jaw-dropping conflict of interests at the magazine whose stewardship is known to include a Novell employee. The short story is that Linux Magazine gave Novell some special honours despite the possibility that those who decide are neither readers nor voters. Now we find the very same magazine advertising SUSE with a contest:
Does your datacenter need a power boost? Looking to deploy Linux in the near future? Let us know and be registered to win an HP ProLiant BL280c G6 Server Blade powered by an Intel Xeon processor, pre-loaded with SUSE Linux Enterprise Server 11. Register now!
Not compelling enough? How about the top banner? or the Novell logo? Never mind the Novell-boosting contest. In addition, on the right-hand-side pane, one may find that 3 out of 4 white papers are for SUSE, and just one is for Red Hat. To be fair, not all pages are like that. Still, it leaves some room for doubt.
Speaking of collision of interests, how about this from the news?
Likewise Open and Citrix XenServer Bring Security and Openness to Virtual Servers
[...]
Come June, this will no longer be the case. Citrix has integrated Likewise’s Open software with its XenServer virtualization software, so that virtual servers running in mixed network environments can be secured just as easily as physical machines.
Likewise is former Microsoft employees and Citrix is one of the closest Microsoft allies and the company's Partner of the Year for 2008. This would easily deceive those who think it’s an “open source” news item. █
Permalink
Send this to a friend
Posted in Microsoft at 9:28 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
To repeat from last year's post about a report from 2004:
THEIL: How close were you to getting bought by Microsoft?
[SAP's] KAGERMANN: Microsoft approached us about a possible merger late last year [but] after a series of talks called it off because it would have been too complex. There was never a deal on the table.
Permalink
Send this to a friend
Posted in Europe, Microsoft, Patents at 6:25 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
Summary: Another roundup of patent news serves as an alarm to Free software defenders
THE LAST time we wrote about patents that kill people was 4 days ago. There is another major new case which takes to task this dangerous trend of patenting:
i. Cancer Patients Challenge the Patenting of a Gene
When Genae Girard received a diagnosis of breast cancer in 2006, she knew she would be facing medical challenges and high expenses. But she did not expect to run into patent problems.
ii. ACLU sues over patents on breast cancer genes
Myriad Genetics, a Utah-based company, vowed Wednesday to “vigorously defend” itself against a legal challenge to its patents on two human genes linked to breast and ovarian cancers, its attorney told CNN.
iii. ACLU, Cancer Patients Sue Over Patenting Of Genes
The ACLU has organized a group of cancer patients who have had treatments and medical analysis limited due to gene patents held by the company Myriad Genetics, and brought the issue to court. This is a big deal… and while the case and the resulting appeals will certainly take many years, this is going to be a case well worth watching.
For those who think that such patents are unethical, consider pharmaceuticals more broadly [1, 2]. Better ways do exist for development of drugs.
Here is a new essay about patent thickets and their relationship to antitrust:
In my next (and final) post on the sewing machine patent thicket, I will raise an issue that is not yet discussed in my paper — antitrust. The impact of antitrust doctrine on how patent-owners contract with other patent-owners may create significant variances between the nineteenth century and today on how patent-owners may resolve patent thickets. I am still researching the relationship between patent pools and antitrust, and so I am especially keen on receiving feedback from the readers of this series.
In light of the Intel ruling in Europe (or elsewhere), Glyn Moody raises again the same question about patents and antitrust:
This might have interesting implications for the netbook market, where Microsoft is desperately trying to keep manufacturers from offering cheaper GNU/Linux models. How it does that could well come under scrutiny by the European Commission if there’s any hint it is apply pressure unfairly.
But beyond that, there’s a more subtle point. These fines arise, after all, from the abuse of monopoly power. And there are no greater abuses than those associated with intellectual monopolies – patents and copyrights. The more that the European Commission punishes such monopolies, the sooner, it seems to me, it will be forced to confront the worst monopolies – those actually backed by its constituent governments. If it wants to make the European markets truly fair, and to promote competition, it should not just be hitting big, bad companies that bully competitors, but the big, bad system that has such bullying at its heart.
Moody also writes about the (probably false because Microsoft denies it) speculation that Microsoft will buy a top lobbyist for software patents in Europe:
Rumour: Microsoft to Buy SAP?
[...]
Irrespective of rumours, Microsoft would be the perfect suitor for SAP since the latter is one of the last major bastions of proprietary software in Europe, and favours software patents.
That’s no surprise, since Enterprise Resource Planning – SAP’s heartland – is one of the few software sectors where open source has failed to make significant headway yet, and software patent monopolies are a great way to lock out up-and-coming free alternatives to high-priced closed-source solutions.
As we have been stressing a lot recently, there is a strong new attempt to legalise software patents in Europe and Roberto Galoppini warns about it, adding that:
Carlo Cappato has been fighting software patents since 2003, and I’m not surprised he just signed the free software pact, the initiative mentioned earlier this week. Now he asks for help, if you like what he did on digital freedoms for years it is time to help him to get elected.
The FFII has pulled old quotes that highlight the severity of the situation.
Hartmut Pilch, founder of the FFII, had the right vision in 2007 about the EU-EPLA project. Here is what he said about the future specialized patent court in Europe.
As this new article from Law.com indicates, when it comes to software, only large companies benefit, so it’s not a one-size-fits-all situation, certainly not from an economic perspective, let alone a moral one.
Congress has spent the past five years in an ongoing effort to reform the patent system. Reform proposals have come and gone; the debates between proponents and opponents of various amendments have been fierce and protracted.
[..]
These disagreements demonstrate the conflicting needs of different industries in the patent system. The incentives necessary to promote innovation in the pharmaceutical industry are not necessarily those for software or to semiconductors. The incentives necessary to innovation by small entities may differ from those needed by large entities.
Despite all this, Bill Gates seeks to justify what he does by publicly equating software to drugs (April 2008). Privately he sings another tune altogether. Some years ago, said Bill Gates (in private): “If people had understood how patents would be granted when most of today’s ideas were invented, and had taken out patents, the industry would be at a complete standstill today.”
And again, despite all of that we know, Gates is being trained to recite words like “innovation” or “R&D” when it fact it’s all marketing and it’s supposed to instill confidence in the minds of Microsoft clients and shareholders. As one person put it in a new article about “Microsoft Research”:
Microsoft Research…why make the effort?
[...]
What research is for, in cases like Microsoft, is status. It’s a very tax efficient, with many valuable and wonderful side effects that occasionally benefit the company, but its primary task is marketing. It’s proof, even in these most distressingly modern of times, that patronage works.
This marketing stunt is also being used to pass new laws that block competition. Why else would they go out of their way to organise a lobbying event called "Innovation Day", which is a recent example of the Microsoft circus for software patents in the EU? There are other examples like Pi Day, usually all leading back to the same Microsoft lobbyists. █
“The genesis of this idea was when I was at Microsoft. We had a problem with patent liability. All these people were coming to sue us or demand payment. And Bill (Gates) asked me to think about if there was a solution.” —Nathan Myhrvold, WSJ: Transcript: Myhrvold of Intellectual Ventures
Permalink
Send this to a friend
Posted in Antitrust, GNU/Linux, Hardware, Law, Microsoft at 5:31 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
Summary: Microsoft’s list of offences grows these days (from illegal deals to bundling and kickbacks)
NOW that Intel is severely fined for its crimes (not enough after damage had been done, as an embargo would prove more effective), Microsoft ought to be careful because it engages in similar practices, sometimes with Intel, e.g.:
Let’s look at articles and posts from the past couple of days to find new evidence of Microsoft breaking the law.
Secret Deals in Switzerland, No Tender
This is a subject that we covered in [1, 2]. It is not worth repeating the details, but here is another new article on the subject. It’s summarised as follows:
The Swiss Federal Office for Construction and Logistics (Bundesamt für Bauten und Logistik, or BBL) is reported as having purchased Microsoft licenses in the order of 42 million Swiss francs (about $38 million). Because no public bids were tendered, open source organizations are now requesting a review of the decision.
Browser Bundling, Prevention of Choice
This too is a subject that we looked at last week. Opera and Mozilla are both complaining about Microsoft bundling [1, 2] and DaemonFC saw it for himself before he wrote:
IE 8 is bad enough on it’s own merits, but Microsoft has sank pretty damned low in turning it into a borderline trojan horse/spyware/browser search hijacker.
Dumping and Crippling
A source says that ASUS has admitted receiving kickbacks from Microsoft to kick GNU/Linux and another source says that Microsoft sells Windows below cost in order to just harm competition (GNU/Linux). Intel committed similar offences and in addition to this, says one person, Microsoft’s hardware limitations are to be treated as an antitrust violation.
Why Aren’t Hardware Limits on Netbooks an Anti-Trust Violation?
Continuing on today’s theme of asking dumb questions about areas of law I don’t know enough about, here’s a question about anti-trust law, spurred by the news that Administration Plans to Strengthen Antitrust Rules.
[...]
Why isn’t this illegal? Don’t the anti-trust laws prevent a software maker with a dominant position from dictating hardware to pc makers in order to protect the market share of a different product?
Whether a violation or not, the consumer suffers here. █
“This anti-trust thing will blow over. We haven’t changed our business practices at all.”
–Bill Gates
Permalink
Send this to a friend
Posted in Deception, Free/Libre Software, FUD, GNU/Linux, Lenovo, Microsoft, Patents, Vista, Vista 7, Windows at 5:00 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
“Analysts sell out – that’s their business model… But they are very concerned that they never look like they are selling out, so that makes them very prickly to work with.”
–Microsoft, internal document [PDF]
Summary: A look at the proximity between GNU/Linux-hostile analysts and the company which feeds them
WE HAVE already written quite extensively about how Microsoft uses analysts to advance its business agenda and several days ago we showed that the Microsoft-corrupted Gartner Group is a fan of the company's software patents. It’s only to be expected from those whose wages are paid by Microsoft [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]. Here is more from an analyst at Gartner:
I am not a big fan of the Bilski ruling. But if it’s impact ends up being more acutely felt on the business models necessary to commercialize innovation than on innovation itself it, that would seem to me yet another reason to find fault with it.
So here is advocacy of monopoly on thought — on a process that can be carried out with pen and paper or just words. Since one of the main losers from In Re Bilski fallout is Microsoft [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14], this should not be too surprising.
In other interesting news, a lot of people parrot the words of some Lenovo analyst, but very few people bother to mention the company’s strong ties with Microsoft as of late [1, 2, 3, 4]. It even includes Microsoft executives as employees and it always looks to reinforce or justify its decisions. The analyst in question is telling as well. His blog is filled with Vista posts and nothing except Windows. So should one be surprised that he bashed GNU/Linux? DaemonFC published a post about it last night:
Microsoft-paid anti Linux stooges at Lenovo
[...]
This isn’t like Windows at all which already has or provides easy access to everything I want it to do, can be downloaded and burned legally and for free to any blank disc I have laying around, and is entirely open source. Linux is proprietary and costs between $140-$1000 a license.
In response to that latest FUD from Lenovo, one person explains that “retail shelves are rented.”
when it comes to the retail shelves, what you see on the shelf is not what customers or the market have picked. These products are placed on rented space and the marketing people placed the product there. This shouldn’t surprise anyone. But, because Microsoft was/is allowed to throw money at hardware resellers(Dell, HP, Lenovo, etc) in the name of marketing partnerships, what products you see on shelves have more to do with backroom contracts than customer demand. Especially when you’re talking about Linux as an option. And yes, I’ve heard product development people talk about how Microsoft influences product configurations with disruptions of these marketing contracts.
Windows Vista is so widely disliked that the Vista Uncompetition has just been launched. Vista 7 won't be much better and we keep seeing vicious attacks from unnamed individuals against anyone who dares to criticise it ahead of arrival, including attempts to shun those critics and get them in trouble with their publisher; the latest example, for which there is a lot of evidence, is Charlie from The Inquirer. One has to wonder if the PR agencies are at work again, policing coverage of key products. █
“Mopping Up can be a lot of fun. In the Mopping Up phase, Evangelism’s goal is to put the final nail into the competing technology’s coffin, and bury it in the burning depths of the earth. Ideally, use of the competing technology becomes associated with mental deficiency, as in, “he believes in Santa Claus, the Easter Bunny, and OS/2.” Just keep rubbing it in, via the press, analysts, newsgroups, whatever. Make the complete failure of the competition’s technology part of the mythology of the computer industry.”
–James Plamondon, Microsoft
Permalink
Send this to a friend
Posted in Apple, Microsoft, Office Suites, Security, Windows at 4:11 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
Summary: Massive security update from Microsoft, which neglects Mac-using customers
MICROSOFT LIES about the real number of vulnerabilities which it patches, but this time we know that the lower bound for last month is 14, 11 of which are “critical” (typically meaning that they permit hijacking of the operating system remotely). Here is one report on the subject.
That one update patched 14 separate vulnerabilities, 11 of which were rated “critical,” Microsoft’s highest threat ranking.
As the above article notes, Microsoft, as usual, leaves Mac users vulnerable because of its software. It’s already trying to defend this practice.
Microsoft has defended its decision to release a Windows-only security patch for its Office program after a researcher warned it put Mac users of the software at risk.
The software poses great risks, it makes botnets, and the US government is growing nervous.
The United States’ top commanding officer for the space and cyber domains told reporters last week that a cyber attack could merit a more conventional military response.
[...]
Following numerous attacks on Pentagon networks, with adversaries copying terabytes of military data, the United States has increased its focus on locking down its networks and formulating a military doctrine for cyberspace. Many of the attacks on US networks are launched from servers in the People’s Republic of China, leading officials to blame Chinese government-funded hackers for the attacks.
Microsoft is becoming a liability and a matter of national security. █
“Our products just aren’t engineered for security.”
–Brian Valentine, Microsoft executive
Permalink
Send this to a friend
Posted in DRM, Finance, GNU/Linux, Hardware, Microsoft, Windows at 3:48 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
Summary: Microsoft’s hardware business (in the sense of direct sales, not manufacturing) to expand at the expense of the licensing model if rumours are correct
MICROSOFT has some financial uncertainties looking at the long term (sharp earnings dive serves a s prelude). It is unable to elevate the price of software because better and cheaper competition exists, notably GNU/Linux. Microsoft has already attempted to enter deeper into the hardware market with XBox and Zune, but it lost so many billions of dollars and it still operates at a loss.
If the rumours are true — and there are reasons to suspect they are true — then Microsoft will be launching some kind of a ‘Zune phone’ .
Microsoft confirms Izune in June
IT LOOKS LIKE Microsoft is getting closer to launching the Zune phone we told you about earlier, here and here.
We have been saying for a while that the launch is quite imminent, production snafu’s aside, and Microsoft just confirmed it.
[...]
Hold off? Why, so you can be disappointed by the new Ibrick SP3, then go out and buy an Iphone or Pre? So you can feel the warm fuzzyness of owning a Izune, and by that I mean the heat of the Nvidia chipset burning your leg?
The effect would be devastating to Microsoft’s Windows Mobile partners. Microsoft already lags behind the competition in this area, so charging for Windows Mobile licences is hard because there goes Microsoft’s value proposition. On a related note, it’s not going particularly well for Zune, which is still disastrous in financial and technical terms.
Microsoft’s anti-ipod ad shows how out of touch their Zune division is
[...]
And if you thought you were going to be cute and record your SPDIF output, Vista will disable that if the file is DRM’d.
Have fun lighting your money on fire with Zune + Vista!
Is Microsoft running out of decent products that people actually want rather than forced to use for compatibility? █
Permalink
Send this to a friend
« Previous Page — « Previous entries « Previous Page · Next Page » Next entries » — Next Page »
