09.24.09
IRC: #boycottnovell @ FreeNode: September 23rd, 2009
To use your own IRC client, join channel #boycottnovell in FreeNode.
Permalink
Comments off 
Send this to a friend
09.23.09
What is ‘Club SCO’ Doing Near the Linux Foundation with Novell?
Where’s Waldo?
Summary: Respected members of the community complain about SCO players lurking among jesters for the Linux Foundation’s “Fake Linus Torvalds” game
SCO used to contribute to Linux, but a lot of people do not remember this anymore. Some pundits opine that Novell will be the next SCO Group and the company’s increased fascination with .NET is not an encouraging sign. Novell is firing Linux developers [1, 2], one of whom we spoke to in our IRC channel just two days ago. Some of these layoffs occur silently and it should not be surprising that Novell's contributions (patches) to Linux dropped sharply this year.
Microsoft’s indirect influence inside the Linux Foundation withstanding (influence via Novell), it was hard to ignore the fact that an anti-Linux character who promoted SCO was almost a guest of honour at LinuxCon. Boldly enough, the Managing Editor of Linux Today complained about this. She wrote:
And check out the winning Fake Linus– Matt Asay, who I would not characterize as any kind of great Linux advocate; his views on Linux and FOSS change as often as he publishes a new blog posting, which is several times a day. But at least Mr. Asay has some genuine FOSS creds.
Dan Lyons as contestant is just plain baffling. You might recall this is the same Dan Lyons who used to publish reams of anti-Linux trolling and pro-SCO guff for Forbes magazine. So what happened, wasn’t Rob Enderle available? Or Maureen O’Gara? With Ms.O’Gara you get a twofer– anti-Linux troll and your token woman. I suppose it’s a play on his schtick as Fake Steve Jobs, which is about as relevant to Linux and community-building as any random celebrity impersonator. A Fake Elvis would have been better, then we would have some cool music to listen to.
Carla spoke for many of us when she shared the thoughts above. She didn’t speak about the other Fake Linus who is a Novell employee, only the former one, namely Asay. Jason (of Mono-Nono fame) wrote
Linux Today on LinuxCon
[...]
Not Ms. Schroder’s words, but she rightfully points out the baffling inclusion of Daniel Lyons in the proceedings. This is a gentleman who enthusiastically supported SCO’s lawsuit activities for years, never missing a chance to smear and degrade the FLOSS community in the effort.
Among some of Mr. Lyons more enlightened diatribes include “Linux’s Hit Men“, where he goes through great pains to distort the role of the FSF and GPL, even reaching for the good old “comrade” Communism allusion. Or perhaps “Linux Scare Tactics” is more to your taste, where Mr. Lyons opines on the “FUD” from “Linux zealots”? You can hit on any random Forbes article from Mr. Lyons on the topic of Linux to be treated to 100% Microsoft approved misinformation and spin with all your favorite code words and key phrases.
Mr. Lyons is just one example of the less intellectually sophisticated Linux detractors / Microsoft apologists, but he serves here as an interesting example of a strange phenomenon among some in the FLOSS community to welcome, or even vigorously defend those who have spent enormous effort to destroy that same community.
I call it the FLOSS Stockholm Syndrome here because it seems to be part of that same mental abberation of hostages sympathizing or defending their captors!
Looking back at Carla’s post, here is an interesting comment from Antero, who writes: “Linus Torvalds atleast “sabotaged” the good reputation of Linux by that “Linux is too bloat” comment. What a interesting thing, everytime something negative has said about Linux it reaches the headlines. Atleast here in Finland. And don’t you ever think that we here see Linus “The Son of Nils” Torvalds as an “god” at all. Personally i find Richard Stallman as a man who really has something to say. His comment about one traitor might sound a bit “Stalin’s Purge” but honestly – it was rather realistic. Linus tries perhaps subconsciously escape the stalinism (connected always here to his father’s past)”
“Microsoft just loves quoting Linux authorities as saying that Linux has technical deficiencies.”Our previous post debunked the whole "bloat" remark, which no doubt will be used by Microsoft against Linux. In its internal anti-Linux presentations, Microsoft just loves quoting Linux authorities as saying that Linux has technical deficiencies.
So anyway, why on Earth was Dan Lyons brought this close to the very same foundation whose cause he was attacking for years, equipped with SCO's slander?
This would not be the first such bizarre incident. Matt Asay, a former Novell employee who is also conspicuously included in this contest despite his professed love for Apple and Macs, joined Dave Rosenberg in citing and inviting Dan Lyons to an audio show, essentially playing along with this vicious character that curses folks like them. Maybe they just don’t know who Lyons really is, but they E-mailed me in advance, suggesting that I propose a question for the show (to be addressed for Lyons to answer). Maybe they know the history of my criticism of Lyons and him linking to Boycott Novell from Forbes Magazine. Another bizarre appearance of Dan Lyons was a keynote at EclipseCon 2008. This is part of a worrying trend where people who speak ‘on behalf’ of FOSS are not even FOSS users and are sometimes anti-FOSS (even secretly).
People who do not know Lyons’ role in advancing SCO’s cause can probably find all the answers at Groklaw, which is now waving an interesting analysis of an amicus brief that favours software patents.
Lineo was, of course, an offshoot of Caldera, spun off in 1999 as a wholly owned subsidiary. Why would it want Hollaar’s web site? For what business purpose would it fund it? According to a report in April of 2002, by Maureen O’Gara, Lineo had ran out of money and was bouncing paychecks. If true, maybe paying professors to put up web sites isn’t a viable business model? I am starting to wonder how long ago the idea of suing over the GPL first began to stir.
Harris replaced Bryan Sparks as CEO of Lineo in 2001, by the way. He started out as VP and General Counsel at Lineo when it began. Sparks founded Caldera, Inc. in 1994. Harris worked for Summit Law Group also, and in fact he was a founding member (more Lineo history at that link), and he was the lead technical lawyer for Caldera in its lawsuit against Microsoft. You’ll find Palumbo in the Caldera v. Microsoft filing also. You can find Hollaar’s other amicus brief submitted by him and IEEE-USA in the Bilski case, the one he filed earlier with the appeals court, on his page of papers.
Starting to feel like the Ozarks, where everyone is creepily related to everyone else you keep bumping into? The point is, there is a connection between Hollaar and Caldera/SCO that goes back years.
[...]
How can a professor of computer science not know that software didn’t start out as proprietary? That came second, not first. And talk about missing the point of the open source development model, where sharing knowledge is deliberate. You could call it the scientific method. It’s like doctors sharing their knowledge from experiments and such, so other doctors don’t have to repeat what they’ve already done. It’s not about keeping that knowledge secret; the whole point is to share, so that the state of the field can quickly advance. The FOSS community shares on purpose, in order to share knowledge, also so the knowledge remains available to all. It has nothing to do with cloning anything. “GNU’s not Unix” is a meaningful phrase. And the GPL in no way downplays copyright protection. It is based on copyright law, and the GPL is enforced using copyright law, so his footnote is grossly inaccurate, not to mention offensive and demeaning, to me anyway.
[...]
Oh, and speaking of small worlds, Hollaar’s bio says “Professor Hollaar is currently working on a new approach to patent reform and laws governing shrink-wrap and click-on licenses.” Speaking of Psystar. And look at a comment submitted, according to Terekhov, by Hollaar to the FSF during the rewriting of the GPLv3:
This is not a correct statement of copyright law, at least in the United States. With respect to “propagate”, it is likely a tautology because of the defintion of “propagate” covering only things “that require permission under applicable copyright law”. But for “modify”, 17 U.S.C. 117 permits the “owner of a copy of a computer program” to make an “adaptation” in particular circumstances, and makes it clear that making that adaptation does not “infringe copyright if you do not accept this License.” It also does not seem to recognize the “first sale” doctrine codified in 17 U.S.C. 109, that permits the transfer of a lawfully-made copy “without the authority of the copyright owner”. Perhaps the interplay between the definition of “propagate” and this section covers it, but it is certainly not made clear and, in fact, misleads one in thinking that the only way to redistribute a lawful copy is to accept the License.
Sounds familiar, doesn’t it? A little like Psystar’s position, isn’t it? A lot like Psystar, huh? Coincidence? I don’t know. But it’s eerie, to me.
[...]
And in 2003, “alexander” posted this comment on Groklaw about how to work around the GPL, a la Psystar, as I read it, and included a link to the SCOX Yahoo! message board, to comments by Alexander Terekhov in support of SCO Group, making the circle complete.
I know what will interest you the most is the Hollaar brief, particularly the arguments on software and whether it is math, but at least you will understand from all this why, despite not knowing exactly how all these pieces fit together, I have come to suspect that the same folks behind SCO are somehow behind Psystar too, and that at its most fundamental, it was and still is an ideological attack on the GPL.
Regarding Professor Hollaar’s disinformation, Dr. Glyn Moody claims that “he doesn’t understand that algorithms are still maths – just ask Knuth”
A connection between Hollaar and SCO would be trickier to understand, but as SCO continues its battle over UNIX copyright, it is clear that Novell is not giving up and it would go all the way for the kill, as LamLaw shows in this analysis.
Novell Files for Rehearing En Banc!(Groklaw)
[...]
But, for the immediate future I do expect the old SCO nuisance lawyers to submit a brief arguing against the petition for an en banc hearing. After all, they have been prepaid for their legal services, right? And even though their hopes of ever getting to the actual trial have all but vanished as the new trustee was appointed by the court, they have been paid and they have been working a losing case all along. And they knew that from day one.
Either you have a transfer agreement that spells out which copyrights you have or you do not have any copyrights. Certainly the SCO lawyers knew that getting into the courtroom (trial court, appellate court or supreme court) would not be enough if Novell, IBM, Red Hat or even AutoZone? insist upon litigating their rights. Even nuisance lawyers are not ignorant of the law. They just think they can cause enough of a stink to get paid off.
Is Novell trying to help Linux (the PR factor) or does it want to keep the “UNIX” ammunition? Novell is not a charity after all.
In a new article from Richard Hillesley, this entire case is called the party that never ends.
Two years ago, we reported the imminent end of the long running legal battle between The SCO Group and the Linux Community, represented by Novell, IBM and others. But like the bad actor in a Victorian melodrama, SCO refuses to lie down, and keeps coming back for more.
It is not hard to come back for more when companies like Microsoft provide funding. █
“…Microsoft wished to promote SCO and its pending lawsuit against IBM and the Linux operating system. But Microsoft did not want to be seen as attacking IBM or Linux.”
–Larry Goldfarb, Baystar, key investor in SCO
Permalink
Comments off Send this to a friend
Linux ‘Bloated’ Claims Came from Novell, Debunked
Summary: Tracing the source of the claims about Linux being “bloated” leads to no surprises and the allegations are soon being refuted
THOSE in the press who are constantly Linux hostile have become preoccupied with Torvalds’ admission that Linux is getting larger (more code). Is it getting more “bloated”? That’s debatable.
Little attention was paid to the original source of the claims. It is not as though Linus Torvalds came up with the statement. He was more or less being fed words in the sense that he was merely presented with a sort of complaint, which he was then left to acknowledge or deny based on no independent evidence. Torvalds does not perform benchmarks, so we at Boycott Novell contacted those who do. We spoke to Phoronix and others who are more intimately familiar with Linux development (kernel space).
First of all, a question worth asking is, where did the claims come from? It turns out that a Novell employee, James Bottomley, is the one who raised the issue. We presented a video of his in this post about Microsoft's (and Novell's) increasing influence inside the Linux Foundation. Here is a report from The Register, which was cited very widely:
During a roundtable discussion at LinuxCon in Portland, Oregon this afternoon, moderator and Novell distinguished engineer James Bottomley asked Tovalds whether Linux kernel features were being released too fast, before the kernel is stabilized.
Citing an internal Intel study that tracked kernel releases, Bottomley said Linux performance had dropped about two per centage points at every release, for a cumulative drop of about 12 per cent over the last ten releases. “Is this a problem?” he asked.
That’s what friends are for, eh? Microsoft is unlikely to ever bring up criticism of Windows in its very own conference which is covered by journalists. Here is one report that references the above.
According to the report, Novell engineer James Bottomley referred to an internal study done by Intel which had found Linux performance had fallen by 2 percentage points at every release. Over the last 10 releases, the drop had been about 12 percent.
The numbers themselves come from Intel, but these were internal. Putting aside Intel's heinous crimes (yes, it commits crimes and then found guilty in multiple continents, by separate independent courts), there are many facts that Moblin fans prefer not see, such as Intel's support of SCO, relentless promotion of Vista 7, notoriously bad drivers for Linux, and collusion with Microsoft. See for example:
- Does the Intel/Microsoft Relationship Qualify as a Cartel?
- Intel-Microsoft Collusion in Sub-notebooks: A Smoking Gun
- Collusion Against GNU/Linux and Sub-notebooks: Part II
- Microsoft on Intel’s Anti-Linux: “Please Keep Confidential. This is a Nightmare”
- Microsoft Accused of Profiteering ($1.5 Billion) from Crime with Intel
- A Gradual Fall of W|Intel… Thanks to OLPC?
- A Federal Court Judge Might Force Microsoft to Pay Up Money It Hardly Has
- Microsoft Accused of Profiteering ($1.5 Billion) from Crime with Intel
- William Poole of NComputing (Formerly Microsoft) Blamed in the Big Collusion
- Might Steve Ballmer be Deposed for Collusion After All?
- The Return of Vista Collusions: Will Ballmer be Deposed Soon?
- Eye on Microsoft: Intel Collaborations, Dumping, and Search Redux
- The Collusion/Collaboration Club Strikes Again
- SpikeSource is Not Open Source
- It’s Not Innovation, It’s Collusion
- Do Intel and Microsoft Use SpikeSource to Fight GNU/Linux?
- What We Can Learn About Novell from Intel-Microsoft-Dell-Hewlett-Packard Collusions
Intel would love to publicly appear like a friend of everyone (including Apple, which is a major client now). But Intel is still in the business of selling the most chipsets and there is no x86 supporter like Windows, which is almost exclusively about x86. Intel found itself asleep on the wheel with OLPC and ARM gaining traction, so it is currently trying to tie Linux to x86 by all means available, even Moblin.
As for the claims themselves, knowing that benchmarks are prone to self-serving fraud (Microsoft does this all the time [1, 2]), we have looked at Phoronix benchmarks of Linux 2.6.30, Linux 2.6.28, Linux 2.6.26, and Linux 2.6.23. Linux does not appear to be getting slower. We asked Michael Larabel if it is true that Linux gets “bloated” and he says that “it depends upon the area. Some areas of the kernel have slowed down while others have improved.”
“Michael Larabel was right,” claims our regular reader Oiaohm, who is somewhat of a Linux expert.
“Let us remember that Novell’s Greg K-H self-servingly chose a criterion by which to slam Canonical and poison people’s minds against Ubuntu.”So what is it that Novell’s Bottomley was referring to specifically? Boot time has definitely improved, the file systems get faster as well, but it is always possible to find some specific test/s to suit whatever hypothesis is carved in stone and then requires proving. Let us remember that Novell's Greg K-H self-servingly chose a criterion by which to slam Canonical and poison people's minds against Ubuntu. Canonical contributes a lot outside kernel space, so Greg’s smear ended up looking dishonest. Compare this to Greg’s sweet talking when Microsoft’s contribution to Linux was just a driver for Microsoft products [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9]. Microsoft is his employer’s ally, unlike Canonical.
In conclusion, adds Oiaohm: “Linux kernel is not just black and white numbers. Overall measurements are showing slowing [but] altering particular settings and setting up systems different ways cause completely different performance.”
Referring to another regular reader, Oiaohm informally writes that this is the “reason why Diablo-D3 and me went head to head recently. I have been using cgroups to manage my processes so avoiding lot of cfs hell. Causing by auto grouping into users. So I am seeing way different bench numbers to what Diablo-D3 is getting, even when we are using the same source. It’s also the numbers of merges over that time [...] Most of the independent trees to the main Linux kernel are no more [and the] Price of unifying it takes quite a few versions for all the side effects to be found and corrected. At some point something better in driver detection for hal searches has to be found. The merges into the Linux kernel should slow down soon [when] You get a linux feature list it is getting fairly complete.” █
“Microsoft did sponsor the benchmark testing and the NT server was better tuned than the Linux one. Having said that, I must say that I still trust the Windows NT server would have outperformed the Linux one.”
–Windows platform manager, Microsoft South Africa
Reference: Outrage at Microsoft’s independent, yet sponsored NT 4.0/Linux research
Latest Evidence That Microsoft is Dying on the Internet
Summary: Microsoft’s position is slipping as GNU/Linux and GNU/Linux-powered Web clusters gain considerable momentum
AS we mentioned earlier, Microsoft loses a lot of money online and the Bing-sponsored blog finally drops some numbers:
Windows Live lost $560m in FY09
[...]
Most notably, Windows Live lost $560 million in Microsoft’s 2009 fiscal year, on revenue of $520 million, according to one of the slides that accompanied the online presentation.
This essentially means that as GNU/Linux continues to take away Microsoft's revenue from Office and Windows Microsoft may be left operating at a loss. Randall Kennedy has just called Office Web Apps “The beginning of the end for Microsoft”. It’s sensationalist, sure, but it is still a timely reminder of the fact that Microsoft must move online to compete (and it fails to compete there). The summary of this op-ed goes like this:
How Microsoft’s half-hearted embrace of cloud computing has signaled the start of an inexorable slide into obsolescence
IBM and Microsoft are meanwhile vying for PHP’s love. Via Bob Sutor:
A group of prominent cloud vendors has banded together behind an open source project that promises to make application services available across clouds. Zend Technologies, the supplier of the PHP scripting language, launched the Simple API project Tuesday, and IBM and Microsoft were among the first vendors to sign on.
Sadly for Microsoft, Zend said a few months ago that 95% among Zend clients choose GNU/Linux for deployment on the server. Microsoft is losing in a very big way. █
“The Internet? We are not interested in it.”
–Bill Gates, 1993
Permalink
Comments off Send this to a friend
Microsoft Tax Avoidance, by the Numbers
Guess who is left to pay Microsoft’s and BIll’s bills
Summary: Another up-to-date look at how Microsoft loots the American public
SEVERAL readers have independently brought to our attention this post from Slashdot, which reiterates old facts about Microsoft’s tax avoidance.
“With Washington State facing a billion-dollar biennial budget deficit, the spotlight again shifts to Microsoft’s software licensing office in Reno, Nevada. ‘Although the majority of its software development is performed in Washington State, Microsoft records its estimated $18 billion in licensing revenue per year through a corporate office in Reno, Nevada where there is no licensing tax. Just by enforcing the state’s existing tax law from 2008 onwards, we could reduce Washington’s revenue shortfall by more than 70 percent. Alternately, we could pursue the entire $707 million from Microsoft’s thirteen years of tax dodging and cover most of the expected deficit going forward.’ We have discussed Microsoft’s creative capitalism in the past.”
Here is the main source referenced by Slashdot. It states its case by citing some older reports and connecting them to contemporary trends and figures.
Last week, the Seattle Times reported that Washington State’s tax revenue is expected to decline by $238 million creating a $430 million shortfall in the biennial budget. The deficit is expected to grow further as a result of “rising demand for state services and other factors”. Luckily, there is an easy way to shore up our finances – ask Attorney General Rob McKenna to begin enforcing the state’s existing tax law on software licensing.
Over the past thirteen years, I estimate that Microsoft has avoided paying more than $707 million in B & O taxes on sales of its corporate software licenses (see Citizen Microsoft and Microsoft’s $528 million Washington tax break ). Although the majority of its software development is performed in Washington State, Microsoft records its estimated $18 billion in licensing revenue per year through a corporate office in Reno, Nevada where there is no licensing tax.
For more information about Microsoft’s practices, see previous posts on the subject, including:
- Number One Lobbyist Gets Tax Breaks, Government Deals, Innocent Children
- Is Novell’s Pal Cooking the Books as Well? (Microsoft)
- Comes, Iowa, Suppression of Truth, Collusion and Tax Evasion
- Summary of Microsoft Tax Evasion Stories
- How Microsoft Harms American Workers, Taxpayers, and the Environment
- Microsoft, a Notorious Tax Evader, Takes Money from Taxpayers to Help Its Own Business (Updated)
- Microsoft is Still Massively Evading Tax, Insider Trading Revisited
- Microsoft in Trouble with the Law Again
- Microsoft Debt and Tax Evasion
More recently we showed that Steve Ballmer is blackmailing Obama to protect this status quo. Until people stand up and demand change, nothing is likely to magically correct itself. This whole taxation game characterises not just Microsoft’s finances in the United States but also elsewhere (accounting in Ireland, as outlined in prior posts) and the personal finances of Bill Gates. Microsoft and Gates rely heavily on people’s ignorance not only when it comes to technical computing matters. █
“My background is finance and accounting. As a socially conscious venture capitalist and philanthropist, I have a very good understanding of wealth management and philanthropy. I started my career in 1967 with the IRS as a specialist in taxation covering many areas of the tax law including the so-called legal loopholes to charitable giving. […] However, the Gates Buffet foundation grant is nothing more than a shell game in which control of assets for both Gates and Buffet remain the same. […] The only difference is that the accumulation of wealth by these two will be much more massive because they will no longer have to pay any taxes.”
The Gates and Buffet Foundation Shell Game
Permalink
Comments off Send this to a friend
Likewise: Microsoft Embraces and Extends Samba with Software Patents?
Summary: A partly Microsoft-derived entity harms Samba by taking its work and making it more Microsoft obedient
A COUPLE of weeks ago we mentioned the company called Likewise because it had been conceived by Microsoft employees, at least in part. The name of the company is very appropriate because it’s centered around a me-too product that is more or less leeching Samba.
It was rather pleasing to see that someone in the press is finally willing to criticise this company, which is selling Samba for a price near Microsoft’s headquarters at Bellevue (there are software patents to be paid for, they would insist).
SMB (Server Message Block) is the network protocol glue that binds many file and print servers and clients for Windows and Linux, but it’s recently been running into some trouble. First, Microsoft’s proprietary take on it, SMB2, has real security problems. Next, Likewise has released a new open-source SMB/CIFS (Common Internet File System) file server software stack to share files among Linux, Mac, Unix and Windows computers, which, in the past, had been based on Samba, the popular open-source SMB server. Samba’s leadership is not happy with this.
[...]
Meanwhile, back at traditional SMB, which works just fine, Likewise recently released Likewise-CIFS and its commercial brother, Likewise Open 5.3, under the GPLv2. The company claims it is the only commercially supported CIFS/SMB file server for storage vendors and enterprises. Likewise-CIFS supports both SMB1 and SMB2.
So what’s the problem? As Krishna Ganugapat, VP of engineering at Likewise, said in a recent interview, “We came to realize that most successful open-source companies must be in a position where they control their own technology destiny.” Later, he said, “We now owned our own intellectual property; we held the copyright to all our source code.”
Listen to him extolling the virtues of intellectual monopoly. By his own admission, Ganugapat started his career in the Windows NT Development Group at Microsoft. That was in 1993.
It is worth adding that Likewise is close to Novell, as we showed many times before (Samba protested against Novell’s deal with Microsoft of course). Tony OBryan provides what he calls a “translation” of the article above:
The story deserves an executive summary:
“Microsoft writes new software, and the software sucks. A Microsoft-funded organization once again tries to kill a Microsoft competitor (Samba, therefore Linux).”
That’s the entire gist of the story.
To be more accurate, Microsoft is trying to kill free-of-charge Linux. Likewise’s products will be marketed as a “better Samba than Samba” and since Likewise is right on Microsoft’s doorstep, it may as well receive the assistance which is required (financial too).
People who support GNU/Linux and Free software should avoid Likewise and go with Samba instead. █
Permalink
Comments off Send this to a friend
Novell Helps Microsoft Zune and CodePlex Foundation Helps Novell
“[The partnership with Microsoft is] going very well insofar as we originally agreed to co-operate on three distinct projects and now we’re working on nine projects and there’s a good list of 19 other projects that we plan to co-operate on.”
Summary: The reciprocal relationship between Microsoft and Novell continues to be made more apparent
NOVELL is a very .NET-focused company at the moment. The staff spends a great deal of time speaking about it, and not just the technical staff. The latest output from Novell’s Mono team is curious; It looks like a Microsoft product developed at Novell and it is called MonoTouch. We wrote about it in:
- CodePlex Foundation Loves Software Patents and What MonoTouch Means to Microsoft
- More Thoughts About the Microsoft CodePlex Foundation: New Links
- Miguel de Icaza “is Basically a Traitor to the Free Software Community,” Says Richard Stallman
- Novell, Microsoft, and the “Microsoft Hater” Daemonisation Label
Novell has actually worked on MonoTouch for several months and the output of this programme thus far is truly marvelous… to Microsoft. Watch this new report from the Microsoft site Neowin:
A few days ago, Novell unveiled its new ‘MonoTouch’ SDK to be used for developing iPhone applications in .NET…
The developer, Foundation42, posted their milestone via Twitter, showing the power of Novell’s new SDK and what can be achieved with it. The game that was ported is called WordMonger, and was displayed on a YouTube video which we have included below. Many have questioned Microsoft’s games which were included with the Zune HD, as (although they’re free) they display a short ad each time they are launched.
That’s right. Novell has just helped enrich the Zune. That’s the idea of .NET promotion. Novell does not seem to be doing so much apart from this.
Just looking at Novell news in general, there is hardly anything noteworthy (other than demise, as shown in the previous post). What sure does exist in the news feeds are anti-Red Hat whitepapers from Novell. They continue to appear this week, just as they have over the past couple of months. Those papers do not target Windows or even UNIX; Novell’s own Web site is very focused on just poaching existing users of GNU/Linux (mostly from Red Hat).
ITWire has another new report which goes under the headline “CodePlex Foundation will help spread use of Mono.” It is true and it is hardly surprising. It’s an ongoing two-way relationship between Microsoft and Novell (not to be confused with Open/SUSE in Germany).
The appointment of Novell vice-president Miguel de Icaza to the board of Microsoft’s CodePlex Foundation has been done for one reason – the Foundation will serve as a handy vehicle to increase the use of Mono.
[...]
Wouldn’t that mean less time can be devoted to developing applications for Linux? After all, the same developers are writing the code for both ports, aren’t they?
Bingo, the magician arrives, Miguel with his magic Mono wand. No problem, says de Icaza, just switch to Mono. Then you can code just once and it will run on both Windows and Linux.
We wrote about the CodePlex Foundation in:
- OIN Receives Thanks from Many, CodePlex Foundation Receives Thumbs-Down from Many
- Why Microsoft’s CodePlex Foundation is a Promoter of Proprietary Software
- Microsoft Runs Away from the Press After Trying to Have GNU/Linux Sued by Proxy
- Novell, Microsoft, and the “Microsoft Hater” Daemonisation Label
There is yet more criticism of Microsoft’s CodePlex Foundation in this familiar parable (where the tortoise and fox are swapped):
For years Microsoft has been spreading lies and FUD (Fear, Uncertainty, Doubt) about Linux in the hopes that they can keep Linux from being widely adopted. Their latest round of lies is the anti-linux propaganda used in training some Best Buy and Staples employees. My opinion is that the reason Microsoft uses these tactics is because their software is so bad that it cannot stand on its own merits. It’s sad that Microsoft wastes tons of resources trying to kill Linux instead of using those resources to improve their own software.
[...]
The fox thought about it and finally agreed. So the scorpion climbed up on his back, and the fox began to swim. But halfway across the river, the scorpion stung him. As poison filled his veins, the fox turned to the scorpion and said, “Why did you do that? Now you’ll drown, too.”
“I couldn’t help it,” said the scorpion. “It’s my nature.”
So, the next time you’re disgusted by something Microsoft does, just remember.. it’s their nature.
Jason Perlow has just published this post which comes across as a little trollish (especially the picture). Being an IBM employee, it is not surprising that he is critical of Stallman’s positions. In conclusion he writes:
Stallman and the FSF, like his Cretaceous ancestors 65 million years ago, isn’t evolved enough to see that his reign is about to come to an end. The Open world needs interoperability, not shut itself off from other standards just because they originate from proprietary sources.
To be fair, Perlow works with two platforms that he connects for clients and also to his credit, he is an advocate of GNU/Linux. But he fails to get acorss a very fundamental point here. He seemingly claims that Microsoft (and Miguel de Icaza) wants interoperability. A bit like the way Microsoft ignored ODF when it comes to interoperability? And instead corrupted standards bodies all around the world?
Novell’s type of sought interoperability is about assimilation to Microsoft and paying for software patents that seemingly do not exist. To claim that Mono is about interoperability is to ignore the fact that Microsoft’s .NET deliberately excludes platforms other than Windows. █
Novell UK: It’s Like Singing to Empty Tables
Summary: Novell’s distribution line in Britain is cut by 25%
Novell UK is going through some rough times these days. Its channel chief apparently quit not so long ago, so the channel is broken and some more departures at the top lead to uncertainty in an already-struggling company. The British press came out with two reports that show the level of demise Novell UK has been suffering as of late. The Register talks abut a 25% decline in Novell’s distribution line.
The software vendor had already thinned its UK distribution line up by 25 per cent this year, having axed broadliner Computer 2000 and a couple of smaller outfits. Termination notifications have now been served to two more unnamed distributors, reducing Novell’s UK line-up to five.
Channel Insider indicates that it’s not over yet.
Novell will axe another 10 per cent of UK distributors currently partnering with the software vendor by the start of November this year.
[...]
Since the start of this year Novell has reduced the number of disties on its books by 25 per cent. Computer 2000 was one of the casualties in Novell’s initial distributor axe grind.
As Novell’s revenue continues to decline, so will the size of the staff and Novell’s overall impact. █
“Our partnership with Microsoft continues to expand.”
–Ron Hovsepian, Novell CEO
Permalink
Comments off Send this to a friend
« Previous Page — « Previous entries « Previous Page · Next Page » Next entries » — Next Page »
