10.17.09
Posted in Antitrust, Apple, Europe, Free/Libre Software, Microsoft at 9:08 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
“…[C]ut off Netscape’s air supply.”
–Paul Maritz, Vice President, Microsoft (Now VMWare CEO)
Summary: Apple-Mozilla power struggle has just returned as a Mozilla employee expresses disdain; Microsoft’s force-fed Firefox plug-in leaves the Web browser vulnerable
ECIS and Opera have both complained about the unreasonable interim deal [1, 2] which has upset those two for quite some time [1, 2]. Complaints from the public are on their way (as promised) and there is already a draft people are encouraged to participate in. It comes from Jukka Rannila of Finland
At the moment of sending the Opinion to the Commission there was still some time to the final deadline of opinions.
Readers are stron[g]ly recommended to send their comments before 7 November 2009.
In addition to the above — and contradicting what Sam Dean wrote about a week ago — Mozilla too is reportedly dissatisfied.
What browser do you use in Windows? Apparently if you live in Europe, the answer is a resounding Safari. That is right folks, in the great ballot poll, Firefox lost out to the lowly webkit-based Safari.
Apple must be so proud, their baby is still not a great browser, but is all the rage.
[...]
Problem is, when you put FireFox that far down on the list, it loses to Safari. Guess who is hating the EU tonight all of a sudden? Don’t expect this to stick.
Here is the original, which also states: “This is my personal opinion and doesn’t reflect Mozilla’s official position or any formal statement from Mozilla.” The Microsoft crowd would possibly incite for boycotts if Mozilla speaks out officially.
We previously showed that Apple is closer to Microsoft than most people realise and Mozilla complained about Apple's vision of a duopoly with Microsoft.
Mozilla has better reasons to be upset with Microsoft though. Our reader Will has shown us this report, which goes roughly two days back.
An add-on that Microsoft silently slipped into Mozilla’s Firefox last February leaves the browser open to attack, Microsoft’s security engineers acknowledged earlier this week.
“Clever,” argues Glyn Moody, “.NET flaw manages to compromise Firefox as well as IE.”
Will reminds us of the fact that Microsoft not only blocked Google but it also rejected its good plug-in that fixed Internet Explorer; adding insult to injury, Microsoft’s hypocrisy was seemingly infinite because Microsoft had pushed a .NET extension into Mozilla Firefox without users’ consent [1, 2]. Going back to what Microsoft did to Firefox and the impact, “It was addressed by a recent patch,” argues Will, “but still, considering Microsoft recently tried to FUD the Chrome Frame plugin in IE.”
Based on Will’s recollection, “they got a 10x performance boost out of IE by using the Frame engine instead of the IE one.” █
“Microsoft is, I think, fundamentally an evil company.”
–Former Netscape Chairman James H. Clark
Permalink
Send this to a friend
Posted in GNU/Linux, Novell, OpenSUSE at 9:07 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
Summary: OpenSUSE 11.2 is near release date right about now and OpenSUSE Junior Jobs initiative debuts
OpenSUSE Conference 2009 (OSC) ended quite a while back, but there are still some belated reports from the OpenSUSE Web site and from Katarina Machalkova. The release of OpenSUSE 11.2 is very near and the final phase which is release candidate has just been announced, then receiving a mention in a few Web sites.
“OpenSUSE works on improving the speed of OBS for more applications to be easily installed in OpenSUSE and other distributions.”OpenSUSE works on improving the speed of OBS for more applications to be easily installed in OpenSUSE and other distributions. Amarok 2.2.0, for example, is now available and Will Stephenson writes about Qt 4.6 for OpenSUSE (not final yet). It’s not unusual for OpenSUSE-specific packages and instructions to be found.
The most unique development in the past week (there was not much) was probably OpenSUSE Junior Jobs (more information here) to which there is some response.
Other than that, OpenSUSE received a special honour in the Tux Machines distribution list which ranked it first:
Daniweb published their list of Top 10 Linux Distributions for 2009 and unfortunately I and not-just-I didn’t agree with his list. I don’t want to detract from the hard working folks on those projects, but some won’t even run on modern hardware too well. One has turned into a specialty distro, although much of world keeps ignoring that fact. Another needs a Windows install to use. Anyway, so here’s our Top 10 List:
1. openSUSE – Always in my Top 10 is openSUSE, despite any contracts signed by corporate with large monopolistic companies because it’s just a really great distro. It’s rock solid, I’ve never had a crash of even an application on openSUSE! It always looks great out of the box. It’s a large corporate sponsored distro with a paid support version employing some of the most talented, and famous for being talented, developers in our community. It always has a professional look and feel, highly polished and overall just a really excellent example of what a Linux distribution can be.
Technically speaking, OpenSUSE is a solid distribution. The relationship with Novell/Microsoft is truly a shame though. It’s not the fault of OpenSUSE. █
Permalink
Send this to a friend
Posted in BSD, Free/Libre Software, Microsoft, Security, Vista, Vista 7, Windows at 5:43 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
Summary: Despite its proven inability to write a secure network stack, Microsoft is approached by Lockheed Martin for the job
AS MANY people are probably aware, Microsoft used (‘stole’) BSD code to implement a TCP/IP stack in Windows. Only recently did Microsoft write its own stack, only to leave Windows Vista readily available to remote hijackers (as far back as 2007) and lately to a remote BSoD (Vista 7 is also affected and hijacking is possible as a result).
Despite this abysmal record with TCP/IP, Lockheed Martin has turned to Microsoft for “improved security” in network protocols. “Irony alert” was sent to use by a reader who says that “Microsoft [is] to reinvent TCP/IP.” He cites The Register:
Arms globocorp Lockheed Martin announced today that it has won a $31m contract from the famous Pentagon crazy-ideas bureau, DARPA, to reinvent the internet and make it more suitable for military use. Microsoft will also be involved in the effort.
The main thrust of the effort will be to develop a new Military Network Protocol, which will differ from old hat such as TCP/IP in that it will offer “improved security, dynamic bandwidth allocation, and policy-based prioritization levels at the individual and unit level.”
“I thought IPV6 was supposed to solve these kind of problems,” comments our reader.
“Through this project, as well as our cyber Mission Maker initiatives, we are working to enhance cyber security and ensure that warfighters* can fight on despite cyber attacks.”
“Help,” says our reader, “I’m under a TCP/IP (Microsoft©) irony attack.” If NASA is anything to judge by [1, 2], then Microsoft could also have Lockheed Martin exclude GNU/Linux somehow. Palladium maybe? █
Permalink
Send this to a friend
Posted in Formats, Google, IBM, ISO, Microsoft, Office Suites, Open XML, OpenDocument, Standard, SUN at 5:11 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
Summary: Just like a filmography-style mafia, Microsoft and its allies proceed from corrupting ISO to bashing ODF from the inside and trying to control it too
MICROSOFT MAY hope that people will forget what it did for OOXML, but the past returns to haunt as more abusive behaviour gets seen. In light of the i4i case for instance [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10], Jomar Silva raises the point that Microsoft lied about patents in OOXML, with the assistance of its special friend Alex Brown [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21].
Here is what Silva wrote a few days ago:
They also defined the coordinator of the BRM, Alex Brown (who also played a crucial role in the outcome of OpenXML, but that’s subject for another post, because I didn’t revealed yet all I saw in Geneva), and he publishes on his blog a FAQ with the rules of the BRM. This FAQ also circulated as an official ISO document, and can be found here.
Look what is written in this document:
4.1 Will IPR issues be discussed at the BRM?
No. IPR issues in this process are the exclusive preserve of the ITTF. IPR decisions have previously been delegated by all the ISO and IEC members (NBs) to the CEOs of IEC and ISO, and they in turn have examined them and found no outstanding problems. NBs seeking reassurance in such matters must pursue them through other avenues than the BRM.
In other words, the CEOs of ISO and IEC (the highest authorities of the two entities) had assessed the intellectual property issues on OpenXML and found nothing, so no committee around the world have to worry about the issue… I remember that I’ve asked about it few times, and the answer was always the same: “Kid, you are doubting the CEOs of ISO and IEC ?”… but what about the i4i litigation ?
[...]
Most of the ECMA delegates I know are Microsoft employees or business partners of the company. This staff can be anything but “uninformed” and therefore I can’t believe that ECMA didn’t know the litigation too.
So, I change the question asked by Groklaw almost two months ago for a more direct one: Who fooled who?
We all know that all NBs was fooled, that the countries have seen their names used in an unscrupulous way and that all delegates and competent technicians has been fooled too.
I really hope to hear something from the cited parties cited, and I believe that all International Society expect the same. We no longer live in a world where a nonsense fact like this can be accepted, and I’ll not stop until I find an answer (and I know I’m not alone in this quest).
I also would like to know from the ISO/IEC what they have to say about all this. They knew the i4i litigation ?
To finalize, I appeal again to CEOs of ISO and IEC: The G-20 is a reality, and it’s never too late to correct an injustice !
In the comments, the president of the FFII writes:
ISO should pull down the ISO29500 immediately.
No one can implement this specification safely.
ISO29500 should be withdrawn “Now”.
Georg C. F. Greve, the founder of the FSFE, writes about the above: “The first rule of the #OOXML club? Don’t talk about the legal problems!”
Rob Weir has more to say about the role of Alex Brown:
Curiously, NBs were asked to make their final decision without actually seeing the text of the standard they were being asked to approve. ISO leadership denied requests from several NBs, a formal SC34 resolution requesting this text, as well as NB appeals, all which asked to have access to the “final DIS” text that would eventually be published. The ISO chief, in his response to the NB appeals, called the final text of OOXML “irrelevant” (prophetic words, indeed!) and would only permit NBs to have access to a list of over 1,000 resolutions from the BRM, many of which gave great editing discretion to the Microsoft consultant who would eventually produce the final text of the specification.
I discussed why the lack of a final DIS text was a problem back in May 2008:
We are currently approaching a two month period where NB’s can lodge an appeal against OOXML. Ordinarily, one of the grounds for appeal would be if the Project Editor did not faithfully carry out the editing instructions approved at the BRM. For example, if he failed to make approved changes, made changes that were not authorized, or introduced new errors when applying the approved changes. But with no final DIS text, the NB’s are unable to make any appeals on those grounds. By delaying the release of the final DIS text, JTC1 is preventing NB’s from exercising their rights.
Would you make thousands of changes to code and then not allow anyone to test it, and then release it internationally? Of course not. Doing so would amount to professional malpractice. But that is essentially what ISO did with OOXML.
Weir is very careful not to mention names (personalising issues), but it’s obvious who’s who, not to mention the current role these people play in derailing ODF. We shall come to this in a moment. To say that ISO was “gamed” is an understatement. ISO was hijacked and a lot of people corrupted and bribed. There is extensive evidence to show this.
On a more positive note, Bob Sutor (IBM) writes about new success stories for ODF, followed by feedback from Roberto Galoppini and also his colleague Rob Weir.
Roberto Galoppini also writes about the ODF plugfest and spreads the word now that the event is approaching.
The second in a series of events that will bring together implementors of OASIS OpenDocument Format/ISO 26300 to unilaterally test and discuss implementation issues of ODF with each other. All ODF implementors and/or those looking into the matter are invited to participate in this event on behalf of the Netherlands government and OpenDoc Society.
We wrote about those plugfests before, e.g. in [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 9 10, 11, 12]. Microsoft (and its ecosystem) attended plugfests to throw some criticism at this standard, which it hates but at the same time must watch over. Alex Brown’s friend, who has always been hostile towards ODF, drops Microsoft’s talking points to be used against ODF while Microsoft’s Doug Mahugh makes fun of ODF as well. Those who are not employees of Microsoft often feed the company by insulting ODF “by proxy”, so to speak.
“Those who are not employees of Microsoft often feed the company by insulting ODF “by proxy”, so to speak.”In the latest example seen above, we are witnessing a familiar old pattern of deception. As our reader puts it, “Microsoft is able to spin it as Microsoft vs 1 company (either IBM or Sun depending on the circumstances) with amnesia about the rest. Via OASIS, 600 companies, universities and government agencies were behind the initial development of the first try at a universal office format. About two dozen were taking the lead in development.” This politicisation of the issue (courtesy of Microsoft) has gone on for years.
Anyway, those who are speaking about the ODF plugfest now include Glyn Moody, Gwynne Monahan, Jomar Silva, Thomas Zander (Nokia), Rob Weir, and the “elephant in the room” Doug Mahugh. The Microsoft crowd is still trying to 'tame' or dethrone Rob Weir, so Jomar Silva sarcastically writes: “Oh my God ! Mr. Vadar is the chair of the ODF TC ! We must be the bad guys ! (M$ fan boys are impressive)”
Microsoft is still striving to control ODF like it controls ISO and Weir must be polite. That’s probably why he also omits names and does not write about the OOXML scandals as much as he used to.
Microsoft’s hijack attempts affect not only the ODF TC. Watch who is involved in the Document Interoperability Initiative: Microsoft, Microsoft allies, and Microsoft-funded groups.
* I’ll be covering the Office 2010 extensions (as was covered by the Office program managers in last month’s DII workshop in Redmond). I will also present the latest news on how we’re working to improve ODF interoperability between Office and other popular applications, and talk about our plans for the future.
* Alex Brown will be covering present and future plans for the Office-o-tron validator project.
* Klaus-Peter Eckert of Fraunhofer FOKUS will present the latest status of the document test library project and other work Fraunhofer is doing to improve interoperability.
Microsoft attempts to control the whole thing, including so-called interoperability. We showed a lot of evidence before [1, 2, 3].
Even in Wikipedia, ODF-hostile content gets injected into the article about ODF by the Microsoft folks, as last shown some days ago. Some references to Microsoft blogs are now being removed, as well as the poison that they have injected.
A more detailed account of how Microsoft subverts Wikipedia (on ODF) can be found in, e.g.:
Microsoft leads people to confusion, fear, and absorption of disinformation using those people who only pretend to be friends of ODF. Here for instance is a person who was unfortunately led to making a false claim given new software like Androffice. ODF does a lot better than Microsoft would have people believe. █
Permalink
Send this to a friend
