Credit: unknown (Twitter)
Summary: Another reminder of the fact that Microsoft is very active on the E.E.E. front, not just against GNU/Linux but also Android and Java
IT IS no secret that Microsoft is trying to derail Android development or take over it, not just tax it using software patents or exerting influence/control using software patents. Then there’s the antitrust aspect; it was Microsoft and its proxies/front groups that pushed European politicians to go after Google’s Linux endeavours (we have covered this in dozens of posts going half a decade back).
“Then there’s the antitrust aspect; it was Microsoft and its proxies/front groups that pushed European politicians to go after Google’s Linux endeavours (we have covered this in dozens of posts going half a decade back).”Right now we find Microsoft’s Jason Perlow [1, 2, 3, 4, 5] (a Microsoft employee who habitually attacks Microsoft’s rivals) doing the anti-Java and anti-Android spiel at ZDNet, which foolishly employs Microsoft staff as journalists. Perlow’s latest piece has a bait headline, “Android’s existential crisis: Why Java needs to die on mobile devices” (attack on both Android and Java; two birds, one stone).
All we can say is, how typical. Agenda as ‘news’. That’s the modus operandi and the business model of CBS, which owns ZDNet.
To better understand why Perlow would wish to trash-talk/badmouth both Java and Android, consider the case of RoboVM, which Microsoft has just killed using its classic E.E.E. method. James Darvell’s good new article about Microsoft’s assassination of RoboVM (and by extension harm to Android and to Linux) goes as follows:
Microsoft recently made a big noise about its love and support of the Open Source community (especially Linux), but while it’s making concrete steps toward improving its support for FOSS projects, its motives may not be entirely altruistic. Microsoft continues to fund legal attacks against open-source projects on multiple fronts, and it has crushed open-source projects when it suits the company.
Such is the case with RoboVM, a Java-to-mobile compiler that supported cross-platform mobile development.
RoboVM originally was an open-source project, although that changed after the parent company was acquired by Xamarin in October 2015. Xamarin had several similar products that support cross-platform development using different programming languages. Naturally, Xamarin saw RoboVM as a suitable addition to its stable.
Shortly after the acquisition, an announcement was made to the effect that the open-source development model “wasn’t working out” for the RoboVM team. The project was closed, and licensing fees were increased to match the other tools in Xamarin’s lineup.
Earlier this year, Microsoft acquired Xamarin, and while it’s proudly touting the majority of Xamarin’s suite of tools, it seems there’s no place for RoboVM in Microsoft’s cross-platform development plans. Last week, the RoboVM team announced that the project would be shut down.
Actually, RoboVM didn’t say this after the buyout but shortly before it, probably when negotiation with Microsoft’s outpost still took place [1, 2, 3]. Darvell of Linux Journal continues:
But, there are some who will say that Microsoft just doesn’t like Java. Microsoft did get its fingers burned back in 1997 when Sun sued Microsoft over its attempt to appropriate Java. Back then, Java was set to become the “language of the Internet”, and bringing Java applet support to Internet Explorer was an important goal. In true Microsoft fashion, the Windows Java VM only partially supported the published Java standard—what’s more, it added features that were not a part of the official standard.
The goal was to create a situation where code that ran on a Microsoft VM would not run on any other platform. By hijacking the Java standard, Microsoft planned to capture Sun’s user base and dictate the future of Java. Of course, that plan resulted in an expensive debacle, which explains the company’s lukewarm attitude to Java ever since.
We worry that next on Microsoft's E.E.E. queue there might be Canonical. Then there’s concern about the Linux Foundation, which just like Canonical currently has Microsoft money on its table. Speaking of which, Microsoft propaganda is being amplified by the Linux Foundation even twice in one day (yesterday), raising questions such as, who are they working for these days? After letting former Microsoft staff in, and having received money from Microsoft, the power of money threatens them too.
“Don’t underestimate Microsoft’s malice. It’s still run by virtually the same people.”Microsoft has a history of using the corrupting influence of money to demolish competitors, e.g. by poaching employees, paying for non-compete clauses, taking over only to dismantle and so on. Don’t underestimate Microsoft’s malice. It’s still run by virtually the same people. █
“Linux infestations are being uncovered in many of our large accounts as part of the escalation engagements.”
Send this to a friend
Microsoft a serial killer of FOSS
Summary: Microsoft has just killed yet another FOSS project (using money to shut down competitors) — one that was helping Android and Java
THE headline “Embrace, extend – and kill. Microsoft discontinues RoboVM” says it all really. Several people in our IRC channels noticed this original story (from the original statement) rather quickly and later on in the day some people told me about it privately, so it obviously wasn’t overlooked at all.
“Nice,” Lirodon wrote in the afternoon, “and now Microsoft has killed RoboVM dead. It was already dead when they became non-free.”
“Microsoft,” MinceR responded, “where projects go to die [...] just like they killed entire video game developer companies (Terminal Reality and Ensemble Studios)” (we covered this years ago).
Microsoft is just the same old evil company, there is no ‘ new’ Microsoft. Microsoft will try this against GNU/Linux if it can. It’s its classic modus operandi, but taking on a project as big as these (to “extinguish”) is a monumental task.
What Techrights wrote about RoboVM when it was first “embraced” [1, 2, 3] turns out to be true. We foresaw exactly what Microsoft would do about RoboVM once it’s payday (yet again!) for Miguel de Icaza.
Some people still wonder, what exactly happened to RoboVM? Here it is in their own words: “Over the past few weeks, we’ve been working with the teams at Xamarin and Microsoft to assess the technology and business conditions of RoboVM to determine the path forward for the products. After looking at the complete landscape for mobile development with Java, the decision has been made to wind down development of RoboVM.”
After they had made it proprietary (shortly before Xamarin stepped in formally), essentially stabbing the whole community in the back, the Microsoft people (all of them are Microsoft staff now) did this:
For any fools out there who still think Microsoft doesn’t do E.E.E. against FOSS, here we go again. What would it take to wake people up? How many more companies need to die? How could RoboVM not know that Xamarin was an evil proxy of Microsoft? It was common knowledge as it wasn’t hard to see where Xamarin’s money had come from (Microsoft veterans).
Microsoft is now essentially shutting down another pillar of Java, so this is classic E.E.E. via Xamarin. As one person put it to us, “and today Microsoft ordered RoboVM to wind down operation” (linking to the original announcement).
A lot of the utter rubbish about Microsoft “loving Linux” is a villainous lie. It’s the best lie money can buy as it’s clear that Microsoft is still very aggressive; it hates GNU/Linux, it hates Android, and it hates Java. Don’t let the Microsoft-funded media fool you (Microsoft Peter, for instance, moved from the UK to the US to write for Condé Nast, which is paid by Microsoft). Microsoft basically buys articles from various large media networks; it pays networks to tell us that Microsoft has changed, but nothing is changing, it’s only escalating.
The above, says Fernando Cassia, “reminds me of VirtualPC, which was a product of Innotek Gmbh and offerend Windows virtualization under OS/2 hosts….”
He then told me, “guess which product they dropped after being acquired by Microsoft? Yes, Virtual PC for IBM OS/2 :-/”
He further emphasised that “everything Microsoft does is about leveraging its cash cow to hurt competitors or whatever it sees as a menace” and “the war on Java started ten years ago… “Operation Sunblock” never really stopped” (here is the article about “Operation Sunblock”)
“20 years ago,” he added a few hours later, “boy how time flew [...] “+options available…including tools that will help you PORT TO XAMARIN” //Competitor eliminated.Mission accomplished”
When will be the next antitrust probe against Microsoft bribery, racketeering, blackmail, and extortion? Did it get enough lobbyists in all the right places in order to shift any such focus to Google? Remember that Microsoft is still run by the same thugs (only the CEO changed) and they want Android and Linux to be next in the E.E.E. pipeline. Microsoft loves nothing but itself and its own monopoly of lock-in and back doors. New charm offensives try to lull us into sleep and inaction (no defensive/reactionary statements from the community).
As one person told me yesterday: “Remember Microsoft’s charm offensive with Nokia? We all know very well how that ended and what happened to MeeGo & Meltemi.”
We wrote a lot about what Microsoft did to Nokia. How many more Linux and FOSS backers need to die (out of work) before the media acknowledges that Microsoft is a liar and an assassin? █
Send this to a friend
Publicado en Antitrust, Decepción, GNU/Linux, Microsoft at 9:02 pm por el Dr. Roy Schestowitz
Córtala o completamente acaba el marrulleo, Microsoft…
“Esta cosa anti-trust explotará. No hemos cambiado para nada nuestras prácticas de negocios.”
Sumario: Las proclamaciones de Microsoft “amor” hacia GNU/Linux no están siendo aceptadas por la comunidad, así que un montón de campaña de PR cae en oídos sordos (excepto aquellos que quieran ser engañados y diseminar aún mas la mentira, e.g. en las compañias de medios financiados o amigables a Microsoft)
EL siguiente mensaje fue publicado no hace mucho en Reddit. Es másc como un blog publicado como submisión en el sitio y es títulado “Recuérden: Microsoft es todavíá (y siempre lo será) hóstil hacia Linux y FLOSS”. Pensamos que vale la pena reproducirlo abajo (sin ninguno de los comentarios) porque alude a muchas cosas que hemos cubierto en este lugar, incluyendo el caso Comes vs Microsoft.
Con toda la “buena” PR y las noticias de Microsoft (aparentemente) se acercar a Linux, es fácil olvidar cómo Microsoft es hostil a Linux y todo el código abierto. Recuerden: Todo lo que hicieron fue conseguir un nuevo director general, la cultura de la compañía todavía es la misma.
Todo lo que ha cambiado es en lugar de odiar públicamente en Linux, Aman ahora públicamente Linux, pero en realidad siguen siendo muy hostiles a Linux. Esto nunca va a cambiar.
Sólo recuerde los archivos de casos de consumo de Iowa (http://edge-op.org/iowa/www.iowaconsumercase.org/), que tiene una gran cantidad de correos electrónicos internos de Microsoft, muchos de ellos básicamente declarar su amor por todas las cosas de Windows y MS y odio para todo lo demás. Todos se encuentran en formato PDF y se han desprecintado (por suerte). Algunos incluso entrar en detalles acerca de su trazado con cosas como el programa Vista Ready con el fin de engañar a los consumidores (que, básicamente, no dan una mierda), etc.
Entonces allí están los documentos Halloween: http://www.catb.org/esr/halloween/
De nuevo, tomen su decisiión – Consigan el FUD, cualquier cosa que escojan. Todo esta allí. Entonces esta lo de Ballmer “Linux es un cancer” etc.
Sí, sí, claro, estoy fuera de mi eje de balancín, esto fue hace todos los años, etc. Pero no es – Microsoft ODIA Linux, esto nunca va a cambiar! Una vez más, la única cosa que tiene el cambio es el CEO y como resultado, el PR. Es probable que encuentres que Nadella ha dicho internamente para todos “públicamente, nos encanta Linux y el software libre, a nivel interno sigue siendo como hasta ahora”; y cambiado la máquina PR como resultado.
Ahora bien, no sé qué Shuttleworth y Canonical están jugando en o qué beneficios pueden obtener de la oferta que hicieron, tal vez más cuota de mercado de Ubuntu (y dinero). Pero no bajar la guardia – Microsoft SIEMPRE odio Linux, incluso si usted no puede ver directamente.
¿De verdad cree que Bill Gates, aunque ya no sea presidente o CEO (que todavía trabaja allí Tho), que realmente dejar que su compañía, sus caminos, sus deseos y dirección, etc. todo vaya por el retrete y que alguien más venga y tomar todo en una nueva dirección? No se … Gates es muy inteligente y despiadado. Mucho más inteligente que eso. Sus / los “viejos” Microsoft maneras del negocio sucios están totalmente arraigados en la empresa. No solo cambio de CEO va a arreglar los caminos de la “vieja Microsoft”.
El “viejo Microsoft” sigue siendo el “nuevo Microsoft”, sólo la cara de la empresa ha cambiado – CEO y PR. Eso es. Microsoft, si pudieran presionar un botón y matar a Linux y a FLOSS durante durante la noche.
Recuerde las “patentes” que tienen que utilizarán para amenazar nuestras forma de desarrollo, aunque no directamente. Microsoft siempre va a ser hostil a Linux y el software libre. ¡RECUERDEN ESO!
Paul Venezia de IDG tiene un razonable buen artículo (él es pro-UNIX/Linux y siempre lo ha sido), el cual publicó esta mañana en InfoWorld. Para citar un poquito: “El hecho que Microsoft ahora soporte SQL Server en Linux no es realmente un desarrollo téchnico — es un movimiento de negocios. Afortunadamente para Microsoft, los ciégos de Ballmer se han ido, y la compañía puede ver que Linux es el OS de preferencia para nuestro futuro, no Windows. Microsoft perdió esa batalla hace tiempo. No sorprende, que los tipos del Azure cloud han tomado la iniciative en empujar Microsoft para apoyar a Linux (y otras tecnologías de open source relácionadas con el cloud, incluyendo Docker, Kubernetes, y varias NoSQL databases).”
“Microsoft no está amando o abrazando a GNU/Linux, excepto en el sentido E.E.E. (recuérden lo que la primera E significa).”Un resumen por Jim Lynch de IDG (también de InfoWorld) dijo más tarde (citando lo de arriba) que “Microsoft ha hecho reciéntemente movimientos para aceptar al Linux de una manera prominente, pero ¿ha tomado la compañía tanto tiempo para hacer esto? Un escritor de InfoWorld piensa que el Embrace de Microsoft hacia Linux pueda ser un poquito, y demasiádo tarde.”
Como explicamos hace un dia, hay un montón de mentiras provocativas Microsoft no está amando o abrazando a GNU/Linux, excepto en el sentido E.E.E. (recuérden lo que la primera E significa).
Hablándo de E.E.E., CSO (IDG) republica y luego se expande en Maria Korolov la propaganda de BlackDuck FUD contra FOSS al decir en lenguaje retórico (allí mismo en el titular) que hay algo malo en “la cálidad del código de open source code”. Black Duck (proviene de un personaje de marketing de Microsoft) es proclamado como sigue:
A medida que se crea el software de código abierto más, el número de vulnerabilidades aumenta también. Software de Black Duck está rastreando actualmente 1,5 millones de proyectos de código abierto.
Vulnerabilidades de código abierto pueden ser particularmente peligrosos, de acuerdo con el ‘vicepresidente de Estrategia de Seguridad Mike Pittenger de Black Duck. Software de código abierto puede ser ubicuo, dijo, y típicamente tiene ningún proceso en el que los parches se envían automáticamente a los usuarios.
Black Duck es de alguna manera similar a Xamarin en el sentido que actúa un poco como proxy de Microsoft. No sería posible sin el “embrace” (como en E.E.E.) de FOSS. Black Duck es una compañíá de software proprietario la que simplemente explota FOSS por mercadeo. Vean todo el largo mensaje arriba y dense cuenta de que estas tácticas no son nuevas en su totalidad. ¿Porqué los mismos errores de nuevo? Aprendan de la historia. █
“No animen nuevas, Java clases de platáformas múltiples, especialmente no ayuden que grandes implementaciones de Win 32 sean implementadas escritas/desplegadas. [...] Promuevan fragmentación del espacio classlib de Java.”
–Ben Slivka, Microsoft
Send this to a friend
Cut out or altogether drop the sweet talk, Microsoft…
“This anti-trust thing will blow over. We haven’t changed our business practices at all.”
Summary: Microsoft’s claims of “love” for GNU/Linux aren’t being accepted by the community, so a lot of the PR campaign falls on deaf ears (except those wishing to be fooled and further disseminate the lie, e.g. in Microsoft-friendly/-funded media companies)
THE following message was posted not too long ago at Reddit. It’s more like a blog post published as a submission in the site and it is titled “Remember: Microsoft is still (and will always be) hostile to Linux and FLOSS.” We thought it was worth reproducing below (without any of the comments) because it also alludes to many things we covered here before, including Comes vs Microsoft.
Will the all the “nice” PR and news of Microsoft (seemingly) getting close to Linux, it’s easy to forget how Microsoft IS hostile to Linux and everything open source. Remember: All they did was get a new CEO, the company culture is still there.
All that’s changed is instead of publicly hating on Linux, they now publicly love Linux, but are really still very hostile to Linux. This will never change.
Just remember the Iowa consumer case files ( http://edge-op.org/iowa/www.iowaconsumercase.org/ ) which has a lot of internal emails from Microsoft, many of them basically state their love for all things Windows and MS and hatrid for everything else. All are in PDF format and have been unsealed (thankfully). Some even go into detail about their plotting with things like the Vista Ready program in order to trick consumers (they basically don’t give a shit) etc.
Then there’s Halloween docs: http://www.catb.org/esr/halloween/
Again, take your pick – Get The FUD, whatever you choose. It’s all there. Then there’s Ballmer’s “Linux is cancer” etc.
Yeah, yeah sure, I’m off my rocker, this was all years ago etc. But it’s not – Microsoft HATES Linux, this will NEVER change! Again, the only thing that has change is the CEO and as a result, the PR. You’ll probably find that Nadella has internally said to everyone “publicly, we LOVE Linux and FLOSS, internally it’s still business as usual”; and changed the PR machine as a result.
Now I don’t know what Shuttleworth and Canonical are playing at or what benefit they may get from the deal they made, perhaps more Ubuntu market share (and money). But don’t let your guard down – Microsoft will ALWAYS hate Linux, even if you can’t directly see it.
Do you really think Bill Gates, while no longer chairman or CEO (he still works there tho), would really let his company, his ways, his wants and direction etc all go down the toilet and have someone else come in and take it all in a new direction? No… Gates is very smart and ruthless. MUCH smarter than that. His / the “old Microsoft” dirty business ways are fully entrenched in the company. No single change of CEO will fix the ways of the “old Microsoft”.
The “old Microsoft” is still the “new Microsoft”, only the face of the company has changed – CEO and PR. That’s it. Microsoft, if they could, would press a button and kill Linux and FLOSS over night.
Remember the “patents” they have that they will use to threaten our ways, even if not directly. Microsoft will always be hostile to Linux and free software. Remember that!
IDG‘s Paul Venezia has a reasonably good article (he’s pro-UNIX/Linux and always was), which he published this morning at InfoWorld. To quote one bit of it: “The fact that Microsoft now supports SQL Server on Linux isn’t really a technical development — it’s a business move. Fortunately for Microsoft, the Ballmer blinders are gone, and the company can see that Linux is the OS of choice for our cloud future, not Windows. Microsoft lost that battle a long time ago. Not surprisingly, the Azure cloud folks have taken the lead in pushing Microsoft toward supporting Linux (and other open source cloud-related technologies, including Docker, Kubernetes, and various NoSQL databases).”
“Microsoft isn’t loving or embracing GNU/Linux, except in the E.E.E. sense (remember what the first E stands for).”A roundup by Jim Lynch of IDG (also InfoWorld) later said (citing the above) that “Microsoft has recently made some moves toward accepting Linux in a prominent way, but has the company taken too long to do this? One writer at InfoWorld thinks Microsoft’s embrace of Linux might be far too little, and far too late.”
As we explained a day ago, there’s just a lot of rhetoric and provocative lying. Microsoft isn’t loving or embracing GNU/Linux, except in the E.E.E. sense (remember what the first E stands for).
Speaking of E.E.E., CSO (IDG) reposts and then expands on Maria Korolov’s Black Duck marketing FUD against FOSS by saying in the language of rhetoric (right there in the headline!) that there’s something wrong with “open source code quality”. Black Duck (it came from a Microsoft marketing guy) is advertised as follows:
As more open source software is created, the number of vulnerabilities goes up as well. Black Duck Software is currently tracking 1.5 million open source projects.
Open source vulnerabilities can be particularly dangerous, according to Black Ducks’ Vice President of Security Strategy Mike Pittenger. Open source software can be ubiquitous, he said, and typically has no process where patches are automatically pushed out to users.
Black Duck is somewhat similar to Xamarin in the sense that it acts a little bit like a Microsoft proxy. It would not be possible without the “embrace” (as in E.E.E.) of FOSS. Black Duck is a proprietary software company which merely exploits FOSS for marketing. See the long message at the top and realise that these tactics aren’t entirely new. Why make the same errors all over again? Learn from history. █
“Don’t encourage new, cross-platform Java classes, especially don’t help get great Win 32 implementations written/deployed. [...] Do encourage fragmentation of the Java classlib space.”
–Ben Slivka, Microsoft
Send this to a friend
These are Microsoft’s own words (click to see the original PDF):
Summary: Just as in the case of privacy and standards (or interoperability), Microsoft pretends that its bad behaviour can be combated by creation of mere publicity stunts, this time a so-called ‘antitrust compliance office’
Microsoft has a long history of competition crimes when it comes to Web browsers. The uninitiated should read the Netscape case petition (included in Comes vs Microsoft case) and maybe recall some articles we wrote some years ago, such as:
Microsoft’s excuses at the time were remarkable. Nowadays, at work, I am seeing more and more sites that ‘break’ due to Microsoft’s ‘new’ and ‘improved’ browsers, which mostly mean that a lot of Web developers need to find new hacks and ‘adapt’ to bugs in Internet Explorer and its attempted rebrand, “Edge” (total rubbish based on what I’ve been hearing). It’s the same old Microsoft, begging for attention even by openwashing its proprietary browser (by publishing code of some small pieces of it) and rebranding, changing the logo just a mild little bit. How else to get attention? Pretense of security.
“Microsoft has a long history of competition crimes when it comes to Web browsers.”“MICROSOFT is giving Internet Explorer users a few weeks to upgrade their browser or become vulnerable to cyber attacks,” says this nonsensical article. Prior to it we saw even Microsoft Zack spreading the same kind of Microsoft nonsense. It’s truly nonsense as everyone who currently uses Windows is permanently exposed. Security is not the goal at all. Microsoft tells spies how to crack Windows before even patching flaws (and some consciously remain unpatched for many months if not years). Microsoft’s marketing people are putting their browser in the headlines again, using lame excuses.
“It’s not over until after the furniture is sold and the former employees fined as well.”
–iophkMicrosoft, based on this new report, gets away with competition crimes again, appeasing people who lost from this behaviour, having just come up with the “antitrust compliance office” PR.
To quote IDG: “Microsoft on Friday told shareholders that it has settled a lawsuit brought last year against former CEOs Steve Ballmer and Bill Gates, the company’s board of directors and other top executives over a $732 million fine that European Union antitrust regulators slapped on the firm in 2013.
“As part of the settlement, Microsoft will set aside $42.5 million to fund an antitrust compliance office for the next five years, and pay the plaintiffs’ lawyers at least $7.3 million, according to court documents and a Friday filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC).”
Here is a good part of the article, serving to show Microsoft’s rather unique attitude:
EU regulators were not amused, and fined Microsoft to the tune of $732 million. “This is the first time we have seen a breech of a legally binding commitment,” said Joaquin Almunia, then the European Commission’s top antitrust official, in March 2013 when he announced the fine. “This is, of course, serious, whether it was intentional or not.”
Our reader iophk said: “It’s not over until after the furniture is sold and the former employees fined as well.” Well, companies like Microsoft — much like the EPO — believe they are above the law and act accordingly. █
“Life — the way it really is — is a battle not between bad and good but between bad and worse.”
Send this to a friend
Summary: Vista 10, the latest incarnation of Windows, takes its anticompetitive aspects to a whole new level, betraying even so-called ‘partners’ in the process
THERE are many negative things to be said about Vista 10, but what about criminal things? What happens when Microsoft breaks competition laws?
Earlier this year we wrote about how Microsoft’s UEFI ‘secure boot’ attack on GNU/Linux had escalated (see 2014-2015 articles on how Microsoft’s terms got even worse, i.e. more discriminatory) and based on this site which regularly studies Windows’ effects on BSD and Linux installations, Vista 10 can mess GRUB up, i.e. sabotage dual-boot setups. To quote:
Where you might run into some problem is if the dual-boot setup is on a computer still using Legacy BIOS, with GRUB installed in the Master Boot Record, or MBR. On such a system, be sure to back up your file before attempting the upgrade.
In response to this, one anonymous user in Diaspora wrote:
I’ve got W7 dual-booting alongside Slackware (+ test distros) on my not-often-used netbook. It’s never finished its updates because it fails to update the MBR – which, for some reason it wants to. I multiboot with LILO which seems to cause W7 problems – I’m glad to say, because nothing should be updaing the MBR except LILO – when I run it. So…
That’s decided it. I won’t be updating to W10.
Which means W7 goes the way of W95 all those years ago when MS forced me to be 100pc Linux ‘cos XP would only run on new machines.
MS – I love you – you always force me to do the right thing – like deleting your software
– don’t mess around with any part of the disk except the partition I give you.
don’t tell me I need a new machine
– Good riddance to bad rubbish – I never used w7.
But it’s not just GNU/Linux partitioning that Microsoft loves to overcomplicate and often wipe/mess up with, the nuisance of UEFI ‘secure boot’ aside. Microsoft apparently learned nothing about fair competition, even when it comes to Web browsers on top of Windows itself (not GNU/Linux). Two decades of disputes and court battles have changed nothing at Microsoft and “Firefox’s CEO is furious”, according to this news headline:
Upgrading to Windows 10 switches your web browser to Edge – and Firefox’s CEO is furious
Mozilla chief exec Chris Beard has penned a tetchy open letter to Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella, criticizing the Redmond giant for changing customers’ default browser choice when they upgrade to Windows 10.
Internet Explorer users were warned that Edge, Microsoft’s Chrome-chasing new browser, would be the default in Windows 10. But as it turns out, users of Google Chrome, Mozilla Firefox, and other browsers, have found their default web clients switched to Edge following the Windows 10 upgrade, too.
In his letter, Beard accused Microsoft of using this part of the upgrade process to “throw away the choice your customers have made about the Internet experience they want, and replace it with the Internet experience Microsoft wants them to have.”
Chris Beard has already written about this not once but twice [1, 2], so he is very passionate about it. Most Firefox users are still stuck in Windows.
Should Mozilla be surprised at all? Microsoft sent Mozilla birthday cakes (publicity stunts), but then again it’s also said that “Microsoft loves Linux” (according to Nadella the liar). Like his boss, Bill Gates, it often seems as though Nadella feels like he’s above the law and any government intervention against gross violations will be too little, too late. Microsoft loves Firefox and Mozilla like it loves Linux and like American Psycho loves women.
Mozilla already helps Microsoft by sending it lots of user activity (even keystrokes) via Yahoo in the Firefox address bar. What has Microsoft done for Mozilla in return? Nothing. That’s just how Microsoft behaves. Some people refuse to learn from a long history of crimes, lies, deceit, and betrayals.
Mozilla should make a stronger alliance with GNU/Linux and other Free software (maybe join the FSF) as opposed to alliances with Google, Microsoft, and others to whom Firefox, the Web browser, is competition.
The European Commission proved to be so toothless and slow (while US authorities unwilling to tackle Microsoft’s recent browser crimes altogether), so no wonder Vista 10 goes further with anticompetitive behaviour. Microsoft knows it can get away with it and make gains by the time technical changes — if any — are made. The European Commission probably won’t take action against Vista 10 any time soon. Entryism is partly to blame (lobbying followed by a coup).
We cannot understand why Mozilla’s CEO is still acting surprised to have found out that Microsoft is a criminal enterprise that won’t obey the law and won’t respect competition, not even on Windows. In a way, Mozilla’s CEO is being punished for being naive, perhaps believing that Microsoft was a partner. As this Firefox advocate points out, all this happens after the Beard-led Mozilla had Firefox divert user keystrokes (like a keylogger) to Microsoft (via Yahoo) without even asking users for their input, opinion, consent, preference, etc. He now gets stabbed in back.
At some later stage we are going to show how Microsoft also suppresses the use of non-Microsoft online services. It’s all “me me me!” █
“I think he [Bill Gates] has a Napoleonic concept of himself and his company, an arrogance that derives from power and unalloyed success, with no leavening hard experience, no reverses [...] They don’t act like grown-ups!”
–Judge Thomas Penfield Jackson
Send this to a friend
Summary: A lot of sites portray Android/Google as anti-competitive, but none seems to notice where this hypocritical accusation originally came from
A LOT OF disappointing ‘news’ coverage (gossip) promotes the notion that Google’s business, and Android in particular, is some kind of illegal activity. It is the tiresome old strategy of casting “free” (even when it means freedom-respecting) as anti-competitive. That’s the very opposite of what should be considered “true”.
A lot of the so-called ‘news’ (not really news) omits important details, just as the media did when it came to an OpenSSL bug, dubbed “Heartbleed” by the firm of a ‘former’ Microsoft chief for increased fear (we covered this before and there is this new response from the OSI’s President).
So let’s start with the alleged ‘news’. Who’s behind it? The man who “was lead counsel for Microsoft during part of its defense against antitrust claims,” based on Wikipedia. It’s an opportunist and an antitrust actions maximalist.
It wasn’t long ago that we saw other antitrust motions against Android and they have been always tied to Microsoft or Microsoft proxies such as Nokia (there is a collusion there).
Sadly, every journalist whom we have seen covering the “antitrust trolling” missed this important connection between Microsoft and Berman. One example from the British press said: “Google is facing a new antitrust class action lawsuit in the US over its “illegal monopoly” on internet and mobile search.”
It also said: “These deals are hampering the market and keeping the price of devices from manufacturers like Samsung and HTC artificially high, the firm said.”
This is nonsense. It doesn’t even pass the “bullshit test” because the very opposite is true. A high price, if ever, is caused by patents, which are not in Google’s interest. Price is not the issue with Google, so the allegations are bogus. Privacy would be a more legitimite concern, but given how Nokia is trying to shove Microsoft spyware into the OS, there’s room for hypocrisy. Consider this new analysis:
When Nokia delivered its Android-based phones at Mobile World Congress, the big news was that with Microsoft acquiring the company, Microsoft would suddenly be in the Android business. But there was another storyline that accompanied the delivery of the Nokia Android phones, which was that they are based on a forked version of Android. Among other issues that creates, the phones don’t support the Google Play app store and the apps there, all of which ring the cash register for Google.
What we may be dealing with here is more of the "Scroogled" attack ads, this time in litigious form. We have already exposed and chastised other anti-Google lawyers who had shrewdly hidden their Microsoft payments by editing their CV prior to their assaults on Android, which basically used all sorts of distortion and libel.
Looking back at the responses to the article in the British press, there are many good comments, preceded by this: “Instead of having me read through all the stupid why not say “greedy lawyers with no grasp over what they are talking about drool over the potential payments from Google but most likely from people that will pay to be represented in the trial””
Another commenter responds: “Hopefully the courts will see through this ruse and slap down these lawyers. Their only purpose is to collect $Millions at the expense of Google and the people they claim to represent.”
Well, the author, Brid-Aine Parnell, gave coverage to this non-news, using the editor’s trollish headline and the following attempt at balance: “A Google spokesperson told The Reg in an emailed statement that Android had brought more competition into the market.”
Well, unlike Apple. So what’s the basis for singling out Google? It’s nonsense. No matter how the case ends up, it make Google look bad and this was probably the intention of this whole PR blitz.
It’s not just this one angle that seems to be pointing a gun at Google. Watch the latest relentless attacks from the Murdoch press against net neutrality and against Google (there is always anti-Google bias in there and more recently a lot of net neutrality disinformation).
Over at IDG, Jim Lynch responds to this original IDG report that almost everyone is citing. The Microsoft connection not even named, so no wonder nobody mentions where a lot of it may be coming from. IDG should be shamed of itself for publishing many lobbying/PR paragraphs without mentioning even once the Microsoft ties. It’s not responsible journalism, as it distorts by omission.
Microsoft says “don’t be Scroogled.” We say, don’t be bamboozled by “Scroogled”; it’s a nasty PR campaign (attacks ads) and the people behind it recently got promoted, █
Send this to a friend
Summary: A new lawsuit by a Microsoft shareholder shows everything that’s wrong with today’s model of accountability, where those who are responsible for crimes are accused of not avoiding fines rather than committing the crimes
THE MENTALITY OF greedy investors, and more so investors who put their money in a criminal enterprise, is worth noting. Microsoft has a long history of crime and the investors occasionally sue not because the act of committing crime is bad but because Microsoft fails to dodge the fines (i.e. there is conviction for the crimes).
Here we have a new example of an investor in a criminal company complaining about the wrong thing. To quote the Indian press: “The lawsuit, brought by shareholder Kim Barovic in federal court in Seattle on Friday, charges that directors and executives, including founder Bill Gates and former chief executive officer Steve Ballmer, failed to manage the company properly and that the board’s investigation was insufficient into how the miscue occurred.”
The problem is not that they “failed to manage the company properly”; as we saw in court documents, the crimes go all the way to the top and include instructions from Bill Gates, who chose to break competition laws. This “Supreme Villain” is now spending his wealth on PR (distracting from his crimes), in order to gain yet more wealth while paying virtually nothing in tax.
Here is a new article about protests against Bill Gates profiteering from private prisons.
Criminals rarely change their spots, they just change how the public perceives them. Gates was personally responsible for many of Microsoft’s crimes (and we have the documents to prove it), but nowadays he is busy bribing much of the press and even blogs in order to paint a different picture while he keeps hoarding a lot more money (at everyone else’s expense). Historically there were people like Gates who used the same tactics to alter public opinion. What’s truly shameful is that the biggest (more expensive) crimes still lead to no jail sentence, especially when the government is funded and run by corporations. █
Send this to a friend
« Previous Page — « Previous entries « Previous Page · Next Page » Next entries » — Next Page »