11.04.11
Posted in GNU/Linux, GPL, Microsoft, Samba at 4:07 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
Summary: How and why Microsoft is ‘embracing’ Samba
“O
n 10 October 2011,” writes The H, “a Microsoft developer contributed a GPL licensed patch to the Samba project. The patch, which was part of a proof of concept for extended protection for NTLM and presented by Stephen A. Zarko of Microsoft’s Open Source Technology Center, has now been noted as the passing of a milestone by Chris Hertel of the Samba team. Samba provides tools and servers which enable interoperability with Windows’ SMB and CIFS networking on Linux and Unix based systems.”
The reactions to this move were mixed. Proponents of the monopolist (who advertise with Microsoft) make it look wonderful (identical headline from SJVN), but members of Techrights are a lot more cautious.
“I’m not sure what the real role of the Microsoft team working with Samba is,” noted one person, “but the developers should not lose sight of the whole picture that is Microsoft. Just because one small department is helpful for one group, for right now does not mean that the greater threat has diminished or gone away. In some ways it the threat is greater because it gets the Samba team and others to let their guard down.
“It’s not unlike a vendor buying them a meal or beer for them, or providing swag. It’s not done for their benefit.
“This is a little more advanced than simply buying someone off with swag or free beer, but it’s the same principle. One rogue department doesn’t set policy for the whole beast.”
Microsoft also gave code to Mono (MS-PL-licensed). At the same time Microsoft asserted that it can sue over it.
“It’s working,” noted one of us. “One problem with Allison’s statement is that he is blind to how Microsoft makes its money. It does not make it’s money from Windows and Office, that’s just a tiny fraction of the money. The big money comes from the monopoly rents on both products.
“Microsoft was trying to leverage that monopoly to get into the server room when Samba took on M$ and defeated it in court. Microsoft is still going to protect its core money-makers, the two monopolies even if Samba does now get thrown a bone.”
Microsoft has already got its former employees from Likewise paying Microsoft for patents on Samba-like functionality (with Samba code). This is not good.
Sam Varghese points out that “Samba is one of the free software projects that has moved in toto to the GPL version 3.” Muktware’s take is that: “As Linux is gaining popularity Microsoft seems to have increased its contribution to ensure their products will work well with Linux. The recent patch submission to the Linux kernel was an indicator.”
What do readers think? █
Permalink
Send this to a friend
10.07.11
Posted in FUD, GNU/Linux, Microsoft, Patents, Samba at 12:46 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
Summary: More Linux patent tax, this time courtesy of a company closely tied to Microsoft (as part of the campaign to generate more FUD, in numeric form)
THE MONOPOLIST from Redmond is part of a chain of companies, some of which are some kind of spinoffs.
Former Microsoft employees tend to use the skills they acquired at Microsoft to further perpetuate the Microsoft mindset (which is why many in the Mono community have Microsoft connections or roots, but that’s a story for another day). Likewise, for example, is part of the Microsoft group. Its managers, the people who came from Microsoft, have been spreading Microsoft APIs for several years now, for a fee.
Likewise is not new to us and we already have a wiki page about it. It is trying to compete with projects like Samba, offering for a fee what people can get for free.
Likewise never hid its Microsoft ties, but the Microsoft boosters promote its latest kissing affair with Microsoft as “Linux patent deal”, which is shameful reporting that helps Microsoft spread FUD. See the following:
Likewise, a software platform provider for identity, security and storage, has signed a licensing agreement with Microsoft, adding Likewise to the list of companies on Microsoft’s Linux patent-protection list.
The licensing agreement with Microsoft will affect Linux and Unix-based Network Attached Storage devices and provide Microsoft Server Message Block protocol support for Windows Server 8.
This is more Microsoft PR and an attempt to scare companies that use Linux. The source of the article was previously funded by Microsoft and the deceiving case of ‘reporting’ this placement of “Linux tax” inside companies is another case of collaborating with market manipulation and extortion. We have seen more of that recently. Journalists like these should be smashed of themselves.
The reality of the matter is that the press should receive a lot of flak for playing along with extortionist companies, which essentially ‘normalises’ this behaviour and makes readers accustomed to it. To give another new example, it is ridiculous headlines like “How I’m protecting my software IP with a patent” that further do damage by calling code “technologies” (illusion of physical existence). It is a very weak piece that neglects to account for copyright as the reasonable option and it makes software patents seem essential for small businesses (this could not be further from the truth). Journalists who are doing this deserve to be criticised because they do a massive disservice to the public. Some of them justify this by painting the articles “interviews” or pointing to FUD-inspiring “press releases” to pass liability. We shall write more about patent lobbying and myths in the next couple of posts. █
Permalink
Send this to a friend
07.10.11
Posted in Microsoft, Mono, Samba at 3:21 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
Summary: Likewise and Centrify carry on promoting Active Directory just like Mono promotes C# and other inferior (not to mention risky) ways of doing things
“Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery,” stresses a famous saying. To Microsoft, however, it’s more than just flattering and also an endorsement of the One Microsoft Way. To Microsoft it is additionally a chance to discriminate and even file lawsuits. Short of a lawsuit, Microsoft can tax/extort rivals. This whole paradigm of imitating Microsoft is truly a problem. Not only Mono is beneficial to Microsoft. Anything which promotes development and deployment with Microsoft APIs is likely to make Microsoft stronger. One such example is the work of former Microsoft people who take Samba too far and add patents to it. We are talking about Likewise, which according to this new announcement has just sold AD Bridge. Another company which does something similar is Centrify [1, 2], and it too has an announcement about AD. They help spread Microsoft, which ultimately leads to FOSS or Novell replaced being by Microsoft, as in this new case (not necessarily a shift through APIs). People must understand that Wine or Samba are not the same things because they are more like compatibility shims, whereas Mono for example encourages the creation of yet more dependence on Microsoft APIs. This point was stressed as the #1 issue with Mono when I did that recent video. █
Permalink
Send this to a friend
02.03.11
Posted in Apple, GNU/Linux, Microsoft, Samba at 2:38 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
Summary: An explanation of what Likewise is really doing (serving Microsoft)
A reader has left this comment which says:
I interviewed with likewise last March for a SysAdmin/Support position (and I have the emails to prove it), helping customers with Linux and Mac Likewise installs. During the interview with Jessie DeCarlos I started asking excited questions about deploying RedHat Directory Servers to replace ActiveDirectory which would push more Linux desktops into the enterprise, thinking this was Likewises goal. I was stopped cold by Jessie and told the hard facts of Likewise which were the opposite. According to Jessie, the goal of Likewise was to go into Mac/Linux enterprises and convert their directory servers into MS ActiveDirectory while allowing them to keep their Mac/Linux desktops. When I pressed further about Likewise being a open source company I was told that a.) its open core not open source b.) the goal is to push MS server software as the executive and sales team is all ex-MS and still very good friends with Redmond.
And to seal the deal of my disgust with these trolls, I was told the compensation package included lots of bonuses, for…….wait for it…….converting Mac/Linux directory servers over to MS ActiveDirectory. I feel violated just telling the story.
One last bit, I had installed Likewise before the interview (when I was naive and thought they were pushing open source not the opposite) on my Ubuntu test box and tried to get it working on a MS domain. Ehhhh, nope, didnt work. On top of that, I uninstalled and then found Likewise changes your local user password and wont let the local user change it by removing the permissions. Crap software being pimped as ‘open source’ and its a total shame.
See our Wiki page about Likewise because there is a lot more about this sham company which tries to ‘openwash’ its public image. █
Permalink
Send this to a friend
09.03.10
Posted in Deception, Europe, Free/Libre Software, GNU/Linux, IBM, Microsoft, OpenDocument, OpenOffice, Patents, Samba at 6:04 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
Beware the enemy within
Summary: Latest examples of Microsoft’s strategy, wherein it sends out affiliates to pretend to be FOSS people and then promote software patent deals, separation between Open Source and Free software, departure from the GPL, promotion of ‘open’ core (proprietary) as “Open Source”, and demotion of free/libre platforms like GNU/Linux along with free suites/formats like ODF
MICROSOFT has a lot of nerve. But hey, it’s Microsoft!
For those who cannot recall, Microsoft was forced by the European Commission to comply with Samba’s requests (or face extremely heavy fines), but that’s not the story Microsoft wants to tell the world, so later it pretended to have done it all out of goodwill (utter lies stemming from need to spin). We covered this pattern of spin before and debunked it thoroughly; still, this FUD just won’t die. Since when is the press just a facility for Microsoft revisionism? Oh, well, keep the up count then. Mea culpa.
A few months ago Microsoft had to comply with the Commission (or face maybe billions in fines), so it very reluctantly implemented browser ballots, which are a farce (Internet Explorer is a part of all options which are selectable) and one that Microsoft could never implement properly. See the following posts:
- Browser Ballot Critique
- Microsoft’s Fake “Choice” Campaign is Back
- Microsoft Claimed to be Cheating in Web Browsers Ballot
- Microsoft Loses Impact in the Web Despite Unfair Ballot Placements
- Given Choice, Customers Reject Microsoft
- Microsoft is Still Cheating in Browser Ballot — Claim
- Microsoft’s Browser Ballot is Broken Again and Internet Explorer 8 is Critically Flawed
- The Microsoft Who Cried “Wolf!”
Now, here comes the key point; Microsoft used exactly the same spin that it used against Samba. Microsoft pretended that those ballots were an act of goodwill rather than obeying a law. Microsoft was also pretending that ballots are punishment enough, even though Internet Explorer remained obligatory.
“It seems like that old tactic which Microsoft calls or refers to as “infiltration”…”It’s amazing, isn’t it? Microsoft breaks the law, then it is punished for it (the punishment is so minor that it’s meaningless), and Microsoft then spins this punishment as a self-imposed limitation that Microsoft has chosen because it loves competition so very much.
Well done, Microsoft. You’re a master of spin.
Over in Budapest, Microsoft spent the beginning of the week bashing OpenOffice.org (in public), assuming the claims are correct. What a funny case of timing, eh? It happens to coincide with the OpenOffice.org event in Budapest. It turned out later, as IBM’s Rob Weir told me, that Microsoft’s Moritz Berger also decided to divide and conquer the OpenOffice.org event itself. It seems like that old tactic which Microsoft calls or refers to as “infiltration” (or “crashing” the event, as per this internal document [PDF]).
“You are totally wrong Both RDF and digital signatures are new to ODF 1.2″
–Rob Weir to Microsoft infiltrator at OpenOffice.org eventWhy does Oracle allow Microsoft to to this? Not surprisingly, some hours ago it turned out that Microsoft’s Berger used the OpenOffice.org event to smear OpenOffice.org or ODF. “You are totally wrong Both RDF and digital signatures are new to ODF 1.2,” hollered Weir at Berger during the event.
So let’s repeat what was happening here: Microsoft staff moving on from an anti-OpenOffice.org event in Budapest to an OpenOffice.org event in Budapest where they spread FUD, as expected. Microsoft always comes to these events under pretenses of “we come in peace” (the title of the talk in this case was about “bridges”, a mere euphemism) and anyone standing in their way will be painted an “irrational zealot” and separated from the rest, singled out as “poisonous” (that’s where the “divide and conquer” approach applies). We wrote a lot more about these techniques (so do Microsoft’s internal documents/presentations to newly-recruited AstroTurfers) when LinuxTag 2010 got the ‘Microsoft treatment’ [1, 2, 3]. It’s truly distasteful and it’s damaging.
Another thing we wish to draw attention to is IDG’s fuaxpen source blog, which delivers more and more messages from Microsoft staff (here is another one from the Microsoft employee who compares/likens Free software to communism and says that “No one is working for free”). How did Microsoft’s team end up writing in this blog? It’s simple. Bort from the Microsoft Subnet now explains who brought him in (Walli), augmenting the Microsoft ‘open source’ think tank which they broadcast to the world via IDG Web sites:
So, I got a hold of Stephen Walli (pictured), who recently joined Network World’s Open Source Subnet as a blogger. (He writes the Open Minded blog). Walli is Technical Director of the CodePlex Foundation.
Bort’s colleague/co-writer, who works for a Microsoft partner, is currently trying to separate “Linux” from the rest (another common Microsoft tactic commonly seen in this Microsoft auditorium). When someone’s colleagues work for a company that spreads proprietary software (there are more of them), it’s likely that more will follow, gradually separating the platform from the notion of Freedom — including the GPL — which otherwise belonged under the “Open Source” badge/brand. Likewise, they are separating it from GNU/Linux.
Watch out for those who take Microsoft and “Open Source” and combine the two. IDG is marrying them quite a lot these days, occasionally taking input from Microsoft Florian (when it comes to patents). Another person who takes input from Microsoft Florian is ZDNet’s Blankenhorn and he got some flak for it from Groklaw, which he once gave an award to. █
“Entryism (or entrism or enterism) is a political tactic by which an organisation or state encourages its members or agents to infiltrate another organisation in an attempt to gain recruits, or take over entirely. In situations where the organisation being “entered” is hostile to entryism, the entryists may engage in a degree of subterfuge to hide the fact that they are, in fact, an organisation in their own right.” –Wikipedia
Permalink
Send this to a friend
08.12.10
Posted in Deception, Free/Libre Software, Microsoft, Mono, Novell, Open XML, OpenDocument, Patents, Samba at 3:44 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
Summary: The latest propaganda from the ‘Microsoft press’, Microsoft’s distortion of formats using VML, and the continued threat of proprietary Samba substitutes masquerading as ‘open’
Microsoft’s Paoli, who played a role in distorting the nature of Microsoft Office formats (portraying them as “open”), has been busy recently ‘openwashing’ Microsoft’s Fog Computing effort. Paoli’s latest spin on ‘open’ is a subject we tackled here before [1, 2, 3], so we won’t be going into the rebuttals again.
Roughly two weeks later it’s time for the 'Microsoft press' to recite those very same talking points.
Microsoft believes that customers own their data in the cloud, Paoli said. To support data portability in Windows Azure, Microsoft advocates the Open Data Protocol (OData).
This whole spin around OData is also loved by Microsoft’s MVP Mr. de Icaza, who uses Mono to ‘openwash’ .NET. One of his colleagues is already creating patent traps using Mono (a project called Banshee) and there are equally scary derivatives. Novell is by all means part of this problem. Novell Inc. — and its VP de Icaza in particular — also promoted OOXML.
One reader has told us that Microsoft’s “VML is back” and it is using OOXML as a carrier, further demonstrating Microsoft’s SVG snub [1, 2] (expected all along).
The Strict compliance level disallows some of the really MS Word early versions-flavoured features. For example, the Strict compliance level specifies that all drawings in an OOXML document are specified as DrawingML shapes, not as VML (Vector Markup Language).
Microsoft never changed. Having corrupted standards bodies all across the world it continues to ensure that only Microsoft Office will be able to handle people’s personal files. Frank Ohlhorst has this new article advising people to buy proprietary software (disguised as “open” using the ‘open’ core trick) from former Microsoft employees [1, 2] (people should use Samba instead) to integrate networks the Microsoft way rather than the standard way. How long will it take for everyone to understand that “open” at Microsoft is a sham (usually Windows-only) and that falling into Microsoft protocols and formats is a technical nightmare? █
“Microsoft’s case wasn’t helped when two books, Undocumented Windows and Undocumented DOS, written by Andrew Schulman, appeared on the shelves. The books charged Microsoft with building secret interfaces into its operating systems, giving its own applications developers an advantage over its competitors by making Microsoft’s own applications run better than anyone else’s.”
–Barbarians Led by Bill Gates, a book composed
by the daughter of Microsoft’s PR mogul
Permalink
Send this to a friend
07.25.10
Posted in Deception, GNU/Linux, Microsoft, Patents, Samba at 3:07 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
Summary: A few remarks about Centrify and Likewise — the Microsoft-esque companies which pretend to serve open source
Centrify is an interesting case [1, 2, 3] of software patents and Microsoft promotion disguised as “free”. Centrify is a subject we covered here many times before (even days ago) and it makes some more headlines at the moment due to this press release that helped produce some articles [1, 2, 3]. They use the term “Express” — just like Microsoft does — in order to introduce a gateway to software patents and pricey proprietary software that strengthens Microsoft’s monopoly.
Centrify Express is a set of free software applications and tools, content resources and community forums designed to help organizations improve security and compliance of data center and desktop systems.
Another new article that’s related to it helps remind us of the bad side of Active Directory, which Microsoft controls and Centrify promotes. We have already explained the Centrify-Microsoft connection (including staff commonalities), which reminded us of Likewise (created by Microsoft folks and currently stepping on Samba with ‘open’ core and with Microsoft patents). “Likewise Software has Record First Half,” says this new press release. Apparently it pays off to pretend to be “open source” (Likewise is not open source) and to promote Microsoft in open source circles. Likewise — unlike Samba — helps put a software patents tax on SMB/Samba functionality. It’s just something to watch out for. Likewise is what Microsoft wants Samba to be. █
Permalink
Send this to a friend
07.23.10
Posted in Patents, Quote, Red Hat, Samba at 3:55 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
Summary: Carlo Piana is also among the critics of Peer To Patent
Earlier today we explained yet again why Peer To Patent is not the best solution to the problem Free software is having. Carlo Piana, the Samba lawyer who says that “the *only* solution is abolition NOW” has also just said: “#peerpatent, however deserving high praise, is a colossal waste of time when examines #swpats, which shouldn’t exist”
Even Florian Müller echoed his remarks. “Sadly,” I explained to the messenger, “what Peer To Patent seems to be doing is in some ways making software patents stronger.” OIN is not an optimal solution, either; far from it, but that debate is different. If companies like Oracle, IBM and Google could align with the pushers to end software patents, this goal would be achievable. █
Permalink
Send this to a friend
« Previous entries Next Page » Next Page »
