03.08.16
Posted in GNU/Linux, Google, Microsoft, Patents at 10:04 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
Summary: Microsoft is still killing (free) Linux with software patents whilst at the same time telling the media that it “loves Linux”
THIS morning we wrote about Microsoft layoffs and an effort to engulf GNU/Linux with proprietary Microsoft software. The PR/charm offensive from last night hasn’t even had much time to cool down and here is another puff piece from the Microsoft-occupied BBC (many Microsoft UK executives became managers there). Hours later we discovered that Microsoft’s hatred of Linux is still bragged about. As this new article by Bogdan Popa put it, Microsoft’s patent extortion of Linux is to net “$3 billion every years without moving a single finger,” or, to quote the summary in full: “Microsoft has just announced that it reached an agreement with Wistron to renew their Android patent licensing agreement, so the company can continue using Redmond’s technology on its tablets, smartphones, e-readers and other devices powered by Android or Chrome OS.”
“This is technically called patent stacking and it artificially elevates the price of devices with Linux on them, for the personal financial gain of Bill Gates and his growing patent network.”Wistron was not only extorted by Microsoft (over patents) but also by Microsoft's troll, Intellectual Ventures, which we wrote about yesterday. This is technically called patent stacking and it artificially elevates the price of devices with Linux on them, for the personal financial gain of Bill Gates and his growing patent network.
Yes, the 'new' Microsoft. Does anyone still believe this sordid myth? The company wants to blackmail companies which use Linux (like it did Acer last month) whilst insisting that it “loves Linux”. Microsoft is just provoking or trolling the GNU/Linux community with pictures that have a heart symbol in them. Corporate media is foolishly reposting these tongue-in-cheekish images. When did basic fact-checking cease to matter? █
Permalink
Send this to a friend
Posted in GNU/Linux, Microsoft at 5:48 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
“MSFT deploys tech to help govs spy” –Christopher Soghoian, Principal Technologist at ACLU, February 26th, 2016
Summary: The misguided and direction-less company from Redmond is hoping that enough people out there are foolish enough to believe that Microsoft “loves Linux” and will therefore help Microsoft abduct GNU/Linux by putting insecure proprietary software in it
Microsoft layoffs have been accelerating even though the company does a decent job hiding it (our sources inside Microsoft are surprised that the company is unable to keep it secret).
Based on this report, having already shut down some of its gaming studios (firing all the staff) and now that it’s alienating outside studios [1-4], the company is preparing to toss Lionhead Studios in the trash. One of its developers, who had worked there even before the Microsoft takeover, used to be a regular in our IRC channels. To quote one of the reports about it: “The game publisher and hardware maker announced today that it is canceling Fable Legends, the next installment in the fantasy series that has been an Xbox staple since its debut in 2004. Microsoft also said that it has proposed completely closing Fable developer Lionhead Studios. This could mark the end of one of the most iconic developers in the $99.3 billion global game industry (based on market researcher Newzoo’s estimates).”
“Microsoft is basically a dying company.”Suffice to say, Microsoft is not doing well. Vista 10 has been such a disaster that the company now forces people to install it and turns the screensaver/lockscreen into ad space (we didn’t find time to cover this because of the EPO emergency). Moreover, as last night’s news serves to show, Microsoft is trying to stay relevant by putting its tentacles on GNU/Linux. We already put two dozen SQL Server links in our last night’s daily links (and in Tux Machines under the title “Microsoft Proprietary Software Spreads”). This has been covered by GNU/Linux proponents [1, 2, 3, 4], Microsoft boosters, and of course some news sites that carry water for Microsoft, promotional banners with the heart symbol included [1, 2]. They don’t try to understand for themselves what’s going on here and instead do an ‘easy’ job by just parroting Microsoft.
Microsoft is basically a dying company. Buying back one’s shares only gives the illusion that it’s business as usual. Windows as a franchise is dying. Don’t let it turn GNU/Linux into a proprietary software platform with NSA back doors (remember it was Microsoft that kick-started PRISM with the NSA). █
Related/contextual items from the news:
-
In my view, this is the most aggressive move Microsoft has ever made. While the company has been convicted of violating antitrust law in the past, its wrongful actions were limited to fights with specific competitors and contracts with certain PC manufacturers.
-
In a scathing editorial in The Guardian, Epic Games cofounder Tim Sweeney spoke out about Microsoft’s Universal Windows Platform (UWP) initiative, calling it a “fiasco” and “the most aggressive move Microsoft has ever made.”
“With its new Universal Windows Platform (UWP) initiative, Microsoft has built a closed platform-within-a-platform into Windows 10, as the first apparent step towards locking down the consumer PC ecosystem,” said Sweeney. “Microsoft has launched new PC Windows features exclusively in UWP and is effectively telling developers you can use these Windows features only if you submit to the control of our locked-down UWP ecosystem.”
-
-
GAMING VETERAN Tim Sweeney, co-founder of Epic Games, which gave the world the Unreal Engine and games like Gears of War, is worried that Microsoft will ruin the games industry if the firm is allowed to continue its closed platform proposition.
Sweeney was given room to write about this in The Guardian (Tim, if you’re reading this you can come to us first next time) and made the most of the noises from Microsoft about bringing console and PC gaming closer together.
“With its new Universal Windows Platform initiative, Microsoft has built a closed platform within a platform in Windows 10 as the first apparent step towards locking down the consumer PC ecosystem and monopolising app distribution and commerce,” he wrote.
Permalink
Send this to a friend
03.07.16
Posted in Bill Gates, Microsoft, Patents at 8:17 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
Microsoft’s Bill Gates and Nathan Myhrvold. Credit: Reuters
Summary: A timely and imperative remark, reactionary in the sense that it responds to a new article, about the misconception that patent trolls are lone wolves and often small entities rather than conglomerates in disguise
A FEW days ago we stumbled upon an article by Joe Mullin, wherein he calls eDekka “Biggest patent troll of 2014,” even though Intellectual Ventures (a Microsoft proxy in some sense) is far bigger and still very active (it has a few thousands of satellites). “Biggest patent troll” by what criterion? Number of lawsuits by one single entity (not a proxy)?
“”Biggest patent troll” by what criterion?”The article from Mullin (otherwise a fantastic journalist by the way) says:
In 2014, no company filed more patent lawsuits than eDekka LLC, a Texas-based company with just one asset—US Patent No. 6,266,674. Fully 168 patent lawsuits came to a sudden halt in October, when US District Judge Rodney Gilstrap stopped the litigation campaign in its tracks.
eDekka’s patent, which had been used to sue a wide array of online retailers, described nothing more than “the abstract idea of storing and labeling information,” Gilstrap found. Those were “routine tasks that could be performed by a human” and didn’t meet the standard for getting a patent. Gilstrap ruled the patent invalid.
eDekka was covered here many times before, even as recently as 2.5 months ago.
“Look at the patent syndicates of billionaires who now even pay the media to paint themselves as “charitable” individuals — something that better known trolls cannot afford to do (to Gates, for instance, spendings on the media cost approximately $300,000,000 per year).”IAM, which is literally receiving money from patent trolls (we wrote about this before), recently — in fact as recently as last week — wrote about the world’s biggest patent troll (also Microsoft-connected troll) and said that: “Fifth-ranked Searete LLC – well-documented as an Intellectual Ventures affiliate – made most of its assignments to the patent firm’s Innovation Science Fund.”
Searete is a part of it. Searete (see our Wiki) and Intellectual Ventures are both are connected to Bill Gates (even financially). Bill Gates, a pseudo philanthropist who uses his foundation for tax-exempt investment in patents, has created an ever-growing large network of patent trolls whose activity increases his personal wealth (this network also attacks Microsoft’s rivals). Don’t get distracted by eDekka and other massively smaller patent trolls. Focus on the big issue. Look at the patent syndicates of billionaires who now even pay the media to paint themselves as “charitable” individuals — something that better known trolls cannot afford to do (to Gates, for instance, spendings on the media alone cost approximately $300,000,000 per year). █
“Intellectual property is the next software.”
–Nathan Myhrvold, Microsoft patent troll
Permalink
Send this to a friend
03.05.16
Posted in Europe, Microsoft, Patents at 3:58 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
“Where are we on this Jihad?”
–Bill Gates
Summary: A look at the phenomenon where people without compassion climb the ‘career ladder’ and hold on tightly to positions of great power
Here at Techrights we often have to deal with companies run by sociopaths. It’s a lot easier to understand the corporate policies, e.g. of Microsoft, when one finally recognises that not ordinary people run things. Microsoft executive Brad Silverberg once wrote: “look what znix is doing! cut those fuckers off” (context here) and we can think of many others whose attitudinal problem is irreparable. There are other, equally rude rants from him and Bill Gates is not much better (privately, as eyewitnesses tell, he also bullies people and uses the “F” word).
Here is a quote taken from a relevant page composed last year:
The recent economic slowdown and transitions that companies are going through are creating a favorable environment for corporate psychopaths. This was just one of the issues raised by Dr. Paul Babiak at the Aftermath Foundation’s Web Conversation on May 19, 2015.
In his talk, Dr. Babiak, a leading industrial and organizational psychologist and co-author of ‘Snakes in Suits – When Psychopaths Go to Work,’ provided an overview of the modern-day corporate psychopath. They look and dress the same way as most business people, are charming, persuasive, charismatic, often fun to be around and, at first glance, seem to demonstrate strong leadership skills.
In reality, however, they are unable to build teams, have no respect for individuals, lack integrity and wisdom, and are only interested in their own success – not the company’s. The long-term damage to companies from psychopathic employees includes low morale, ill-informed decision-making, increased risk and reduced productivity.
A reader sent us an article which we thought is worth sharing, no matter who it can apply to.
What’s the difference between a psychopath and a sociopath?
“Some of these people rise to astonishing heights, but in the process they cause enormous damage. They can poison the workplace, putting the health of both their companies and staff at risk… …They are highly manipulative, discrediting others around them, deflecting the issue at hand when confronted. They will threaten and distort the facts, all the while presenting themselves as helpful and or working ‘for the good of the company’. They are very talented at hiding their true motives, while making others look incompetent, uncooperative, or self-serving. The only thing that counts for these people is to win. They prey on people’s emotional vulnerabilities.”
Harvard Business Review “Is your boss a psychopath?”
by Manfred F. R. Kets de Vries, 201
This is the result of some desk research into the difference between psychopaths and sociopaths. We are not medical experts, so please read what we write with that in mind.
What do psychopaths and sociopaths have in common?
Until recently, many people used the terms “psychopath” and “sociopath” interchangeably. Both denote an individual who can be cold, manipulative, at times charming, and kind of emotionless. They both suffer from something called Antisocial Personality Disorder (APS). Neither experience shame or guilt. They can be highly intelligent and have excellent people skills. They are frequently charismatic, even beguiling. They can be great speakers. However, they exaggerate what they’re saying, and distort the truth if it’s to their benefit to do so. They are comfortable with lying, if it helps them achieve their goals.
As the name of the disorder – Antisocial Personality Disorder – implies, these people are not a good fit with our society. They don’t share the values or principles of the majority of us. They don’t even share our respect for the law. They are quite simply anti-social. They are so different from us that we fail to understand them. We can’t work out how they function, what their triggers are. They don’t play according to the rules, and we do. Therefore, inevitably, we – and society – lose, if we fail to get a psychopath or sociopath under control.
What are the main differences between psychopaths and sociopaths?
The definition of a sociopath is still evolving. If you do your own research on the internet, you have to check the date of the information you retrieve. The more recent the information is, the bigger the difference you will find between psychopaths and sociopaths.
Current thinking highlights that psychopaths are generally very intelligent, often being the holders of university degrees, while sociopaths frequently have poor academic qualifications and are generally not considered as intelligent. Psychopathy, some say, is a condition present at birth, the product of genetics. Sociopathy, on the other hand, is a consequence of a person’s upbringing; sociopaths often have a pattern of abuse in their childhood.
Psychopaths basically have no feelings and no conscience. Without conscience, they lack an inner voice which could help them to control their behaviour in the absence of external controls:
“Without the shackles of a nagging conscience, they feel free to satisfy their needs and wants and do whatever they think they can get away with.”
Robert D. Hare, “Without Conscience”, chapter “Internal Controls: The Missing Piece”, 1999
Psychopaths don’t have a sense of right and wrong. They make their own rules and see themselves as above the law. They don’t grieve and feel neither guilt nor shame, nor remorse. They have no problem victimising people and will enthusiastically improve their own position at somebody else’s expense. Since psychopaths don’t feel fear, they are able to take extreme risks without worrying about them. They can be impulsive and act without thinking through the potential consequences.
Psychopaths never surrender – they will always viciously defend their position, lying to discredit anyone who disagrees with them. They are sure that they are never wrong. Because they are never wrong, they never apologise. They show no empathy, because they feel none. And they don’t understand that other people have rights. Challenge them at your peril, for they will use all their charisma and communication skills to make you look stupid.
“Psychopaths are dangerous. They’re violent and cruel, and oftentimes downright sinister. They show no remorse for their actions, usually because of a lesion on a part of their brain responsible for fear and judgment, known as the amygdala. Psychopaths commit crimes in cold blood. They crave control and impulsivity, possess a predatory instinct, and attack proactively rather than as a reaction to confrontation …”
Medical Daily “What’s the difference between a psychopath and a sociopath?
(Not much, but one might kill you.)” by Chris Weller, 20141
Psychopaths often feel pleasure when they see others hurt – brain scans on prison inmates diagnosed as psychopaths have shown that the pleasure centres of the brain light up when the inmate sees images of someone in pain.
Contrary to psychopaths, sociopaths do understand right from wrong, but their definition of “right” can differ wildly from our own. One source cites Anders Breivik as a typical sociopath. It was clear in his mind that he was doing something that was “right” when he committed his atrocities in Norway in 2011.2
Sociopaths cannot reciprocate love. They take it and feed off it, but don’t give anything back. They put themselves and their own needs first. To get what they want, they do something called “sociopathic mirroring”. Basically, they simply imitate you and behave the way you do. You value them for this, because you like yourself, and so you like them. Psychopaths also trick you into thinking they share a common bond with you. They don’t. They are emotionally empty, but have the charm and intelligence to make you believe the opposite.
Sociopaths are prone to nervousness, distress and rage. Their deeds are typically sloppy rather than meticulously premeditated and planned. Deeds perpetrated by psychopaths, on the other hand, are often well-planned, and that makes it difficult to catch them out.
In his article in Medical Daily, cited above, Chris Weller concludes: “Psychopaths are fearless; sociopaths aren’t. Psychopaths don’t have a sense of right and wrong; sociopaths do. But both are equally capable of ruining lives and destroying relationships — not that they care.”
When the boss is a psychopath or a sociopath
Psychopaths are attracted by power, and they have the ruthlessness to make it to a high level in companies and organisations. Statistics vary, but there seems to be consensus that while about 1% of the population in general are psychopathic, the figure is much higher among executives. Psychology Today, for example, puts it at about 4%.3
Positions of authority give psychopaths the environment they thrive on. They can bully, manipulate and lie with little danger of negative consequences. With only their own interests at heart, they wreak havoc, causing damage to an organisation and its staff. They destroy wherever they go, and even have fun while they do it.
One of the biggest problems in dealing with psychopaths in the workplace is in recognising them as such. Their charisma and their willingness to lie mean that they are very convincing. People in a position to do something about a psychopath frequently fail to see the problem. They believe the lies. All the evidence in front of them is saying that the problem is with the people who are complaining, not with the person complained about. It can take years for the truth to come out, and sometimes it never does.
“For many dealing with a true psychopath can be a deeply harmful experience. In addition to the emotional pain and anxiety they cause, if you stand up to them they may also do their best to destroy you – character assassination through lies and threats is a trademark.”
The Independent, “Help! My boss is a psychopath”, by Xanthe Mallett, 20154
World of Psychology suggests there are six things to look out for if you’re worried you might be working for a psychopath.5 If your boss is:
-
charming
-
a control freak
-
a narcissist
-
a master of deception
-
avoids responsibility
-
and takes extreme risks
then he could be a psychopath.
Psychopathy is generally considered incurable and untreatable. Harvard Business Review hints that prevention is the best approach, that organisations should put mechanisms in place to stop psychopaths reaching positions of authority. For example, there should be a test already at the recruitment stage for signs of antisocial personality disorders. And there should be channels for sounding the alarm bells: “First, make it easy for rank-and-file workers to express concerns about colleagues. Have an ombudsman or an anonymous tip line.”
“Solche Leute darf man nicht decken oder schützen, und man sollte schon gar nicht auf Einsicht und Umkehr hoffen. Solche Leute kann man nur feuern. Ganz emotionslos.”
Spiegel Online “Zeitbomben mit Schlips”, by Heiner Thorborg, 20156,7
________________________
1 http://www.medicaldaily.com/whats-difference-between-sociopath-and-psychopath-not-much-one-might-kill-you-270694
Permalink
Send this to a friend
03.01.16
Posted in GNU/Linux, Kernel, Microsoft, SCO at 12:39 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
Microsoft loves Linux SCO
See Lawrence R. Goldfarb (Wikipedia)
Summary: An important reminder of the role Microsoft played in SCO’s massive (multi-billion), never-ending attacks on the legitimacy and the cost of Linux
IS the SCO saga “over”? That’s what they told us half a decade ago, yet today’s (and yesterday’s) headlines [1-4] suggest this is definitely it, no matter what happens next. Novell was actually “over” a long time before SCO was truly “over” (“don’t make me over,” it perpetually insists and shouts at the judges, like Dianne Warwick while throwing her now-famous fit at Burt Bacharach and Hal David), unless one counts the “Novell” brand which was carried forward, or abandoned efforts/teams such as Mono/Ximian, which based on this news from Phoronix is already being used for E.E.E. (this time involving Vulkan), shortly after Microsoft tied the knot. Don’t ever forget Microsoft’s true colours. The company hates GNU/Linux with a great passion; it just tries to hide it while working to undermine GNU/Linux. █
Related/contextual items from the news:
-
The case was opened in 2003, when SCO filed a $1B claim against IBM. The suit alleged that IBM had inserted some code from Unix, over which SCO claimed ownership, into the Linux kernel.
-
The long-running SCO vs. IBM case looks like it might just be over.
A new filing (PDF) scooped up by the good folks at Groklaw sees both SCO and IBM agree to sign off on two recent decisions in which SCO’s arguments advancing its claims to own parts of Unix were slapped down by the US District Court.
As The Register reads the PDF we’ve linked to above, and our informal legal counsel concurs, the new document describes IBM and SCO both signing off on the recent court orders. Those orders left SCO without a legal argument to stand on.
The new filing also points out that SCO remains bankrupt and has “has de minimis financial resources beyond the value of the claims on which the Court has granted summary judgment for IBM.”
Or in plain English, SCO is broke and the only asset it possess of any value is its claims against IBM, and now it doesn’t even have those because it just lost a court case about them. That leaves SCO in no position to carry on.
“Accordingly,” the new filing continues, “the disposition of SCO’s appeal is the practical course most likely to conserve both judicial and private resources.” That’s the legal sense of “disposition”, by the way, so what the document’s saying is that SCO giving up its appeal is most likely to stop the courts spending any more time or energy on this matter. Courts don’t like wasting resources. So this is both parties explaining that wrapping things up now is a desirable thing.
-
Today in Linux news the Ubuntu ZFS controversy isn’t quite settled after all. Fedora’s Adam Williamson today blogged, ” Lots of stuff is busted. We are aware of this, and fixing it. Hold onto your hats.” Richard Freeman reminded folks the systemd disagreements aren’t over either and Debian has finally stopped renaming Firefox to Iceweasel. Dedoimedo said today that Mepis derivative MX-15 is on the “highway to rad” and Christine Hall signed SCO’s death warrant.
-
It appears as if SCO’s case against IBM, which began as a blustering tornado back in 2003, finally died with a whimper last week. The death notice came in the form of what is essentially a one page agreement between SCO and IBM which calls “for certification of the entry of final judgment on the Court’s orders concerning all of SCO’s claims….”
Permalink
Send this to a friend
02.28.16
Posted in Microsoft, Mono, Novell at 7:38 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
“Now [Novell is] little better than a branch of Microsoft”
–LinuxToday Managing Editor
Summary: A longer and more detailed analysis of Microsoft’s official takeover of the Mono team (and by extension a so-called ‘company’, whose finances are secret but are linkable back to Microsoft through Ignition Partners)
THERE is a sense of relief now that Microsoft has ‘collected’ its moles; they’re back home (or at the ‘base’) where they belong. Our latest post on this matter (we covered it shortly after this became publicly known, hence composed in somewhat of a rush) is quite a few days old. That post, which focused on Xamarin‘s role and duties for Microsoft, was a little tongue-in-cheek, and it probably lacked context which those who are unfamiliar with these matters may truly need.
“After Novell had purchased Ximian this move was characterised by a Novell executive as a “red carpet” (to a Microsoft deal).”Techrights has spent nearly a decade writing about Novell, which was the previous incubator or ‘host’ (in a sort of embryonic sense) of Mono (see this Wiki page for a detailed chronology). After Novell had purchased Ximian this move was characterised by a Novell executive as a “red carpet” (to a Microsoft deal). See this complete transcript from 10 years ago. A lot of people don’t remember this; nor do they remember the significant role which Miguel de Icaza personally played in Microsoft and Novell coming to their patent deal — a subject which we wrote about many times before (de Icaza’s role was noted by Novell dissenters almost a decade ago).
Michael Meeks (formerly of Novell) wrote the other day: “Pleased to see Miguel & Nat exit to Microsoft” (direct quote).
“It’s like both of them were engaged to Microsoft for a decade but only officially celebrated in a wedding ceremony (and tied the knot as the saying goes) last week.”Nat had worked for Microsoft before he worked for Novell and Miguel too had visited Microsoft and loved them. For Meeks, as their former colleague (at Novell), it’s easy to sympathise, but did they ever “exit”? They were always there. They have only just made it official. It’s like both of them were engaged to Microsoft for a decade but only officially celebrated in a wedding ceremony (and tied the knot as the saying goes) last week.
The news about Microsoft buying Xamarin was mostly covered by the Microsoft side and Microsoft boosters, not FOSS or GNU/Linux sites. This in itself is rather telling and revealing. Oh, how things have changed! Here’s Microsoft’s Mouth and the Microsoft-friendly Tim Anderson covering this, the latter noting: “Remember the Nokia devices acquisition? That went well. Not”
“Microsoft now intends to use Xamarin to further its E.E.E. (embrace, extend, extinguish) agenda inside Android.”Nokia was another case of Microsoft moles, notably Elop. It was designed to tear apart Linux and Nokia.
Microsoft now intends to use Xamarin to further its E.E.E. (embrace, extend, extinguish) agenda inside Android. Why? Because other such efforts, including the Cyanogen plan, are evidently failing. There’s no headway. As Anderson put it in a separate article:
Microsoft has officially scrapped its Android to Windows 10 bridge, codenamed Astoria, but is forging ahead with its Objective C Windows compiler and tools for porting iOS applications.
The Android announcement was expected, as the project was apparently abandoned some months back, but the new post from Windows Developer Platform VP Kevin Gallo adds some background.
Right now Microsoft uses Miguel de Icaza to make developers defect to Windows. When Xamarin was its own company, backed by people from Microsoft, it didn’t quite work out. People — and developers in particular — just weren’t foolish enough. “De Icaza told me in the past that he’s rich,” Stephane Rodriguez told us 9 years ago, so we know that Microsoft pays such moles enough to make them do almost anything. Xamarin was an attempt to infiltrate the development world on behalf of Microsoft. Based on lack of press coverage, we very much doubt it was financially sustainable without all the VC money from Microsoft folks, who were understandably trying to keep it afloat.
“Right now Microsoft uses Miguel de Icaza to make developers defect to Windows.”Overlapping the announcement of the Xamarin takeover was this important news covered in articles such as “Microsoft confirms: Android-on-Windows Astoria tech is gone”, “Microsoft’s plan to port Android apps to Windows is dead”, “Microsoft Confirms Android-To-Windows Tool ‘Project Astoria’ Is Dead”, and “Microsoft is ditching Android app ports for Windows Phone”.
Miguel de Icaza was perhaps Microsoft’s Plan B, much like Elop inside Nokia. As one Microsoft apologist put it the other day (in his headline), “Microsoft: Use Xamarin to port Android apps to Windows” (sounds like the same thing as above, except the above just got axed).
“Miguel de Icaza was perhaps Microsoft’s Plan B, much like Elop inside Nokia.”Microsoft propagandists such as Simon Bisson sure are happy for Miguel de Icaza and other Microsoft saboteurs, whose goal wasn’t to help either GNU/Linux or Free software but to advance Microsoft’s interests and financial gain. “Embrace, extend, eat” is how this article from The Register summed it up (in its seminal report about the takeover). “Strangely patents were not mentioned,” iophk wrote to us, alluding to this analogous report from Wired. To quote: “Given the number of startups that have been purchased by larger companies primarily for their engineering talent, not their products—a strategy called “acquihiring”—developers may worry that Xamarin’s technology could go away after this acquisition. Microsoft insists this isn’t the case. “This is definitely not an acquihire,” says Scott Guthrie, the executive vice president of the Microsoft’s cloud and enterprise group. “There are more than 300 people on the Xamarin team. We very much view this acquisition as an opportunity to take what they’ve built and make it a core part of our strategy.””
It seems quote possible that Microsoft is just “acquihiring” in this case, as we noted in our first post about it. However, let’s not forget that VC money for Xamarin came from former Microsoft staff (Ignition Partners), so if anyone pockets the money here, then it’s them (that’s like Microsoft giving money back… to Microsoft people). Groomed by Microsoft for over a decade, Xamarin is probably the last incarnation of what was Ximian, then Novell, and later Xamarin. Now it’s called what it really is: Microsoft.
“We were right about Mono, Miguel de Icaza, and Xamarin, just as we were right about Novell and Nokia in the patent sense.”According to this report from the New YoRk Times, “Microsoft announced on Wednesday that it was buying Xamarin, a company that helps software developers write applications for mobile devices. The price was not disclosed, but is believed to be more than $300 million.”
As we often point out here, many of these figures are bogus. They’re more like accounting tricks that make both the buyer and the acquired entity look bigger than they really are; it surely fools an already-gullible media when sometimes all that happens is that shares move from place to place, i.e. no money exchanges hands at all.
“Microsoft came first; what’s why he was pushed away by FOSS people.”All in all, the whole thing proves we were right all along. We were right about Mono, Miguel de Icaza, and Xamarin, just as we were right about Novell and Nokia in the patent sense. Miguel de Icaza has, consistently over the years, served Microsoft’s agenda and now it’s payday again. He hardly ever truly worked for FOSS; Now he’s a Microsoft employee. Miguel de Icaza turned to Microsoft not because FOSS people pushed him away. Microsoft came first; what’s why he was pushed away by FOSS people. Bruce Byfield, a longtime Novell (and Mono) apologist, gets it all in reverse in his analysis which begins thusly:
Just before I settled down to write today, I read that Microsoft had acquired Xamarin, the company founded by Miguel de Icaza and Nat Friedman. To many, the news is the logical end to a story that has been unfolding for years now, and if the first cries of, “Traitors!” have not appeared on blogs and articles, then I expect they are only a matter of time.
Perhaps Byfield can finally admit that it was us who were right all along, not him. On de Icaza, one person told me the other day: “I remember him back in ‘the day’ on IRC. he was always considered a crazy compromizer.”
“In summary, Miguel gets money from Microsoft. Again.”He was always like that. He didn’t just magically turn out that way. In fact, a lot of this started when he tried to get hired by Microsoft, way back in the 1990s.
A decent article by Steven J. Vaughan-Nichols (SJVN) says: “In 2011, Attachmate laid off the Mono team. De Icaza then founded Xamarin with an eventual total of $82-million in venture capital to give it a home.”
“The future of APIs, patents and mobile-centric operating systems is at stake now.”Well, money from Microsoft veterans/retirees (for the most part). It was pretty much back then that Microsoft ‘bought’ de Icaza; it just left him as peripheral/external because it’s easier to use him as a proxy or mole that way.
In summary, Miguel gets money from Microsoft. Again. E.E.E. didn’t work out this time around, but Miguel had his safety net. Now his salaries will come directly from his longtime boss (at Novell too a lot of the money came from Microsoft).
This post is not a personal attack. But since many people out there are too timid to mention names and say things as they see them, someone probably has to. Anything else is self-censorship.
If any of the above is not accurate or not correct, please point out specifically what it is. We welcome an open debate on this. The future of APIs, patents and mobile-centric operating systems is at stake now. █
Permalink
Send this to a friend
02.24.16
Posted in Deception, GNU/Linux, Google, Microsoft, Mono at 10:33 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
So the Microsoft-loving lynch mob will start receiving salaries directly from Microsoft
Miguel de Icaza now officially a Microsoft employee
Summary: Xamarin staff’s Microsoft roots and loyalties now confirmed as Microsoft just bought/recruited them all
THE TROJAN horse strategy of Microsoft can only ever work as long as FOSS developers are naive enough to believe that Microsoft comes with good intentions. We have already seen openwashing of Microsoft lock-in like .NET (there is more of it today from Pierre-Luc Maheu), even though it’s still proprietary lock-in with some open ‘core’. We wrote a lot about this in 2014.
Just as Microsoft uses Cyanogen as a Trojan horse in mobile (Android), Microsoft has used Xamarin as a Trojan horse for a number of years now (not just in mobile).
“Just as Microsoft uses Cyanogen as a Trojan horse in mobile (Android), Microsoft has used Xamarin as a Trojan horse for a number of years now (not just in mobile).”Xamarin’s Mono now becomes Microsoft’s as Miguel de Icaza once again makes a lot of money from Microsoft, after former Microsoft people had dunked lots of money into his efforts (Xamarin’s sources of funding were covered here before).
RoboVM was part of an embrace phase (in E.E.E.); it’s almost as though Microsoft bought a Java/Android company, which it soon took proprietary (extend) and can now use as a Trojan horse for .NET conversions (extinguish) because RoboVM employees all become Microsoft employees, within just a few months. It’s like Nokia all over again and it happened in a nearby country (neighbour of Finland).
Proving Techrights was right all along, earlier today was found this post from Phoronix which said “Xamarin was formed by Miguel de Icaza in 2011 after his earlier Mono-focused company, Ximian, was acquired by Novell but then the Mono developers were let go when Novell was acquired by Attachmate.”
“Right now Mono is officially a Microsoft thing.”We warned about it right from the start. Right now Mono is officially a Microsoft thing. Not just Microsoft copyrights are inside of it. The trademarks too probably become Microsoft’s. “Everybody knew this was coming years ago,” a senior member at Phoronix Forums wrote. Here is the Microsoft angle and Microsoft Peter’s shallow piece. There was some discussion about it in our IRC channel, as Mark said that “de Icaza is practically a closed source advocate… uses Mac OS X over Linux… pumps MS tech whenever possible… Microsoft MVP Awardee in 2010… Apple basically advocates conspicuous consumption which is pretty much the opposite of what I believe in” (expect de Icaza to praise Microsoft even more from now on).
Some, myself included, were relieved by the news because it’s proving us right. “Finally,” XRevan86 wrote. “I was sick of people who were saying Xamarin is not a Microsoft thing. Like Microsoft is bad but Xamarin is okay. You know what’s the most ironic thing? Miguel said that GNU/Linux won’t ever be popular because of compatibility issues after he moved to OS X. The most compatibility messing thing in GNU/Linux is GNOME’s GTK+.”
“The Mono lynch mob is something Microsoft will now be accountable for.”“As part of this commitment I am pleased to announce today that Microsoft has signed an agreement to acquire Xamarin,” wrote Microsoft, calling it “a leading platform provider for mobile app development.” [sic]
Leading? How many people even use this thing? Xamarin, in recent years, hired longtime enemies of this site (Techrights) — people who publicly attack me all the time for ‘daring’ not to trust Microsoft and Mono. They even hired Jo Shields, who has been cursing and swearing, sometimes even libeling me. These are Mono boosters who are more like moles inside GNU/Linux. Well, from now on they’ll get their salary directly from Microsoft and any time I see them attacking me online I’d be able to attribute these attacks to Microsoft. I criticise Mono, so they criticise me personally (ad hominem). What a relief it is to know that Microsoft will now bear responsibility for these utterly rude people. The Mono lynch mob is something Microsoft will now be accountable for. █
Permalink
Send this to a friend
02.20.16
Posted in America, Microsoft, Patents at 2:58 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
Summary: An overview of some very recent cases involving software patents and situations in which the US Supreme Court’s stance helps squash them
THE US Supreme Court‘s ruling on Alice is the best thing that ever happened regarding software patents as far as Techrights is concerned. It helped stop software patents (or significantly slow them down). The 2014 ruling exceeded our expectations in the sense that its breadth touched CAFC as well (CAFC is where software patents were originally ‘born’). Every week we learn of new cases in which Alice helps crush software patents, sending a warning sign to anyone who considers patenting software or wants to sue a company using software patents.
“I think the Supreme Court is going to be pretty sick of Apple by the end of this year,” wrote this person the other day. “Apple v Samsung also may be heard by the justices,” based on this update from SCOTUS blog. Apple apparently cannot effectively compete without suing companies using software patents and design patents, which typically resemble software patents. According to this, “Samsung v. Apple appeal to the Supreme Court: petition & response are now available.”
Patently-O, a reasonably reliable source of information on these matters, has just published a useful list of SCOTUS cases regarding patents. Will SCOTUS set even a stronger precedence regarding software patents?
According to this update, “US Pat 7,072,849, Network Comm Patent Survived Alice Attack in DE” (one of the few cases where Alice does not work in eliminating software patents). Contrariwise, according to lawyers’ media (published a few days ago), “The Supreme Court’s Decision in Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank Has Taken a Heavy Toll on Patents for Computer-Related Inventions” (even patent lawyers admit the undeniable impact on software patents). To quote the opening paragraph: “The patent statue broadly defines patent-eligible subject matter as “any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter” and any improvements. But inventors cannot patent laws of nature, natural phenomena, or abstract ideas. The prohibition on patenting abstract ideas has caused federal courts to declare hundreds of patents for computer-related inventions invalid since the Supreme Court’s June 2014 decision in Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank. After Alice, about 70% of challenges for failure to claim patent-eligible subject matter have succeeded.”
The key part is in that last sentence. We saw even worse estimates, e.g. with over 90% courtesy of Bilski Blog. John R. Harris, a patent lawyer, noted that: “Other law firm agrees that Alice decision taken heavy toll on patents for computer-related technologies” (more specifically, software patents).
The other day another lawyers’ site wrote: “The patent attorney often faces the problem that broad claims for a class can be rejected when prior art surfaces for one of the members of the class. One strategy is to exclude those members of the class found in the prior art, and to claim the rest of the class.”
Notice how patent lawyers basically tend to work, always looking for loopholes when applying for patents and suing. Here are the patent maximalists that the EPO funds saying (just a few days ago): “Two years ago the Supreme Court opened the floodgates for attacks on computer-implemented inventions in Alice Corp Pty, Ltd v CLS Bank International. The Supreme Court set out a “two-step framework” for determining whether patents are claiming laws of nature, natural phenomena or abstract ideas, as opposed to patent-eligible applications of those concepts. Under the first step, courts must determine whether the claims at issue are directed to a patent ineligible concept, such as an abstract idea. If so, the courts must look for an “inventive concept” – that is, an element or combination of elements sufficient to ensure the patent amounts to significantly more than the abstract idea or ineligible concept itself.
“Mortgage Grader joins the post-Alice wave of cases invalidating computer-implemented inventions in various forms. The court agreed that the claims were directed to the abstract idea of “anonymous loan shopping”, and that the claims as a whole recited nothing more than the collection of information to generate a “credit grading” and facilitate anonymous loan shopping. In particular, the court noted that the series of steps covered by the asserted claims could all be performed by humans without a computer.”
The noteworthy thing right here is that a lot of the worst maximalists out there have come to grips with the fact that Alice is a game changer. There’s no point denying that as anyone who does deny it simply discredits himself or herself. To IP Watchdog‘s credit, it did foresee the impact of Alice early on (shortly after SCOTUS had published the ruling), despite dissent from fellow patent maximalists. It wasn’t long afterwards that even the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) reinforced the precedence set by SCOTUS and software patents dropped like flies.
Speaking of CAFC, Secure Web has just lost to Microsoft, as this new post written by patent lawyer indicated the other day. It’s a win for Microsoft, but a loss for software patents, which Microsoft so heavily relies on. It turns out, based on this article, that the two software patents were aimed at Microsoft’s worse spyware (in some regards Skype is the worst). To quote WIPR: “Microsoft’s Skype computer program did not infringe two patents related to data encryption, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit has ruled.
“Yesterday, February 17, the federal circuit said the US District Court for the Eastern District of Texas correctly constructed the claims in two patents asserted by technology company Secure Web Conference.”
In a sense, for a change, we are happy that Microsoft won this court case as it serves to show that software patents are a dying thing, or a bubble that’s busting, even in the Eastern District of Texas, patent trolls’ capital. █
Permalink
Send this to a friend
« Previous Page — « Previous entries « Previous Page · Next Page » Next entries » — Next Page »
Content is available under CC-BY-SA