Comments on: Novell’s Dirty Little Secret: It Helps OOXML (Updated)

By: Roy Schestowitz

Roy Schestowitz — Wed, 13 Feb 2008 01:41:33 +0000

Lukas, I’ve noticed a pattern in your comments. What are your affiliations? You seem to stubbornly defend Mono, Moonlight and Miguel de Icaza when any of these get mentioned. I asked you this before, but I think you did not answer. I am just curious and I think it would be fair to have disclosures, at least of real identity.

By: Lukas

Lukas — Wed, 13 Feb 2008 01:10:47 +0000

If GNOME developers don’t want Icaza or Waugh ,why don’t they get rid of them? Seems to me like GNOME are fine with the current direction, else they would not have re-elected Waugh (Miguel de Icaza hasn’t run for the board in years).

By: Great

Great — Tue, 12 Feb 2008 09:09:55 +0000

Jeff Waugh is doing white wash and avoiding the core issues here. Miguel de Icaza and Jeff Waugh needs to get their hands off GNOME. They MUST resign out of GNOME Community. They are just harming the community for their own selfish needs.

NOVELL needs to keep their dirty hands off Linux and GNOME. Take your MONO shit and leave. They have ***ked SuSE and now they are after GNOME.

GNOME is a work of lot of developers and other people and Jeff and Icaza have no right to destroy it. What they are doing is just unthinkable.

I personally call for boycott of NOVELL employees/Jeff Waugh/Miguel de Icaza from GNOME community. The Judas Iscariot of the free software . They dont want to remmembered as the traitor of the free software.

By: Dark Phoenix

Dark Phoenix — Tue, 04 Dec 2007 06:57:50 +0000

Er… I’m probably not the best source to be quoting, because I’m not directly involved in this situation, though I did link to where I got my info. IMO, it is bad form for anyone in FLOSS to be helping OOXML in any way, regardless of desires to give “full support”. I doubt it’ll even be the same if it comes out of the BRM as a standard, and even so, it’s a moving target controlled by a monopoly with a clear agenda. Microsoft has already extended it (see the VBA macro stuff), so what Office 2007 is creating isn’t even REAL OOXML. Of course, it seems to me the sentence at the beginning of the standard noting that behavior is not defined by the standard in any way (a serious lie) was slipped in so that Microsoft could still claim to be using “the OOXML standard” while not really using it. Embrace and extend at its finest.

By: 78iuz

78iuz — Tue, 27 Nov 2007 23:18:23 +0000

I'd rather say the issue at hand is Roy's dirty, slanderous ego. I guess he gets a kick out of trying to drag the names of people infinitely more talented than himself into the mud. Roy, from now on you're called the RITA SKEETER of open-source. :p Note: comment has been flagged for arriving from an incarnation of a known (eet), pseudonymous, forever-nymshifting, abusive Internet troll that posts from open proxies and relays around the world.

By: 4350980e904e98t9809

4350980e904e98t9809 — Tue, 27 Nov 2007 23:10:16 +0000

I'd rather say the issue at hand is Roy's dirty, slanderous ego. I guess he gets a kick out of trying to drag the names of people infinitely more talented than himself into the mud. Roy, from now on you're called the RITA SKEETER of open-source. :p :p Note: comment has been flagged for arriving from an incarnation of a known (eet), pseudonymous, forever-nymshifting, abusive Internet troll that posts from open proxies and relays around the world.

By: 2+4e5ä#4355t654ä6

2+4e5ä#4355t654ä6 — Tue, 27 Nov 2007 23:05:56 +0000

By: 2234e534e4355t6546

2234e534e4355t6546 — Tue, 27 Nov 2007 23:03:24 +0000

By: Roy Schestowitz

Roy Schestowitz — Tue, 27 Nov 2007 22:59:07 +0000

Alan,

The issue here is not the opinion expressed; it is about a person helping a monopoly which fights his own creation — GNOME. It’s a long story.

By: Alan Bell

Alan Bell — Tue, 27 Nov 2007 22:54:32 +0000

I run dis29500.org and I am pleased for anyone to comment on it, especially if they know what they are talking about and can add the benefit of their expertise to the debate. I don’t happen to agree with Miguel de Icaza on the specific bstr issue (I understand that XML didn’t meet the requirements of what they wanted to encode, but they should have done something else about it if they want to have their format as a standard) but everyone is entitled to an opinion even if it is wrong :-).

Alan Bell
http://www.theopenlearningcentre.com

By: Jeff Waugh

Jeff Waugh — Sun, 25 Nov 2007 01:38:54 +0000

Then you got my point. Good.

By: Roy Schestowitz

Roy Schestowitz — Sun, 25 Nov 2007 01:33:24 +0000

…you’re just creating wedge issues in the community, spreading propaganda…

Heh. You’ve just described what Microsoft and Novell do.

By: Jeff Waugh

Jeff Waugh — Sun, 25 Nov 2007 01:31:22 +0000

So rather than writing vicious insinuations couched as questions, why don’t you go to the source and ASK? I have suggested this to you over and over and over again, but you seem to be refusing to do so. By actually getting REAL information from the stakeholders in these issues, your site will be better, more informative and more useful to readers. Your points about Novell will be more readily received if the rest of your writing is accurate and balanced. You’re not making a good case for *anything* with this blog at the moment, you’re just creating wedge issues in the community, spreading propaganda, and screeching to the converted.

By: Roy Schestowitz

Roy Schestowitz — Sun, 25 Nov 2007 01:25:22 +0000

I only asked questions and I prefer to assume that the answers are “no”. I even said “Let’s just assume that it’s all false.”

Asking the readers questions is not a case of stating fact or suggesting something is a fact. Also, the main point of the paragraph is now what you’re trying to suggest (for your own purposes/favour/convenience). It’s intended to say that GNOME receives donations and we’re wondering what effect the Novell/Microsoft deal had on these donations (project aspirations/direction aside). Like many others, I am also curious about Miguel de Icaza’s goals and the interests of those who fund it all.

By: Jeff Waugh

Jeff Waugh — Sun, 25 Nov 2007 01:15:35 +0000

Nitpicking? You called into question the integrity of GNOME Foundation directors, including myself, and bizarrely, my company and wife. If you’re going to do that (particularly in the UK, where libel laws are quite strong), you should aim higher, and hold yourself to a higher standard. What you’re doing at the moment is irresponsible (to FLOSS in general) and nasty.

By: Roy Schestowitz

Roy Schestowitz — Sun, 25 Nov 2007 01:03:19 +0000

The reach of this site is not very high (just thousands of visitors per day). Proper articles I publish elsewhere and they present a balanced view that is by no means/rarely controversial. That's the type of stuff that reaches a large audience and whose readership can have more faith in the content. Elsewhere, I also pass a lot of news as-is, without interpretation or modification. I think you're nitpicking here. We all have our inclinations (influences by background, perspective, ambitions, etc.) and we are permitted to express our opinions in public. It's even a constitutional right in the United States. We needn't end up like this (from the news).

By: Jeff Waugh

Jeff Waugh — Sun, 25 Nov 2007 00:22:56 +0000

On a site like this, with its purported goals, and with the access you have to the FLOSS community? Absolutely. If you shirk that responsibility, you end up with exactly the propaganda, offensive insinuations and potentially libellous content you’ve written. If your intent is to provide benefit to the community, you should aim higher, and hold yourself to a higher standard.

By: Roy Schestowitz

Roy Schestowitz — Sun, 25 Nov 2007 00:11:46 +0000

In the same vein:

This is completely ridiculous, and you should be absolutely ashamed of your behaviour and disrespect towards GNOME and the FLOSS community.

GOOD LORD! Now I need to do research before leaving COMMENTS on the Web, which ARE, by my own admission, speculative?

It still appears as though you consider blog posts to be bits that require journal-quality reviews and now the same goes for blog comments.

Many journalists, an increasing majority of which maintain professional blobs, consider it their workbench. This is where things are discussed and studied. That’s why there is room for comments, unlike articles.

By: Jeff Waugh

Jeff Waugh — Sat, 24 Nov 2007 23:34:31 +0000

I am also coming to discover that you are not necessarily supportive of Mono (or maybe you just speak collectively, on behalf of the larger group).

GOOD LORD! Do your research! ASK QUESTIONS! The reason you don’t know these things is because you haven’t done the ABSOLUTE BASICS of research for all of these accusations — you have not even ASKED me. This is completely ridiculous, and you should be absolutely ashamed of your behaviour and disrespect towards GNOME and the FLOSS community.

By: Roy Schestowitz

Roy Schestowitz — Sat, 24 Nov 2007 23:29:17 +0000

It is absolutely hilarious that you think our ECMA statement “represents everyone and upsets no-one”. You’re clearly not doing even basic research about GNOME, let alone asking questions of stakeholders. Hilarious.

I'm referring to the scenario where you couldn't just directly say that the "GNOME Foundation does not support OOXML" (or something along those lines), arguing that a developer's perspective might be different from that of all users. I can't recall where I read this (and the exact working/situation), but I can find out if you wish and then get back to you. This is by all means understandable, Jeff. We actually have more in common than it seems. Both of us recognise the fact that the patent system -- as broken and irreparable as it may be (even in Australia) -- is becoming an issue that Linux developers and users cannot completely ignore. I am also coming to discover that you are not necessarily supportive of Mono (or maybe you just speak collectively, on behalf of the larger group). Let it be clarified that the reason we ever touch these issue is because:

OOXML is a patent timebomb, it is impossible to implement, and it is a moving target (Microsoft is not committed to its own ECMA standard).
Mono is a patent timebomb, which has already left Linspire and Xandros bare (I haven't yet checked to see how Turbolinux fits into this).

There are several more such issues. Failing to ignore these dangers is a route to following Microsoft's desires. Microsoft does not play nice with Linux (it only pretend to). It wants Linux subverted to the point of being unattractive and encapsulated within 'legal' distributor/s, which can be squashed like a typical business. Remember those antitrust memos about Microsoft "tilting [opponents] into the death spiral"? How about the "we need to slaughter Novell" exhibit?