Note: comment has been flagged for arriving from an abusive Internet troll

[Ad hominem attacks left unreplied to /]

So you’re not saying anymore that M$ will destroy Linux? Well, so much for all the doomsday-anticipatory excitement. Weren’t you all about patent lawsuits endangering Linux some short while ago?

Taxation is not a voluntary thing; you cannot opt out of it.
Linux is not being taxed.

And HOW in the big, wide world do you control Linux by voluntary, reciprocal agreements?

You have absolutely _no_ logical foot to stand on.

Note: comment has been flagged for arriving from an abusive Internet troll

All the time you are bringing forward teensy-weensy pieces of unfriendly but basically boring statements of M$ executives and claim these really smallish pieces would prove a big, big conspiracy. That is ridiculous. Don’t they teach logic at where you studied?

Here’s just one among many examples:

http://antitrust.slated.org/www.iowaconsumercase.org/011607/3000/PX03020.pdf

Bill Gates: “If seems unfortunate if we do this work and get our partners to do the work and the result is that Linux works great without
having to do the work. Maybe we can define the APIs so that they work well with NT and not the others even if they are open. Or maybe we could patent something related to this.“

@eet – You want some sort of smoking gun, a video secretly recorded. Sorry, no such thing. There is a thing called logic, and one method of logic is called “inference”. It’s used here

And how they played the software patent card! Just look at how anti-Linux patent lawsuits are popping up like daisies everywhere!

Note: comment has been flagged for arriving from an abusive Internet troll

So, in short, you believe what Steve Ballmer says. Now, that is a sight to behold.

That, along with the attacks in May, was an indication that the optimists were wrong and the skeptics were right. Microsoft signed a deal with Novell (and dumped a lot of money on Novell) just to play the software patent card, among other things.

So, in short, you believe what Steve Ballmer says. Now, that is a sight to behold. (Taking a moment to watch Roy believing Steve Ballmer.) I guess it is an IP-expert you wouldn’t choose to believe if it didn’t fit into you theory.

Ohhhh; Novell does things _for_ OOXML. So that means they probably want OOo dead? Wait a sec! Wasn’t that the OOo Novell co-develops and sells with the SLED?

Something is wrong in this picture. Or rather ‘somebody’, and that body is you…

Note: comment has been flagged for arriving from an abusive Internet troll

‘ In mid-November, shortly after the pact was announced, Microsoft chief Steve Ballmer said companies that sell or run Linux, but aren’t covered under the Novell deal, are illegally using Microsoft’s IP. “We believe every Linux customer basically has an undisclosed balance-sheet liability,” he said.

He said in a later meeting: “I do think it [Novell deal] clearly establishes that open source is not free.” ‘

http://www.techworld.com/opsys/news/index.cfm?newsID=8771&pagtype=all

There’s a lot more, but as I said, I wouldn’t bother convincing a troll.

Then come to consider all the things Novell does for OOXML and its mud-slinging against other (supposedly ‘illegal)’ Linux distributions. You can bury your hand in the sand. Do it at your own risk, but don’t force everybody else to bury their heads in the sand also.

Note: comment has been flagged for arriving from an abusive Internet troll

Never mind. Let’s talk about your ‘product’ there: As in so many other of your mental constructs you simply claim that Novell admitted that Linux infringes on Microsoft’s patents. As a proof for that your offer – a statement by a Microsoft’s own Steve Ballmer; surprise!

Now, what kind of fact is that?

That Novell promptly protested against this is a fact you so very conveniently omit; as you omit any fact that doesn’t fit into your carefully built pseudo-religious delusions.

You _have_no_facts_.

Note: comment has been flagged for arriving from an abusive Internet troll

http://boycottnovell.com/2007/09/30/novell-patent-portfolio/

There are many external references.

Who do you think you can fool?

Note: comment has been flagged for arriving from an abusive Internet troll

Noooo? I thought so…

Note: comment has been flagged for arriving from an abusive Internet troll

Did anyone at “boycottnovell” ever consider the other possibility – that Novell did it to suck some handy cash out of Microsoft, and Ballmer & Co. caved under threat of Novell pressing suit against THEM for IP that Novell owns and Microsoft has been using, unlicensed?

It is always amusing when that fantasy is mentioned. Many journalists wished to believe (at the time) that the deal with Novell was a sign of the maturity of Linux. After a few weeks or months, the truth was discovered. This is all well recorded, so there’s little need to repeat all the evidence.

Did anyone at “boycottnovell” ever consider the other possibility – that Novell did it to suck some handy cash out of Microsoft, and Ballmer & Co. caved under threat of Novell pressing suit against THEM for IP that Novell owns and Microsoft has been using, unlicensed? That Novell attempted to use this so-called “unholy alliance” to their advantage, to COUNTER the FUD M$ has been spreading about MS’s so-called IP they claim to be in Linux and other FOSS? To PROMOTE the corporate adoption of Linux and other FOSS in companies that had been made skittish by M$’s FUD? To gain even more foothold in the corporate world through the easing of corporate fears that using FOSS would lead to interoperability problems? That maybe, just maybe, this deal is actually GOOD for FOSS?

NOOOoooo, instead you have to go off the deep end. I’m glad to read so many posts by people like me that can see your anti-Novell propaganda for the steaming pile of crap it is.