08.07.11

Gianugo Rabellino Helps the Attack on Software Freedom

Posted in Free/Libre Software, Microsoft at 11:34 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Summary: Microsoft’s Gianugo Rabellino joins the attempts to cheapen “Open Source” and portray the thug as a friend of the victim

Microsoft’s participation in OSCON was tackled by our team over a week ago, but a couple of important links on the subject ought to be added here as these are self explanatory:

1. Microsoft: Cloud need only be open surface, not open source

   Microsoft is more open — at least on the surface — and that’s all that matters in the cloud era, one company exec maintains.

2. Microsoft Further Dilutes The Term Open Source, Coins Open Surface

   One of the reasons I prefer the term Free Software instead of Open Source is the way mega corporations like Microsoft have diluted the meaning of Open Source to suit their agenda.

   Now, Microsoft is coining yet another term to further confuse users — Open Surface. Senior Director for Open Source Communities at Microsoft, Gianugo Rabellino, said at Oscon 2011 that “customer don’t care about the underlying platform as long as the APIs, protocols and standards for the cloud are open.” That’s when he threw the term ‘open surface’.

Microsoft: attack by entryism. They become their own ‘opposition’, therefore they win even if they lose. Rejecting Microsoft is defensive, it’s not intolerant. The company filing patent lawsuits and secret blackmail operations is worse than intolerant; it’s borderline criminal, but it wants the police (or antitrust regulators) to stay away, so it needs to be seen as a friend of the victim. Those who cooperate in this posturing are worse than passive; they are the opposite of peacemakers because they make aggression acceptable. █

Permalink Leave Your Comment      Send this to a friend

Links 7/8/2011: Red Eclipse Released, KDE 4.7 Praises

Posted in News Roundup at 7:11 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Permalink Leave Your Comment      Send this to a friend

Novell and Microsoft Security ‘Honours’

Posted in Microsoft, Novell, Security at 3:58 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Summary: Novell and Microsoft get special mentions for weaknesses in their proprietary software, which they wish to hide by hiding the source code

NOVELL is a proprietary software company whose software has gotten enough flaws to earn a Pwnie Award nomination. Thanks to our reader Tacone for bringing the following bit to our attention:

Remotely exploitable stack overflow in OpenSSH on Novell NetWare
Vendor: Novell

The ZDI advisory clearly stated that this is a remotely-exploitable stack overflow, but Novel claimed that it was only a denial of service attack and refused to patch it until ZDI dropped the details on their blog. You can’t argue with 0×41414141.

In other news, Windows has a rootkits epidemic again and this time Sony is not to blame:

Machines running the decade-old Windows XP make up a huge reservoir of infected PCs that can spread malware to other systems, a Czech antivirus company said today.

Windows XP computers are infected with rootkits out of proportion to the operating system’s market share, according to data released Thursday by Avast Software, which surveyed more than 600,000 Windows PCs.

While XP now accounts for about 58% of all Windows systems in use, 74% of the rootkit infections found by Avast were on XP machines.

The Register meanwhile says that “Microsoft is fuelling up 13 bulletins for release next week, including an update that guards against critical flaws in Internet Explorer.”

We oughtn’t forget that Microsoft lies about those numbers.

“It’s funny that I almost never have to reboot, or even logout, when I update my Linux boxes,” remarks one GNU/Linux advocate. ‘Why is it that Windows can’t update a file that is open? Linux & other *nix’s have had this filesystem feature for longer than I can remember. Doesn’t Windows have any decent filesystem?”

Finally, spyware too seems to be part of Microsoft’s package:

Microsoft has collected the locations of millions of laptops, cell phones, and other Wi-Fi devices around the world and makes them available on the Web without taking the privacy precautions that competitors have, CNET has learned.

The vast database available through Live.com publishes the precise geographical location, which can point to a street address and sometimes even a corner of a building, of Android phones, Apple devices, and other Wi-Fi enabled gadgets.

How come nobody remarks on the privacy implications? Without privacy, security too can be compromised more easily. █

Permalink Leave Your Comment      Send this to a friend

Microsoft Monetises Death Again

Posted in Microsoft at 3:43 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Image by Bojars, licensed under the terms of the CeCILL

Summary: Microsoft finds another opportunity to grab some money as a music celebrity dies prematurely

PREVIOUSLY in this week site we gave examples where Microsoft sought to profit from disaster (e.g. in Haiti and after Katrina). The previous post mentioned Feynman, a dead scientist whom Microsoft exploits for profit, just like it did with other early deaths.

It is not as though Microsoft being insensitive should be news, but this new example is priceless:

Yes, it was hard to get it all into 140 characters. But the intention seemed clear: Amy Winehouse is dead. You can get her music here.

Microsoft also exploited Michael Jackson's tragic death for self promotion. Microsoft is a vulture of a company. █

Permalink Leave Your Comment      Send this to a friend

.NET Gets Called a Mistake, But Not in Xamarin

Posted in Microsoft, Mono at 3:17 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Summary: Microsoft’s .NET is still promoted by Microsoft boosters from Novell, who helped Microsoft devour important scientific lectures under the pretence these would be available to all

MICROSOFT MVP Miguel de Icaza enthusiatically announces another release of a .NET clone which nobody truly needs. “Was .NET all a mistake?” That’s what some are willing to assert and as we showed last month, it increasingly seems to be the case. To quote:

It is time to reconsider the recent past and ask the question “was .NET just a forced detour on the road to another technology?”

Before anyone explodes I’d better say that I don’t have a definitive answer to the question that the title raises – how could anyone have such an answer. However the recent unsettling behavior at Microsoft has caused me to re-evaluate my .NET experiences and think hard about where it all came from and where it is all going. It is interesting and I promise not to be too provocative just for the sake of it…

.NET is just a lousy copy of Java, which matured over the years after Microsoft had been nailed for subverting Java, deliberetly fragmenting it (this was shown in internal documents we have in our wiki). The same goes for Silverlight, which is an imitation of Flash. It never really took off, so Microsoft resorted to exploiting dead scientists like Feynman (covered here before).

As one GNU/Linux advocate put it some days ago, Feynman’s videos “used to be on youtube but they were removed when Feynman’s heirs wanted to make some money from them (something Feynman I’m sure would have objected to).

“Bill Gates steps in and buys the rights to them and puts them on the Internet for free.”

The outcome: “Sorry, Silverlight for your browser is not officially supported.”

In conclusion he writes: “So to view these videos I would have to infect my PC with Microsoft SW. That’s too high a price to pay.”

What about using Moonlight, which Miguel de Icaza and Microsoft used to pretend Silverlight was cross-platform (they help the same illusion for .NET, also pretending it’s “open”)? Does Xamarin maintain Moonlight? Of course not. Now it’s time to buy Windows for Silverlight, which they pretended was available to all platforms. █

Permalink Leave Your Comment      Send this to a friend

Apple is Increasingly an Embargo Company, Not a Technology Company

Posted in Apple, GNU/Linux, Patents at 3:16 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Summary: Apple is aiming at embargo of the competition rather than improvement of its own products, choosing a walled gardens approach against this nuisance called “counterparts”

IN ORDER to justify purchases of its overprices products, Apple needs to ensure it lacks any real competition. As we have been showing since Apple started its patent attacks on Linux (early 2010), Apple has no qualm about acting like a thug, despite its relative wealth. Those who preach for arrogance are expectedly arrogant themselves. Techrights lacks sympathy for Apple simply because Apple deserves none, and not just because of its size (SCO too became unpopular, despite rapidly-decreasing scale).

According to this recent report, “One day after Apple’s Mac OS X Lion was released into the wild, Steve Jobs’ bête noire, Adobe, has released an extensive list of wounds that the big cat has clawed into its products.”

“Problematic apps include such stalwarts as Photoshop CS3, CS4, and CS5; Dreamweaver CS4, and Illustrator CS5 and CS5.1,” says this report. Some quality, eh?

“I don’t understand how this can be possible,” remarks one Linux advocate sarcastically. “Surely “professional” proprietary software is meant to be superior to all that “freetard hobbyware” stuff.

“So what happened?

“Why didn’t Adobe simply download the sources to Apple’s software (or possibly vice versa), make the modifications necessary to get it all working together properly, rebuild it then publish it in their repo?”

“But in terms of actual market share (usage, not money), Apple only commands about 4% globally (according to Apple’s own SEC filings).”Apple may have a very powerful brand and it still appeals to rich people for whom unnecessary expenditures are largely acceptable. But in terms of actual market share (usage, not money), Apple only commands about 4% globally (according to Apple’s own SEC filings). By some estimates, GNU/Linux is still ahead of Apple, however GNU/Linux is not a company. Apple knows that commodity products can doom its core business.

“Somebody is truely [sic] blind,” says Norbert Evenich about Apple apologism (from Cult of Mac in this case). It is amazing how far some people would go to defend Apple’s aggression. Well, Apple has not gotten its way yet and its first victim, HTC, is still fighting back — a subject to be touched on in a later post.

Realising that GNU/Linux is on its tail (especially in lucrative areas like mobile devices), Apple decides to sue and sue and sue…

Apple is now trying to black Linux-based tablets and one report says:

Apple is seeking an injunction against Samsung which would block the Korean electronics giant from launching the latest version of its Galaxy tablet computer in Australia until the patent lawsuit is resolved.

On Monday, a Federal Court in Sydney heard Apple lawyer Steven Burley claim that the Samsung Galaxy Tab 10.1 had infringed 10 Apple patents, including the “look and feel” and touchscreen technology of the iPad.

Well done, Apple? Need we look at all those whom Apple imitates? The company’s spiritual leader, Steve Jobs, has himself admitted that Apple “steals” great ideas.

Well, Apple’s legal actions have thus far been unproductive as the legal head called it quits (maybe he got fired), as we covered a few weeks ago. Samsung is in fact Apple’s supplier in some areas, so Apple essentially attacks its own production line. Samsung is undeterred, at least based on the fact that it shrugs off Apple’s actions (Samsung has a massive patent arsenal too). Apple turning into an embargo company is a sign of the times, indicating again that patents need be reconsidered as a whole. The Galaxy Tab 10.1 will sell in Australia despite Apple’s complaint. “Samsung has said that its forthcoming Galaxy Tab 10.1 set for release in Australia is different from the device sold in the U.S. — which is the hardware Apple has targeted in its lawsuit. Because it is a different device, the Korean electronics company believes it is free to release its iPad competitor down under, according to a statement released to Ausdroid.net,” says the cited source.

“If Samsung fights back against Apple, why did it agree to pay Microsoft for Linux back in 2007?”“The company did not reveal what the difference is between the U.S. Galaxy Tab 10.1 and the one that Samsung will release in Australia. The statement did reveal that no other Samsung smartphones or tablets are affected in the Australian market or other countries,” it adds.

If Samsung fights back against Apple, why did it agree to pay Microsoft for Linux back in 2007? Maybe because those two companies had collaborated in many areas? That has been our guess over the years. We continue to encourage a boycott of Samsung for this reason. █

Permalink Leave Your Comment      Send this to a friend

(Software) Patents Backlash Becomes Mainstream

Posted in Patents at 2:59 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Summary: The unpopularity of patents — and software patents in particular — is fast becoming a mainstream debate that merits attention and hopefully a fix; Hulu is now sued

IN the coming posts — mostly tomorrow — we will show that patents are viewed negatively in the press, even without having to be selective (the coverage is overwhelmingly critical of patents). This sure is an achievement to those who vocally opposed software patents and attended live debates on the subject. Developers have a much more compelling story to tell than lawyers and monopolists. All it takes now to turn the tide is increased exposure. Even those who are technology unaware or agnostic are starting to see their favourite products banned or at least injured. This gives a lot of momentum to the abolition proponents — those who view ending all software patents as the solution (not deterrence advocates who prefer a M.A.D. approach). The latest example of lawsuits that will fuel backlash against patents is this one against Hulu, which Reuters covered as follows: “Rovi Corp sued Hulu, accusing the online video site of infringing patents that cover electronic program guides.

“Rovi, created from Macrovision Corp’s acquisition of Gemstar-TV Guide International Inc in 2008, provides technology that powers the streaming services provided by Blockbuster On Demand and Best Buy Co Inc’s CinemaNow, according to the complaint, filed on Friday.”

Programme guides as a patent? Really? █

Permalink 3 Comments      Send this to a friend

European Procurement Rules Need Review for Built-in Bias

Posted in Europe, Free/Libre Software, GPL at 2:52 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Summary: Romania ‘bans’ the GPL, whereas in Italy, the Puglia region council is starting to mandate the opposite type of policy

SEVERAL weeks ago we wrote some posts about procurement rules in the UK. These are unjust and one might even say “corrupt”. These rules ensure that those who lobby for them will continue to profit without having to work hard, let alone compete. The public suffers from this because of cost and quality. In the nation of Romania we have seen many such examples of misconduct and covered some of them in, e.g.:

• Microsoft and Romania: Follow the Money
• More Dirty Deals in Europe Involve Microsoft, Microsoft Lobbies
• Ballot Stuffer from Redmond Stuffs Another FOSS Conference (Romania)
• Quick Mention: It’s Romania’s Turn for Microsoft’s OOXML Stacking
• Microsoft ‘Vampires’ Suck Blood of Romania’s OOXML Voters, Supporters
• Head of Microsoft Romania Quits, Entryism Revisited

Someone from Romania has just informed us of this translation of articles whose main message is:

There’s a government procurement bid going on in Romania for creating the software and infrastructure to modernize criminal records’ access within the country and to interoperate with European countries’ similar systems.

It is likely to become one of the many overpriced, poorly specified and poorly implemented solutions that are cranked out by companies that would not survive in the private sector but are close to the decision-makers and are tacitly supported by large IT companies whose proprietary software and expensive hardware have key roles such projects. Nothing new here.

What sets it apart however from other cases, at least to my knowledge is that in the general requirements section there’s a small paragraph stating:

“All versions of sofware that are part of the offer must not be published under a ‘free software license’ – GPL or similar”

Is that truly the case? And if so, then the FSFE has work to do there. The very opposite policy — one preferring or enforcing the use of Free software — should be embraced in the public sector. So once again we come across ridiculous regulations which must have been influenced by the fox in the hen house. Recall what Nichi Vendola did when Free software was gaining ground in Italy (Puglia). We now discover that, based on research from OSOR, Vendola may not get his way entirely:

The council of the Italian region of Puglia is about to approve the law proposed last December that will make the use of open source and open standards mandatory for the region’s public administrations, according to news reports. The region expects to save up to a million euro per year by increasing its use of this type of software, at the same time creating business opportunities for small and medium sized enterprises.

What about the education sector? Activism in this area is very much needed to ensure that policies are not perverted to the point of no return (like software patents in the United States). █

Permalink Leave Your Comment      Send this to a friend