Jaunty: Notifications

Mon Apr 13 02:46:43 UTC 2009

On Sunday 12 April 2009, GreyGeek wrote:
>Lindsay Mathieson wrote:
>> Good grief, just determined to be a linux fan boy with your head in the
>> sand aren't you LA LA LAH I CAN"T HEAR YOU.
>
>Like an MS Fanboi?   It works both ways.
>
>> Mono runs on more linux/unix platforms than java, GPL'd and non-patent
>> uncumbered ... Jeeze, but you MS haters just don't get it. It's ridiculous
>> I've been running linux and contributing one way or another, including
>> code and criticising MS for decades and I just don't get this mindless MS
>> bashing. Its pointless and counter productive, there's a lot of talented
>> people and good products from MS which can be learned from. This holier
>> than thou shit is just mindless group think.
>
>It would be "mindless" if there were not facts to back up the "bashing",
>as you call it.   From Microsoft's point of view it is  "pointless and
>counter productive" unless your desires favor Microsoft maintaining or
>extending its control over PC OEMS, and state and federal software
>vendor processes that have ruled out FOSS, and the stuffing of panels,
>buying off journalists, bloggers and websites, and political bribes to
>pass laws favorable to them.
>http://boycottnovell.com/2008/11/10/summary-of-the-ms-bribed/
>
>*I don't believe that Mono "runs on more" Linux platforms than Java*
>(and I don't care about Unix)  ...   I don't know of, nor can I recall,
>a single, current Linux distro that doesn't/can't run Java.  And, I
>can't think of a single Linux distro that is *dependent*  on MONO or
>*requires* it, even if they can "run it".   There are a few Linux
>applications on some distros that are built with MONO but they can
>easily be removed without impairing the distro.
>
>_Here is the problem with MONO (.NET):_   James Plamondon, the first
>head of Microsoft's Technical Evangelist team stated it this way: "every
>line of code written to Microsoft's standard is a victory for Microsoft,
>and every line of code written to any other standard is a Microsoft
>failure."    Stated another way,  _every line of code written to
>Microsoft's standard is a failure for Linux_.    MONO development stops
>dead in its tracks and stagnates the first time Microsoft decides to put
>*further* improvements to .NET under patent protection that requires
>license fees to use, and MONO trickle downs will stop.    IF Microsoft's
>history is any judge, that is not IF, but when.   Microsoft has already
>used threats of lawsuits to divide the FOSS developer community:  In
>their agreement with Novell they promise that the only group of FOSS
>developers that would be immune from the threat of an MS lawsuit are
>ONLY those whose contributions to OpenSUSE *are included in SELS*,
>because for every copy of SELS that Novell sells they pay an IP ROYALTY
>to MS.  All other FOSS developers,  including contributors to OpenSUSE
>or working on any other distro, are under threat.
>http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/exec/steve/2006/11-02NovellInterop.mspx
>"*Novell will also make running royalty payments based on a percentage
>of its revenues from open source products.*"
>Ask  yourself what Novell is admitting to by paying royalties so they
>could get $300M from MS.  In other words, what is the reason for royalty
>payments?
>
>An MS "Hater"?  (An emotional word, shades of left-wing agendas).   But,
>I admit it.  I hate any corporation that is as corrupt and unethical as
>MS.
>
>Do you think the OOXML ISO panel stuffing was their last in a long line
>of unethical and/or immoral actions and deeds, one of which they were
>convicted twice in Federal court?  Think again.  MS is waiving the "Open
>Source" flag but only, as Bruce Perens warned, so it can destroy FOSS
>from within.  Currently MS is fighting FOSS in Europe.  They are
>stuffing of the European Open Source Strategy committes and the document
>they are writing, which will set the course for FOSS in Europe:
>http://wikileaks.org/wiki/How_to_Hijack_an_EU_Open_Source_Strategy_Paper
>
>For a complete explanation of both their "The Slog" technique and their
>"The Stuffed Panel" technique see the comes vs. Microsoft lawsuit
>website and read the PX03096.pdf, around page 53, or for a partial text
>version see http://www.groklaw.net/articlebasic.php?story=20071023002351958
>
>I retired 8 months ago after a nearly 40 year career in teaching and
>programming. I haven't always disliked MS.    I used to be an MS fan.  I
>supported my family installing and supporting Win3FWG on SOHO networks,
>and later writing custom software for SOHOs on Win95, NT4, W2K and XP
>systems using AREV, PowerBuilder, VB,  FORTH,  Java, FoxPro,
>VisualFoxPro, MSVC6++ and Qt4, to name a few tools.    I have a T-shirt
>from Microsoft with the Internet Explorer logo on it because I was one
>of the 1st 10,000 to download the first release of that browser in
>August of 1995, and I wore it proudly.   I still have it.   I wasn't
>unfaithful to MS, it was unfaithful to me, a client and developer.
>
>My first inkling that something was wrong was when I tried to install
>Win3 on top of DRDOS4.0.  I got a msg saying it would install only on
>MSDOS, but MSDOS wasn't as good as DRDOS4.   Dr Dobbs Journal ran an
>article  showing that if that section of code which flagged DRDOS was
>replaced with NOPS in a hex editor the Win3 installation proceeded as
>normal and Win3 ran very well.  In fact, better than it did on MSDOS.
>That was the first time I realized that MS was trying to tilt the
>playing field but I considered a fluke or misunderstanding and dismissed
>it.  The benefit of the doubt.    My trust in MS received a serious blow
>when it was revealed that MS used tax payers money to write their
>software by using a stock option scam.
>http://www.billparish.com/msftfraudfacts.html  Since then the MS
>corporate misbehavior and dirty tricks has continued unabated, even if
>ignored by most or justified by others.
>
>
>My favorite Microsoftism was Chief Executive Officer Steve Ballmer
>telling an audience of Eastern Washington University alumni: "Taxpayers
>in the state have to come to grips with the notion that we need to
>invest in higher education." It was a warning shot of sorts from the
>most influential CEO in the state. Ballmer had to know, however, that
>Microsoft wouldn't be footing much of the bill if taxpayers increased
>education funding. *Seven years ago, Microsoft opened a small office in
>Reno, Nev., to collect the money it got from PC manufacturers that
>installed Windows and Office on the computers they sold. In the years
>since, Microsoft has sheltered more than $60 billion in royalty revenue
>in Nevada, a state with no corporate income tax, costing Washington an
>estimated $327 million in unrealized tax revenue.*
>http://www.seattleweekly.com/2004-09-29/news/citizen-microsoft.php
>
>The sham continues:
>"There will be a lack of equity and fairness as long as state leaders
>allow Microsoft to operate with a different set of rules than other
>businesses that pay the taxes on all of their Washington-made products.
>More importantly, the state will be left without vital revenue from its
>most successful company. How large does our infrastructure deficit have
>to become before our elected leaders find the political will to
>challenge this practice?"
>http://crosscut.com/2008/02/02/microsoft/11167/
>
>Microsoft is doing EVERYTHING in its power to destroy or coop Linux and
>FOSS, and you want Linux users to adopt a "statemen's like attitude" or
>worse, shut up and get rolled over?
>GG

That is the most cogent, if long, statement of fact about M$ I've read in a 
while.  Thank you.

But I'd advise the immediate purchase of some nomex underwear and bulletproof 
clothing, cuz there are M$ lovers hidden in the corners and crannies of even 
this list.

-- 
Cheers, Gene
"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
 soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
-Ed Howdershelt (Author)
The covers of this book are too far apart.
		-- Book review by Ambrose Bierce.