Ubuntu-Pakistan Licencing reasons

[Burhan Khalid]

Mr. Khawar:

  Thank you for your response, here is mine.

On 12/6/06, Khawar Nehal <atrc.support at gmail.com> wrote:
> Dear Mr. Burhan,
>
> I have met a lot of people who use Linux to AVOID M$. Including me. So the
> logic of I have not seen any does not mean there are none.
>
> I have also seen people who show up at a 100% opensource exhibition and tell
> us in the face that they prefer NT.
> Dealing with such cases, our reaction is usually. "Good for you" and we do
> not explain further.
>
> To set the record straight. I was a MS Basher and OSS Fanatic earlier.
>
> Now we are seriously supporting IT clients and all clients need Closed
> source, shareware, OSS and other licenced softwares.
>
> We do not bash M$ for the software which is getting better and as far as I
> know beinged forced by the growing OSS market size to be more standards
> compliant or having to make new open standards.
>
> It is the attitute of licencing. Oracle and others are also closed source.
> They do not force people to pay. They have a softer policy.
>
> As far as MS is concerned I DO believe they DO NOT have the right to ask for
> money because they have been involved in false advertising. They use
> promising words like NT (New Technology) for 25 year old DEC VAX technology
> and NCSA Compatible for IIS server which happens to BE THE NCSA WEB SERVER.
> Mosiac compatible for IE which started with MOSAIC and almost all other
> software which they peddle as "Enterpriseware". For your kind info they
> temselves cannot run their own HOTMAIL on 100% Windows Servers like the OSS
> people do.

First of all, shoddy marketing exists everywhere. So to use that as an
excuse is a bit tiresome. Everyone that has been in the industry for a
while has been bombarded with all kinds of marketing spin -- and the
quality of spin that comes from Microsoft is one of the best (since
they have the dollars to pump into their marketing schemes).  Everyone
has been doing false advertising. Tobacco companies have been doing it
for years.

I don't see how running Hotmail on Windows Servers has anything to do
with what we are discussing now. You are aware that Microsoft acquired
Hotmail a long time ago, right? As you said yourself -- its never easy
to "rip the guts out" -- so maybe they are doing what they seem is
best; not fixing something that isn't broken.

> It is the exorbitant prices and false promises which M$ makes which causes
> MS bashers to exist.

As I have mentioned above, these false promises exist everywhere; so
lets not argue on that criterion. However, their prices are high --
which is a price that they know they can charge because people are
willing to pay for it.  Why? Because of any number of reasons ...
excellent marketing, people are used to Windows, training costs,
platform migration costs, long term viability -- all these are factors
that lead businesses to purchase Windows licenses -- or more
appropriate, buy into the Windows Server System. In business whose
core operations rely on their IT, cost is not the #1 factor, its is
more operational capabilities, support and long term availabilty.  Why
do you think RedHat offers enterprise support packages? Because that
is what businesses want.

In the end, they do not care of the cost, they care that it does their
job, and when it breaks (should it break) they have someone else to
blame.  That is the real cost of software.

> We are offering 95% OSS and 5% closed source options as an alternative for
> companies in Pakistan (Especially karachi) so they can make sure ALL of
> their mission critical and non critical work gets done.
>
> If companies use the LTSP solution, then they can make sure their Pentium 1s
> keep their desktop response as fast as their fastest server on which their
> applications run.

This is a bit far fetched, but I will take what message you are trying
to get across here. That is that with Linux, you can breathe new life
into otherwise obsolete hardware and thus save businesses money.

I would love to see what application you are proposing that runs on a
Pentium 1 at the same desktop response as a "fast" server.

> Since ATRC is 100% OSS for more than a decade I do nto get to see the
> strange behavior of M$ software, viruses, worms, shareware popups asking for
> money. We do no live in muree but we do live in the pure calm and reliable
> world of OSS.

I use MS software at work. I run two workstations. I do not see your
worms and shareware popups. I'm sure I don't have to tell you -- its
not the software but the operator. You can run a workstation with
proper attitude and not have to worry about such things.

I never once received a virus, worm or shareware popup from a program
developed by Microsoft. I have seen people install "junkware" that
provides these things.  The fact that there is no just "junkware" on
Linux is only a testament to the fact that Linux is not widespread on
the desktop, thus it is not a lucrative target for developers of such
programs.

To say that such programs don't affect Linux is foolish. If we want to
see Linux advance on the desktop and become more mainstream than it is
now, then we must also be prepared to acknowledge that once it becomes
popular, it will be a wider target for junkware developers.

> When we hear someone screaming from the "outside" world we get to see their
> horrific situations.
>
> We find it very unprofessional when we see a virus infection warning on a
> client's server. It signifies that the IT administrator has systems for
> which they are responsible for but have outside unauthorized softwares
> running. These softwares can be doing anything on the Admin's responsibility
> and watch.

Yes, and what is your point here? I have seen rootkits on Linux
servers and compromised machines that are running RH and sending out
thosands of spam messages.

It is all the reponsibility of the operator. If you have a properly
trained operator running a server, then the chances of such things are
minimized.

Perhaps in your case above, all that needed was for them to renew a
license for their anti-virus software, or implement proper security
procedures on their systems.

> Since OSS and Unix based technologies have been around for more than 40
> years it is unprofessional to support companies which exploit the people's
> trust in their marketing.  People have the attitute of "A company cannot be
> that bad".
>
> However they still do not know the alternatives because of the lack of OSS
> marketing budgets.  The internet and the CDROM drive of the early 1990s
> allowed the proliferation of OSS.
>
> By 2015 I do not expect a lot of closed proprietary commodity software to be
> existing on Machines. Softwares for common tasks like Browsers, chatting,
> ...
>
> Wehn I say people do not feel like paying, I do mean it. Imagine someone
> paying for a software which spits out ads or forces registrations or even
> asls for your email when almost everyone knows of a better alternative which
> comes on a 30 GB media prevalent at the time.

It is their choice to buy such software (you mentioned they paid for
it).  You can easily spend that money on buying software that doesn't
do such things.  If you are trying to allude to some software
developed by Microsoft, which one?

I have paid for the following Microsoft products:

Windows XP
Windows Server 2003
Microsoft Office Professional 2003
Visual Studio .NET

None have ever given me any kind of popup that I didn't initiate.

> I mean the computers shall already have a minimum 500 GB harddisk chock full
> of the BEST (Not commercial, NO ADS, maybe OSS) softwares available for ALL
> of the common tasks by 2015.

This is an abitious goal.

> DELL is offering Linux NOW.

So is HP/Compaq.

> We are planning on teaching hardware suppliers how to make a machine which
> would be common in 2015 now.

Is this the machine that you talked about above? With the 500 GB of
disk space and BEST OSS software? If so, this is not the machine of
2015. People have been predicting the demise of commerical software
giants like Microsoft and Oracle for a long time now.  What they don't
seem to realize is that there is a very good market for such products;
and as long as people and businesses are using computers, they will
need a company to back them up.

My prediction is that software will become a service, rather than a product.

> Not many people can see the long term trends.
>
> The prediction of MS Office for Linux was 2007 and this prediction was made
> by somebody in 1998. Way before Open office existed.

Who made this prediction? Do you have a link or a reference?

> Some OSS people can see the future up to a decade with an accuracy of +-20%

Yet some chant each year that "This is the year of Linux on the
desktop". Its all on who you ask :)

Regards,
Burhan

>
>
> On 12/6/06, Burhan Khalid < burhan.khalid at gmail.com> wrote:
> > Khawar:
> >
> >   What you are talking about could be one of two things, either its
> > WGA (Windows Genuine Advantage) which was implemented as a critical
> > security update to Windows.  This little gem sits in the background
> > and checks if your Windows license is legitimate. If it is not, it
> > will popup these reminders from time to time. Eventually, it will
> > prevent you from logging into the system.
> >
> >   The other thing that could be causing this is that somehow Windows
> > has detected a major change in your hardware and its asking you to
> > reactivate it.
> >
> > "If MS is preventing logins then I would like to see the reaction of
> people
> > to this.
> > Have the people come out with a cracked XP yet ?"
> >
> > What reaction do you expect? Microsoft has spent a lot of money and
> > resources to develop their software, and they have a right to protect
> > it just like everyone else that develops software. I don't see why
> > this is such a bad thing. It is their choice to close the source of
> > Windows, if you don't like it - you are always welcome to an alternate
> > OS :)
> >
> > I don't believe talking about pirating software is withing the
> > guidelines of Ubuntu, so I will not answer that question.
> >
> > "So the bad news is that I cannot teach prepare MS Project. This got me
> > thinking.
> > MS Software like IE and others do not work perfectly on Linux or Wine so
> if
> > MS intends to register XP then they shall also restrict MS products like
> MS
> > Project and others."
> >
> > They already do this. You must register and activate Office products,
> > and you can only activate them on two machines. If you have a
> > legitimate copy of a MS product that is not working correctly, you can
> > call their special support line for activation issues (which is almost
> > always a free call).
> >
> > "This shall force people to use Open source softwares like Imendio (which
> > they never bothered to learn about) because OSS works perfectly on Linux
> and
> > not so perfectly on Windows. In most cases OSS is available only for
> Linux."
> >
> > Well, it would force two things. Either they pay for software that
> > they need to do their job (which is what most people end up doing) or
> > they do what you said, find a free alternative.
> >
> > A lot of OSS software works perfectly on Windows too. A few examples
> > that come to mind are Open Office, Firefox and Thunderbird.
> >
> > "This new situation is cool. The more Software is available for an OS the
> > better it is. With the "great" move of restricting XP has caused MS to
> > delegate their OS in the area of Suns and Irix and other PAID OSes like
> > BeOS."
> >
> > This is a bit of wishful thinking because unless you have been living
> > in some cave in the hills of muree, you would know that Windows has
> > been around since the 80s and they have always had a closed soruce
> > model.  I don't see how you can compare Windows to "Suns" by which I
> > assume you mean Solarix, which by the way, is available for free now;
> > Irix and BeOS -- other than being payware, these operating systems do
> > not compete for the same market and are not designed for the same
> > purpose.
> >
> > "The OS is now a commodity item and the world does not feel like paying
> for
> > it."
> >
> > Which world are you talking about? The world of pirates?
> >
> > I am as big a fan as Linux, but this kind of unnecessary bashing is
> > not adding to the image of Linux or its users.  People already
> > consider us "fanatics" and "MS haters", which is not the truth. Almost
> > everyone that I have met is using Linux not because they "hate"
> > Microsoft or that they cannot afford Windows, but because its a choice
> > that they have made for other reasons -- some like the alternate
> > desktop; other enjoy Linux because it provides them access to tons of
> > software that they cannot use on Windows; some (like myself) use Linux
> > as a development OS because it has great support for development
> > software and their related services.
> >
> > Lets pull this back on track ... to the original thread topic which
> > was LiveCD on legacy machines.
> >
> > As others have mentioned, the main problem with livecds is the RAM
> > issue. Most require a lot of RAM because by nature; a LiveCD runs from
> > RAM.  The less RAM you have, the longer it will take for the system to
> > load.
> >
> > 128 RAM is minimum for a good smooth experience. 256 is even better. A
> > 486 really should be delegated to specialized distributions, like LFS
> > or Gentoo.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Burhan Khalid
> >
>
>
>
> --
>
> Khawar Nehal
>
> CEO
> Applied Technology Research Center (ATRC)
> C-55 Block A KDA Officers, Karachi 75260, Pakistan
> Voice : 92-21-4980523 Mobile :
> Karachi 92-333-2486216
> Islamabad : 0334-5339171
> Email : khawar.nehal at atrc.net.pk
> Fax : 1-734-298-6555 Web : atrc.net.pk
> Gmail account : atrc.support at gmail.com
>
> Registrar
> Preston Institute of Management, Science and Technology (PIMSAT)
> 177/2 IEP Building, Opposite Regent Plaza (Formerly Taj Mahal Hotel)
> Shahrah-a-Faisal, Karachi, Pakistan
> Voice : 92-21-2789888 to 90 Fax : 92-21-2789891
> Email : khawar at pimsat-khi.edu.pk
> General Inquiries : info at pimsat-khi.edu.pk
> Web : pimsat-khi.edu.pk
>
> "Gambling increases risk. Investing decreases risk."
>
> "God's test is simple. Who do you work for : Him or yourself ?"