decoration decoration
Stories

GROKLAW
When you want to know more... 		decoration
For layout only
Home
Archives
Site Map
Search
About Groklaw
Awards
Legal Research
Timelines
ApplevSamsung
ApplevSamsung p.2
ArchiveExplorer
Autozone
Bilski
Cases
Cast: Lawyers
Comes v. MS
Contracts/Documents
Courts
DRM
Gordon v MS
GPL
Grokdoc
HTML How To
IPI v RH
IV v. Google
Legal Docs
Lodsys
MS Litigations
MSvB&N
News Picks
Novell v. MS
Novell-MS Deal
ODF/OOXML
OOXML Appeals
OraclevGoogle
Patents
ProjectMonterey
Psystar
Quote Database
Red Hat v SCO
Salus Book
SCEA v Hotz
SCO Appeals
SCO Bankruptcy
SCO Financials
SCO Overview
SCO v IBM
SCO v Novell
SCO:Soup2Nuts
SCOsource
Sean Daly
Software Patents
Switch to Linux
Transcripts
Unix Books

Gear

Groklaw Gear

Click here to send an email to the editor of this weblog.

You won't find me on Facebook

Donate

Donate Paypal

No Legal Advice

The information on Groklaw is not intended to constitute legal advice. While Mark is a lawyer and he has asked other lawyers and law students to contribute articles, all of these articles are offered to help educate, not to provide specific legal advice. They are not your lawyers.

Here's Groklaw's comments policy.

What's New

STORIES
No new stories

COMMENTS last 48 hrs
No new comments

Sponsors

Hosting:
hosted by ibiblio

On servers donated to ibiblio by AMD.

Webmaster
Microsoft Calls AdTI "Study" an "Unhelpful Distraction"
Monday, June 14 2004 @ 11:49 PM EDT

Well, friends, we've won the Alexis de Tocqueville FUD war.

It's official. In the face of a united community's repudiation of Ken Brown's "Samizdat" attack on Linus and Linux, Microsoft told the Wall St. Journal's reporter, Lee Gomes, the report wasn't helpful, leading Gomes to end his report, "Recent attacks on Linux come from dubious source", like this:

"With growing numbers of businesses turning to Linux, its pros and cons are fair game for debate. But cynically manufacturing confusion isn't debating. Even Microsoft didn't like the way this report turned out, though it indirectly helped subsidize it. A company spokesman called the study, 'an unhelpful distraction from what matters most -- providing the best technology for our customers.'"

That is the cherry on top that dooms the report to the junk bin. I doubt that it enhances a "think tank's" reputation to be called an "unhelpful" "dubious source".

Do you think they'll put that quotation up on their web site?

I wish to commend Microsoft for repudiating this "study", which they were at least indirectly responsible for. No. Really. There is no need to be cynical today, although I'm sure we can all admit to plenty of subsidiary reactions, including a definite reaction to claiming "the best technology". But this is a day to just rejoice and let a few things slide for now.

I have a further suggestion for Microsoft, since they followed my advice about repudiating Samizdat: learn to play nice with others, distance yourself from SCO, drop what we believe are your patent-pool attack plans on GNU/Linux, actually work on providing the best technology instead, and you may find your company has a future after all. It's the Information Age now, you know. The old ham-fisted, muscle techniques will have to go, because they don't work in broad daylight, and that is exactly where you are.

I'm only kidding about them following my advice -- I have no knowledge that they followed or even knew about my previous suggestion. We've had a huge upsurge in trolls since I began highlighting the AdTI story, so maybe they did, but that isn't proof positive. If I were AdTI, I'd put out a press release, but I'm not, so I'll acknowledge it's only suggestive. They could be AdTI operatives, or SCO's, after all. Still, it was good advice. And so is this. And by the way, Bill Claybrook agrees with me. Remember when Mr. Claybrook was an Aberdeen analyst? No more. Guess what he's doing now? He's president of New River Linux & Grid Computing. Yup. The handwriting is on the wall.

You can read Gomes' story on the Wall Street Journal [update: no more; but you can find most of it here], if you have a sub, on page B1 (or search for Gomes off the home page), or via Google, which directs you to the AP, which has picked up the story.

So, as weird as it feels, we can now add Microsoft to our list of those offering rebuttals to Samizdat.

Don't forget, SCO has another teleconference today, Tuesday, at 11 AM Eastern, to tell a drooling world all about SCO's new UNIX products businesses just can't wait to buy from the company that has shown a singular propensity to sue its own erstwhile customers and partners when funds get low. I'm sure there is a line forming all around the block. No doubt they'll write a long novel for Judge Kimball about how it is all Novell's fault. The truth is people don't much like doing business with serial litigators.


  


Microsoft Calls AdTI "Study" an "Unhelpful Distraction" | 532 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
Corrections Here
Authored by: Nick Bridge on Tuesday, June 15 2004 @ 12:43 AM EDT
Corrections Here

[ Reply to This | # ]

Microsoft Calls AdTI "Study" an "Unhelpful Distraction"
Authored by: red floyd on Tuesday, June 15 2004 @ 12:44 AM EDT
'an unhelpful distraction from what matters most -- providing the best technology for our customers.'

So Microsoft is going to be providing either Linux or *BSD to their customers now?

---
The only reason we retain the rights we have is because people *JUST LIKE US* died to preserve those rights.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Second Time
Authored by: Nick Bridge on Tuesday, June 15 2004 @ 12:48 AM EDT
...I've found myself gratified by something from Microsoft.

I'll keep my cynicism to myself for a while, and be happy.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Microsoft Calls AdTI "Study" an "Unhelpful Distraction"
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, June 15 2004 @ 12:51 AM EDT
I found the report extreamly helpful. Pointing out there a lots of people out
there willing to pounce on Linux who have not idea wha they are talking about.
Also pointing out just because there educated, does not mean they have a lick of
sense. FUD POOF Linux ..... You gota love it.

[ Reply to This | # ]

What journalism can be
Authored by: TheMohel on Tuesday, June 15 2004 @ 12:57 AM EDT

Other than confusing "infer" and "imply", a pet peeve of mine for which I can forgive Mr. Gomes quite readily, this is one of the better articles I've ever read. Not just on this subject, but on any.

I'm rather a fan of the WSJ in general, because they seem to like objective reality (although they, like all media, have a bias). But when the reporter's take includes a good sample of the salient evidence, makes appropriate (but not excessive) judgments about the quality of the debate, and even includes new supporting quotes from Microsoft (that I'm thrilled to see), it's a good day for journalism. The old kind of journalism, where truth matters.

And none of it would have happened without Groklaw, because there'd have been no central clearinghouse pointing the way to all of the bits and pieces of the community's rebuttal.

[ Reply to This | # ]

  • infer vs. imply - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, June 15 2004 @ 11:29 AM EDT
A letter to my Congressman
Authored by: erehwon on Tuesday, June 15 2004 @ 01:02 AM EDT
I guess parts of my letter are a little out of date now!

***
I sent this to PJ this afternoon. (my time) she kindly suggested that I post it
as a comment.
***

On Jun 14, 2004, at 5:25 PM, David wrote:

I sent this message to my Congressman, Hon. Jim Kolbe, of the Arizona
delegation, and thought you might wish to read it and perhaps comment or
criticize. (Heaven forfend that you might criticize too harshly -- I would be
burnt, shriveled,and dimished to a mere wraith...)

You should probably chop off my phone number at the bottom.

David

*** Quoted message follows ***

Sir:

I am a volunteer with a small non-profit group (CCLAC) here in Bisbee. We
refurbish older computers, and install free and open source software on them.
Because we cannot afford proprietary software, we must use other resources. For
the operating system, instead of Windows, I install one of several 'flavors' of
Linux, I also provide an office productivity suite, (Open Office.org) and a web
browser. (Mozilla)

All of these programs are free, and the copyrights are licensed under the
GPL (The General Public License) The authors of (and proxy holders for the GPL
and a lot of GPL'd software) are the Free Software Foundation.
<www.fsf.org>

There are a number of stories developing in the news and in the software
world that cause me grave concern. Many of my concerns have to do with the
modifications of and the extensions to the Copyright Act, and frivolous
patents.

There is a new book out (freely downloadable and distributable) named _Free
Culture_, by Dr. Lawrence Lessig, that enumerates many of the problems, (some
the result of 'The law of unintended consequences') That have emerged as a
result of recent revisions to the Copyright Act. He also offers some
suggestions that might clear the current impasses that block a consistent
approach to Intellectual Property rights and the disputes that surround them.

This is Dr Lessig's home page:
<http://www.lessig.org/>

Here is the link to the PDF file:
<http://www.free-culture.cc/freeculture.pdf>

If you wish, there is a plain-text version at:
<http://www.firasd.org/scrapbook/books/lessig/freeculture.txt>

I am not as eloquent as the leaders of the Free and Open Source Software
Community, (often abbreviated F/OSS) so I offer several links to websites that
cover the 'Cream of the crop' of the main F/OSS advocacy organizations.

This is not, by any means meant to be an exhaustive list, but simply to
allow your staffers the opportunity to acquaint themselves with this very real
problem.

<www.fsf.org> The Free Software Foundation, the authors of the GPL,
the General Public License, under which most free or open source software is
licensed.

<http://www.oss-institute.org/> The Open Source Software Institute

<http://www.osdl.org/> The Open Software Development Labs, who are the
current employers of Linus Torvalds, the original author of Linux, and currently
the project manager of the Linux Kernel Project.

<www.pubpat.org> The Public Patent Foundation who are seeking
de-certification by re-examination of a frivolous patent issued to Microsoft
Corporation. Their chartered purpose is to force re-examination of frivolous
patents in general, and in particular those that might be intended to strangle
the open source community.

<www.groklaw.net> A website run by paralegal Pamela Jones, dedicated
to conveying up-to-date information about the various SCO (Nasdaq [SCOX])
lawsuits involving IBM, Novell, RedHat, Autozone, and Daimler-Chrysler. Her
website is viewed regularly by members of the F/OSS community, by attorneys for
all the parties involved in the various disputes, by many other attorneys who
are simply following the cases, and (probably) the law clerks for the several
judges in the various jurisdictions.

Her site is valuable for two reason: If you simply wish to follow the
minutiae of the various lawsuits, there is a timeline stretching from SCO's
first press releases 18 months ago, to rulings made just a few days ago in the
Novell and IBM actions.

The second, and probably more important function her website serves, is to
make available in one place the combined (open source again!) talents, and
knowledge of thousands of people involved in the open source community, by
implementing Linus Torvald's observation, "...that with many eyes, all bugs
are shallow." (That is generally accepted to mean that with a lot of
observers, the truth is easy to determine.)

These people are the people who actually wrote a lot of the code that now
runs America and the world. There are historians and programmers, professors,
executives, and all manner of folks who simply want to see their ideals
fulfilled.

<www.adti.net> I include this website for the Alexis de Tocqueville
Institution as a counterpoint. They have self-published a book, _Samizdat_,
written by one, Ken Brown, that purports to cast doubt upon the legitimacy of
Linus Torvalds, Linux and it contributors. It is significant that most, if not
all of his interviewees have denied that they said what Brown claims that they
said, and the open source community has roundly criticized the book as a 'paid
hatchet job' The main reason for thinking so is the fact that Microsoft is a
regular and beneficent contributor to their Institution. It might or not be
relevant that the names of all their contributors have been elided from the
public versions of their Form 990's

I know this is a lot of work, and a lot of stuff to read, but the situation
is so serious, that it needs to be addressed, and addressed decisively. I would
recommend that you speak with Rep. Rick Boucher, who has recently introduced
some legislation that will, perhaps, deal with many of the concerns expressed
here.

I respect your integrity and intelligence (as well, of course, as your staff
people) and hope that you look into these, and related concerns.

You may, of course, contact me by phone or email, should you feel the need
for more information.

Sincerely,

David M Wilson
<erehwon@cableone.net>

*** End quoted message ***

---
I'm old. I'm grumpy. Get over it.

[ Reply to This | # ]

This Is Great!
Authored by: dmscvc123 on Tuesday, June 15 2004 @ 01:05 AM EDT
First SCO gets the bad rulings, then they get the bad earnings report and now
this. I do hope that AdTI stays in business since they are so entertaining.
Maybe next AdTI can write books on why the sea is boiling hot and whether pigs
have wings.

[ Reply to This | # ]

I Concur
Authored by: MikeA on Tuesday, June 15 2004 @ 01:16 AM EDT
I have to concur with PJ that Microsoft deserves credit for coming out and saying the whole thing was a waste of time, and not very useful to either side. (I don't like to think of it as "sides", but that is how it seems somedays.) Even if it was in their best interest to do so, it was the last thing I expected MS to do, so I guess that's why I am impressed. That, as PJ pointed out, is how we expect companies to conduct themselves today, and it gains our respect.

I was particularly interested to see that the article comes right out and says MS partly funded the study. My tinfoil hat fell off when I read that. (It has been kinda loose lately....getting worn out, I guess.)

Anyway, one small battle in a greater war.

What will ADti have on their website now.....now that they aren't "Ground Zero" for the BIG Debate anymore??

---
Change is merely the opportunity for improvement.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Microsoft Calls AdTI "Study" an "Unhelpful Distraction"
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, June 15 2004 @ 01:17 AM EDT
I just wanna say this is the best web site on the net !
I check it everyday (I'm a Linux user) to keep up to date. And.. PJ, if your
not married, I'm available !

[ Reply to This | # ]

AdTI and SCO?
Authored by: mr.mighty on Tuesday, June 15 2004 @ 01:22 AM EDT
Between AdTI's ridiculous attacks on linux, SCO's ridiculous attacks on linux,
and the SCO legal team's awful performance in the courts, I'm left to wonder if
they're all the same group. When AdTI is around, SCO disappears. When SCO shows
up in court, the AdTI is never there. Just like a brain-dead version of Clark
Kent and Superman.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Gulp....
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, June 15 2004 @ 01:26 AM EDT
I'm sober- really I am... did I just read this?

Yes I did!

Did I?

Oh my.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Begging the question...
Authored by: RedBarchetta on Tuesday, June 15 2004 @ 01:29 AM EDT
This all begs the question... who, then, co-erced AdTI into writing such a report? Judging by this news, Microsoft didn't directly initiate or fund it.

This leaves one remaining suspect: The SCO Group!

---
Collaborative efforts synergise.

[ Reply to This | # ]

It's just one more strategy for Microsoft
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, June 15 2004 @ 01:29 AM EDT
Even when Microsoft is telling the truth, they're still lying.

They're still lying because they have no actual intention to tell the truth.
Microsoft speaks strategically -- they only say what they think will gain them
the greatest advantage. Sometimes, that _happens_ to correspond with the truth,
like a broken clock that tells the right time twice a day. :-)

In this case, Microsoft is trying to distance themselves from the AdTI because
Ken Brown's report is producing the opposite to its intended effect.

The report has been repudiated by multiple sources, and the report has been
associated with Microsoft propaganda.

Thus, when people (including government officials) read the report, instead of
seeing it as evidence of what's wrong with Linux, they're seeing it as evidence
of what's wrong with Microsoft.

[ Reply to This | # ]

OT. SCO's most recent financials available.
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, June 15 2004 @ 01:31 AM EDT
Seen on lwn.net

[ Reply to This | # ]

A parody of SCO finances
Authored by: bsm2003 on Tuesday, June 15 2004 @ 01:54 AM EDT
Warning Put down Drinks

Here

[ Reply to This | # ]

Microsoft's attitude
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, June 15 2004 @ 02:30 AM EDT
> Well, friends, we've won the Alexis de Tocqueville FUD war.

It is only a battle. We've a long way before we win the war.

Like the patents battle. And corporate / client / politicians' attitudes.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Earth to Maureen...
Authored by: belzecue on Tuesday, June 15 2004 @ 02:53 AM EDT
I'm looking forward to reading the transcript of that recent Twilight Zone episode dressed up as SCO's latest financial conference call.

Maureen O'Gara.... Egads, where to begin. As the principal monkey wrangler ('Forget SCO's abysmal financials and look over there, everyone!'), Dr Seuss on 'shrooms couldn't have done it better. She did a great job refocusing immediately on the German stock exchange thing. But, my gosh, what was with the long pauses, stumbling thought process, and fifth-grader mentality? Despite her contempt for the FOSS community, I don't wish to defame her character, but what the heck was that performance suppose to achieve? It made her look bad and it did the conference no good to have so much 'dead air'...

[ Reply to This | # ]

SCO 10q Filing
Authored by: MikeA on Tuesday, June 15 2004 @ 03:14 AM EDT
"Research and development:"

"...The increase in research and development expense [13%]....was primarily attributable to increased personnel and related costs attributable to development work and enhancements of our two UNIX operating system products..."

Horay! I read this and I said to myself...maybe SCO is learning. While they have been laying off people in all the other departments, they have been hiring people in R&D! Good for them, they have learned they can't just be a litigation firm any more!

And tomorrow they are going to announce some all their new software offerings....

....and then I read the next paragraph:

"For the last two quarters of fiscal year 2004, we anticipate the dollar amount of research and development expenses will decrease compared to the secondquarter of fiscal year 2004 due to recently implemented cost reductions."

AKA: A 13% layoff in R&D

Thanks for your help, guys. Great software you wrote! This will come in handy! Now, security will show you to the door...."

Oh, well.

---
Change is merely the opportunity for improvement.

[ Reply to This | # ]

I don't buy it
Authored by: jkondis on Tuesday, June 15 2004 @ 03:17 AM EDT
Sorry, there's just nothing not to be cynical about.

M$FT blatantly arranges and funds Caldera/The SCO Group to sue Linux users and
spew anti-Linux FUD (up to and *including* the idea that Linux is stolen from
Unix) and now they say the AdTI report is "unhelpful" while they plug
their products? They buy bogus software licenses from the Caldera/The SCO Group
racketeers to fund and exert influence on their crusade against Linux, and
people shouldn't be cynical?

I know that no one has forgotten, but let me remind you anyway: in the year+
that Groklaw has been online, almost every major lie campaign directed against
Linux has turned out to have M$FT's fingers in it. Halloween X, ABI Licenses,
or Enderle, anyone? AdTI is just another in a long chain of these lies.

Truth is always a good thing, but come on, there's a context here! Call a spade
a spade!

IMHO this is nothing more than damage control for their public image. Does
anyone think that this "truth" that M$FT now pronounces would have
been spoken by them if Linux users, IT professionals, and too many others to
name hadn't spoken with outrage and contempt at the M$FT-funded
"study"? Do you really REALLY think they wouldn't have just sat by
and watch "samizdat" destroy Linus and Linux developers' reputations,
even if they knew it was outright lies and that it was their money paying for
it? Three words: I don't thinkso.

It's going to take a heckuva lot more "truthfulness" before many
people, including myself, cease to be cynical regarding M$FT.

FWIW this "research" may have been just vaporware all along. As
others here have postulated, maybe it was never meant to be published, just to
be described as "According to a study by AdTI due out later this year,
Linus Torvalds and Linux developers are all liars..." by the press. Just
enough to get the honest people angry and to get the attention of the PHBs with
baseless facts that then never actually make their libelous existence real. If
that's the case, then this statement by M$FT may just be the easy way out. They
heroically denounce the "research" while the book is quietly
cancelled as was originally intended. Or is the tinfoil just on too tight?

And BTW Bill, it's not a jihad it's a revolution.

---
Don't steal. Microsoft hates competition.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Microsoft and SAP
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, June 15 2004 @ 04:14 AM EDT
Hello all

thought I would throw this in, as I have not seen any mention anywhere else. The
British IT press is running stories on how the Oracle v. PeopleSoft case
(currently going through U.S. anti-competition law ?) has thrown up the fact
that Microsoft and SAP recently discussed a merger. Apparently both sides came
to the conclusion it would be too complex and painful.

However what should be taken into account is the vast size of MS "war
chest" and that fact that it could contemplate this. I have seen figures
suggesting the following market valuations:

MS $287 Billion
IBM $151 Billion
HP $67 Billion
Oracle $60 Billion
SAP $52 Billion
EMC $28 Billion
Accenture $24 Billion
Sun $14 Billion

Now although MS have never paid more than the $1.4 Billion it layed out for
Navision, it could buy out IBM if it wanted to !

It doesn't do this because as it noted with the SAP deal, its all horribly
complicated, however what happens if Sun open sources Solaris, and then MS steps
in and buys Sun for a paltry $15 billion (yes, pay over the odds to make sure
you get the share holders on side), sells the Sparc processor to Fujitsu-Siemens
and then starts using Sun's "IP" against us ?

A purely fictious scenario, but I am sure you can see where I am coming from !

Jed (in the UK)

[ Reply to This | # ]

check this out on ADTI.net
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, June 15 2004 @ 04:17 AM EDT
Open source tip of the day. Open-sourcers hate to pay for copyrighted material
-- even when it's the much-admired prose of Lee Gomes at The Wall Street
Journal. How to read Gomes for free, given the strict copyright policies at
Dow-Jones? Answer: click here, to be whisked to Linux Today, where there's a
large archive of links to many of Gomes's magazine and Journal articles, posted
free at sites such as lucifer.com, news.excite.com, and even zdnet.com. "I
always read Gomes off the Linux Today links," chirps a correspondent to
AdTI's message boards. Warning: Sometimes the links go down, as the DJ
barristers comb the world for pirated Journal content. "I have one word for
you in that case," another Gomes fan writes: "google cache." Well
two words. "But it beats having to shell out $300 for the
d---Journal."

[ Reply to This | # ]

Let's do Kremlinology on Microsoft
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, June 15 2004 @ 04:56 AM EDT
This is an admission by Microsoft that it is a "distraction". Why
should it be distracted if it has nothing to do with it? This implies that they
were hoping, at one point, that something "helpful" would come out
from this study. That is, they paused for a while from "providing the best
technology for our customer" and see if Ken Brown help them with an easier
method. Now they realize they have been distracted, and let's return back to
providing technology.

[ Reply to This | # ]

OT: City of Bergen, Norway to convert to FOSS.
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, June 15 2004 @ 06:02 AM EDT
As reported in todays Aftenposten ("The Evening Mail" in Norwegian -
Norway's largest daily newspaper), the city of Bergen (Norway's second largest
city, situated beautifully amongst mountains and fiords ;-) has decided to go
Linux:

"...[Bergen] county's central databases and educational network, which
today are running on Windows or Unix, will switch to Linux within the end of
this year.
This means that 15,000 administrative employees, more than 35,000 school
children and teachers at more than 100 schools in Norway's second largest city
will be controlled by Linux-based systems..."

They cite cost reductions, security and stability, and freedom from being tied
up with one vendor as benefits of switching to an open source platform. They're
also contemplating using Linux for office applications and in elementary school
teaching.

Original article here (Norwegian):
http://www.aftenposten.no/nyheter/nett/article809575.ece

:-)

[ Reply to This | # ]

good move
Authored by: pyrite on Tuesday, June 15 2004 @ 06:18 AM EDT
I think this is a very good move on Microsoft's part. I tend to see large
companies like that as sort of being in a situation where "one hand doesn't
know what the other hand is doing", so while this is a good move on their
part, whether or not the company as a whole has learned anything from this is a
good question.

I think that is just something that tends to happen whenever you have a very
large organization; I think it's inevitable. That's probably why people go to
get those MBA's - so that they can try to get some kind of control over these
types of huge organizations and make some sense out of them.

The impression that I am under that in any organization the size of Microsoft,
you are going to have individuals who have the power and the authority to try to
pull off this kind of stuff. Perhaps there will be an internal investigation and
a reassesment of why these types of things go on.

In any case, I still support an individual's choice of operating systems or
computer software, and I don't really have any problem with anyone that decides
that Microsoft is the best software for their particular purpose.

It's definitely in Microsoft's best interests to be helpful and supportive of
individuals' rights to choose to use Linux or BSD, because if this turns into a
partisan issue, it's not going to be good for either Linux or Microsoft, and the
freedom of people to choose what is best for them will be dictated by their
political affiliations instead of their actual needs and preferences. At least
in the US, that is.

Let the customers choose. Provide the customer with accurate information, so the
customer can make an informed decision. What could be better than that? There
are lots of people who like Windows, and will continue to use Windows. I think
that in the end, this will work out just fine.

P.S. What about a Microsoft "flavor" of Linux?

[ Reply to This | # ]

Microsoft Calls AdTI "Study" an "Unhelpful Distraction"
Authored by: blacklight on Tuesday, June 15 2004 @ 06:25 AM EDT
"Instead, Mr. Toptygin, appalled by the way Mr. Brown was ignoring the
evidence, posted his work online. (He also refused his paycheck.)" Lee
Gomes

Tpotygin is a class act. He deserves the thanks of the Open Source community for
doing the right thing, even though it cost him and even though he could have
used the money. I hope somebody reputable hires him.

[ Reply to This | # ]

OT a way to counter M$ FUD
Authored by: globularity on Tuesday, June 15 2004 @ 06:29 AM EDT
It just occurred to me that it might be good PR for companies like IBM, Red hat
Novell and the like could have some sort of "tractor plant tour"
showing the local congressmen how software is developed, what source code is,
how version control works how many different platforms can be compiled for from
one version of the source. Of course show them exactly what open source is,
there should be no need for PR spin, just the facts and cover any possible M$
FUD areas. Also it will give the congressmen some idea of the fact that there is
both money and votes behind it. More importantly when M$ comes up to them waving
bundles of cash they might decide it is not necessarily in their interest to
accept.
I am not necessarily anti M$ but the market has taught Novell and IBM some hard
lessons and they have emerged better companies for it M$ needs the same lesson.
Anybody who remembers how IBM and Novell used to be will know how much their
attitude to their customers has improved of late.

My A$0.02

Mark

[ Reply to This | # ]

Microsoft Calls AdTI "Study" an "Unhelpful Distraction"
Authored by: Jude on Tuesday, June 15 2004 @ 06:35 AM EDT
Implicit in the phrase "unhelpful distraction" is the admission that
M$ regards some distractions as helpful. Otherwise, they would have just called
it a "distraction".

[ Reply to This | # ]

Microsoft Calls AdTI "Study" an "Unhelpful Distraction"
Authored by: blacklight on Tuesday, June 15 2004 @ 06:58 AM EDT
"In the face of a united community's repudiation of Ken Brown's
"Samizdat" attack on Linus and Linux" PJ

The repudiation was effective because of its methodology: groklaw and PJ took
the lead, gathered the facts and put them out to the world. In other words, our
repudiation was terminally effective because we stayed away from polemics.

At the end of the day, our demonstrated effectiveness in snuffing out FUD will
be a key factor in the decision of any corporate entity to avoid starting FUD
wars.

[ Reply to This | # ]

OT: Bug discovered wandering around Linux Land
Authored by: archonix on Tuesday, June 15 2004 @ 07:06 AM EDT
Helsinki: A previously unknown species of bug has been discovered lurking in the
hitherto virgin territory oft referred to as Kerneland. This new species,
nicknamed "Minimus Nonsensica" until properly classified, has only
been spotted once and was unfortunately squashed flat when its discover, one
Linus Torvalds, sat down on it whilst writing an epic poem of the hsitory of the
land.

The bug is considered dangerous only if you can penetrate the dense jungle and
security fences surround Kerneland and then introduce another small creature
known as a 'daemon' in to the bug's nest.

Kerneland is a popular port of call for bug-hunters, despite the fact that bugs
are so rarely found, and is a rapidly growing centre for commerce and industry,
despite some recent false controversy over the historical accuracy of its
foundation raised by AdTI researcher Kenny McCormick, who has also claimed that
Mr Torvalds was unable to write more than one word a day.

---
The only money being made here is by Sue, Grabbit and Rune.

[ Reply to This | # ]

OT: ADTI website
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, June 15 2004 @ 07:11 AM EDT

Does anyone else think that the adti website (http://www.adti.net) is the
slimest website they've read in recent history - not to mention one of the
poorest and inelegant?

Considering that they recieve funding in the millions, you would think it would
be possible to create an internet presence that inspires a sense of
professionality and competency.

Not to mention the self agrandizement going on:
- 'a tour de force'
- 'the right prescription', 'cogent'

Right at the bottom is this little gem:

Images used on this site are copyrighted to AdTI <b>or have been gathered
from non-copyrighted sources or with the permission of the copyright holder, to
the best of our knowledge</b>

Finally, when zdnet, or other news sites place their own articles based on
WSJ's, they do so with permission, having business relationships with WSJ to do
so. Thus WSJ remains compensated for their work. This is just another example of
K.B trying to spin everything to make the F/OSS community appear dishonest,
immoral, and unethical.

[ Reply to This | # ]

At least they didn't say:
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, June 15 2004 @ 07:30 AM EDT
This is an "unhelpful distraction". Now if you will excuse us, we have
to go concentrate on SCO...

[ Reply to This | # ]

AdTI Accomplishments
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, June 15 2004 @ 07:54 AM EDT

On the page with AdTI's mission statment, there are a couple of links to their accomplishments:

No accomplishments yet I suppoose.

Also, there are no links to "View the Crew" or "Staff & Associates" on the mission statment page. I guess they don't want their faces to be known.

// Magnus

[ Reply to This | # ]

FOSS wins this battle but the war is far from over
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, June 15 2004 @ 08:17 AM EDT
I am glad to see Microsoft has repudiated this study, however this does not
change their overall objective:

http://www.informit.com/articles/printerfriendly.asp?p=174156

"Make no mistake: Microsoft really hates the web. The new browser war may
appear to be about the emergence of Mozilla and friends with their polished
eye-candy interfaces, but it's really about Microsoft versus the W3C. Internet
Explorer is Microsoft's blocking tactic?never to be properly web-compliant,
never to give the W3C a day in the sun?and Longhorn technology is the big-stick
alternative being built. One of the purposes of Longhorn is to destroy the web
as we know it."

FOSS is a roadblock to this goal and Microsoft will not give up easily.
Hopefully increased popularity will continue to win converts to FOSS and allow
others to realize that there are alternatives to the Microsoft hegemony.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Trolls?
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, June 15 2004 @ 08:26 AM EDT

PJ said:

"... I'm only kidding about them following my advice -- I have no knowledge that they followed or even knew about my previous suggestion. We've had a huge upsurge in trolls since I began highlighting the AdTI story, so maybe they did, but that isn't proof positive. If I were AdTI, I'd put out a press release, but I'm not, so I'll acknowledge it's only suggestive. They could be AdTI operatives, or SCO's, after all. ..."

I wouldn't be so quick to assume that people who disagree with you on one point or another are SCO operatives or trolls.

For example, I brought you to task for what I regarded as unjustifiably strident comments about certain conditions ADTI placed on redistribution of their report. I still think that if you don't want to agree to the terms for downloading the report, then you just shouldn't do it, and that you didn't have to invoke the ghost of "King Jehoikim of the Bible book of Jeremiah" and visions of knives and burning books. I admit that you didn't directly call me a troll for that, but others here strongly suggested that. I think you ought to make clear to them what you think a troll is.

People here may want to review the "Linux Advocacy mini-HOWTO" Canons of Conduct, available at

http://www.ibiblio.org/pub/Linux/docs/HOWTO/other-formats/pdf/Advocacy.pdf

(sorry, I don't know how to make that an active link)

where, among other things, it is stated:

"...Refrain from name-calling ... Avoid hyperbole and unsubstantiated claims at all costs. It's unprofessional and will result in unproductive discussions. ... Always remember that if you insult or are disrespectful to someone, their negative experience may be shared with many others. ..."

You usually follow that rule fairly well, but you could have avoided hyperbole by refraining from the biblical book-burning reference and asserting simply that the manner in which the report is being offered suggests a lack of confidence that the report will stand up to informed criticism. Moreover, as someone else suggested, the terms under which the report was being made available said nothing at all about prohibiting criticism of the report, which you and many others were already doing.

Even though you were not the one to call me this, I am not an "ADTI apologist." I have been running Linux since about 1994 or 1995, starting with Slackware continuing with many other distributions since then. I admit to forcing my browser to lie by saying that I am running Windows most of the time, but that prevents many web sites from annoying me with "upgrade your browser" messages.

I suggest that you might want to post the Canons of Conduct from the Linux Advocacy mini-HOWTO on your site for everyone to read and to follow.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Class Action IPO
Authored by: LarryVance on Tuesday, June 15 2004 @ 08:42 AM EDT
Has there been, or is there any information about the Class Action Suit for IPO
issues by 300 people. This is listed in the SEC filings.

---
IAAE - TGIANAL
Larry Vance

[ Reply to This | # ]

Microsoft Calls AdTI "Study" an "Unhelpful Distraction"
Authored by: photocrimes on Tuesday, June 15 2004 @ 08:49 AM EDT
Now this is fun.

First there is the ADTI yahoo group:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/tq/

Which list the contact:

Suite 2400
Montreal, Quebec H3B 4W5

Telephone: XXX-XXX-XXXX
Facsimile: XXX-XXX-XXXX
Email: emeritus@adti.net
Contact: Dave Ryan, Gregory Fossedal, Dan Buck
Special thanks to: Gustave de Beaumont, ami de Tocqueville

Google cache gives up the "whole" address:

You can contact the society at: 1000 de la Gauchetiere Street West Suite 2400
Montreal,
Quebec H3B 4W5

Which then points us at the offices of a very large Software & Service
company:

http://www.tibco.com/company/worldwide_offices.jsp?m=b7

This office, same phone exchange btw. Comapny PBX system:

Montreal, Quebec
TIBCO Software Canada Inc.
1000 de la Gauchetiere Street,
Suite 2400
Montreal, Quebec H3B 4W5
Canada
Phone: 514-448-XXXX
Fax: 514-247-XXXX

Who would want to put a dent in OSS? Well have a peek at their
"partners"

http://www.tibco.com/company/partners/service.jsp?m=c1

Just keeps getting better don't it?

---
//A picture is worth a thousand words//

[ Reply to This | # ]

Microsoft Calls AdTI "Study" an "Unhelpful Distraction"
Authored by: greybeard on Tuesday, June 15 2004 @ 09:00 AM EDT
Gee, and I would have bet good money that it is no longer possible to embarrass
the Czar of Redmond. Imagine that. I suppose the check cleared, all the same.

---
-greybeard-

[ Reply to This | # ]

Truth in cartoons? yes, indeed...
Authored by: darthaggie on Tuesday, June 15 2004 @ 09:01 AM EDT
This cartoon is probably a more accurate representation of what Uber...errr...Microsoft would really like to say.

[ Reply to This | # ]

ESR, not Linus
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, June 15 2004 @ 09:02 AM EDT
The "Many eyes make all bugs shallow" quote originated with Eric
Raymond, not Linus.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Drooling over SCO
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, June 15 2004 @ 09:15 AM EDT
"Don't forget, SCO has another teleconference today, Tuesday, at 11 AM Eastern, to tell a drooling world all about SCO's new UNIX products businesses just can't wait to buy from the company that has shown a singular propensity to sue its own erstwhile customers and partners when funds get low"

Is this "drooling with anticipation" or "drooling because of a lobotomy"? :)

-gumnos

[ Reply to This | # ]

OT: Wanted Court documents
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, June 15 2004 @ 09:22 AM EDT
Showing ADTI for the coniving disassembling dishonest and unsupported foolish
fantasists that they are, is kind of amusing, but any news on the new court
filings:

SCO v IBM
==-=====

There are two new transcripts on the court dockett. These appear to be of
conferences that we were aware happened, but of which we never previously aware
of the content:

0-0
Filed: 06/09/04
Entered: 06/09/04
Transcript of Proceedings
tn proc
-/-/- - -

blk

1503347
Docket Text: Transcript of Proceedings for date(s) of 10/31/03 Status
Cnf. Court Reporter: Geri Jardine
0-0
Filed: 06/09/04
Entered: 06/09/04
Transcript of Proceedings
tn proc
-/-/- - -

blk

1503348
Docket Text: Transcript of Proceedings for date(s) of 11/21/03 Status
Cnf. Court Reporter: Geri Jardine

Additionally I think SCO's reply in support of their motion to dismiss or stay
IBM's 10th counterclaim was due yesterday 6/14 (I can't see that they've got
another extension, they've already had two, the 2nd of which for 2 weeks)

I'm not sure when due, but I think SCO's reply in opposition to IBM's partial
summary judgement motion is also imminently due, possibly was due yesterday
6/14


Red Hat v SCO
==========

I *think* Red Hat's filing in support of their motion for reconsideration should
be due and done already - but I'm not sure


SCO v DC
=======

I *think* that SCO must have answered DC's motion for summary disposition, and
DC replied in support by now, but I'm not sure

[ Reply to This | # ]

Cartoon view at Chris Wright's 'Ubersoft'
Authored by: TheOldBear on Tuesday, June 15 2004 @ 09:25 AM EDT
The Help Desk comic for 15 June 2004.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Not the first MS retraction
Authored by: dgetzin on Tuesday, June 15 2004 @ 09:37 AM EDT
Not many people noticed but 3 weeks ago the "get the facts" web site
had a new "Study" by Bearing Point. this was not a TCO but a
comparison of aquisition costs for a large and modest size buisness to deploy
Windows, Redhat and SUSE. Of course it concluded that MS was cheaper. the good
news is that they included all the data. The Funny news is that they made a
couple of very large and simple errors in their calulation. Namely the price in
the spreadsheet for Win2003 was much less costly than the pretend negotiated
price. fixing this error reversed the results and 4 days after I noticed it -
it was removed. Coincidently, MS and Bearing Point had also just announced a
deeper relationship. ;-)

MS's statement just conceeds that this FUD attempt failed and they are trying to
buy an ounce of credibility by saying so (with never admitting it was probably
their Idea or $ that got Brown going in the first place).

the Bearing Point incident just shows that MS has a strategy of encouraging
partners and third parties to take shots of all sorts against Linux and if they
stick or have lasting FUD (like SCO) they milk it. Alternatively, if like Brown
or Bearing Point, they FUD is put down or proved lies (or errors), they distance
themselves - with plausible deniability.

Maybe we ought to document in one spot all of the attacks on linux that have
links to MS...

PS I still have the "study" and the teaser text that introduces it.
for anyone interested

[ Reply to This | # ]

an "Unhelpful Distraction" from MS's effort to provide the best technology
Authored by: Jeetje on Tuesday, June 15 2004 @ 09:42 AM EDT
I know I've been suffering from a lack of sleep lately, so if anybody wants to
call me paranoid I won't hold it against them. Just bear with me, because I
think I see a pattern emerging...

SCO is lagging and dragging, no doubt about it. They are litigating themselves
to kingdom come, and if these lawsuits won't do them in then the fat paychecks
for the management will. There is no doubt in my mind that SCO management is
upping the burnrate on purpose. The big question that had been bugging me up
'till a week ago was: 'What will happen when (not if) SCO goes belly up?'

Now I have spent the better part of an hour reading through the stipulated
protective order, and although IANAL I agree it specifically excludes SCO people
from the happy few who can take a peek at AIX and Dynix/ptx code.

However, one slip of the tongue in the last few months revealed SCO techies have
spent hours on end 'comparing' SCO source code to AIX and Dynix source code. Now
any techie would know better than to do that by hand, so let's assume they made
sure they had a digital version 'made available' to compare to SCO source
code... Is that a strange assumption? Is it more strange to assume they kept
that version on a central server, to streamline the group effort of those
techies? Is it even stranger to assume that server has been backed up each and
every night, to avoid losing all the progress thus far, considering they are
forced to work on a very tight schedule?

And still they want more source code, of each and every version of AIX since the
Stone Ages...

Furthermore, SCO has been exceptionally forthcoming with information of the
ins-n-outs of their business in discovery. They want IBM to do the same,
preferebly from the highest echelons...

So, who will be held accountable, and liable, if and when it comes to light
other parties have gotten hold of the entire AIX codebase? Who would benefit
most from access to the complete codebase of AIX and Dynix/ptx, once SCO goes
belly up? Who would love to see David Boies lose his reputation over 'misplaced'
confidential information?

My prediction for the near future: within the timeframe of bankrupcy, MS will
have a majority of SCO shares...

Please, call me paranoid and put my mind at ease! I will catch some zzzz's
tonight after this morning's exam (the reason for my paranoia ;) but I'd just
love to try and get a better view of the big picture....

[ Reply to This | # ]

WSJ Placement of the Article
Authored by: joef on Tuesday, June 15 2004 @ 10:00 AM EDT
Most of the time this sort of thing gets buried deep in the bowels of a
newspaper. I'm impressed that the article appeared on page B1 of the WSJ and
that it was as long, detailed, and accurate as it is. For those geeky types who
may be unfamiliar with the WSJ, the B section is where the technology news
resides, and its front page has the business news with the major articles.

I believe this qualifies as a major PR success for the Groklaw white hats.

[ Reply to This | # ]

OT, but not: web sites using akadns.net sites are unavailable
Authored by: phrostie on Tuesday, June 15 2004 @ 10:03 AM EDT
thanks. i was having trouble last night.
this may explain it.

---
=====
phrostie
Oh I have slipped the surly bonds of DOS
and danced the skies on Linux silvered wings.
http://www.freelists.org/webpage/snafuu

[ Reply to This | # ]

Slightly OT: Why focus on microsoft technology?
Authored by: cjdj on Tuesday, June 15 2004 @ 10:14 AM EDT
Based on a lot of the comments I see in here, I am sure that I'll get some flak
for saying this... but I think that the jabs on microsoft technology is somewhat
shallow and probably more destructive for our cause than it has been in the
past.

First off, I am a Linux user. I love to use Linux. I get frustrated with many
of the problems with Windows and microsoft products. But I ALSO get frustrated
with linux and open source products.

Now I am definately NOT pro microsoft. As far as a company goes, I think they
are pretty darn aweful. Their tactics are un-ethical at best.

But lets be honest here for a moment. Attacking microsoft technology is not
going to sound very convincing to those that are the ones in most need of
confincing.

Sure, most of microsofts technology is built on the bones of shattered
competition and shoddy dealings. But for the most part, it 'seems' to work
better than linux.

I just installed linux on my wifes computer, and she is not complaining too
much. But the Lexmark inkjet printer I have does not seem to want to work on
linux (and I have spent about 8 hours trying to get it to work, it took maybe 5
minutes to get working in windows). There is some funky font spacing issue
which makes some webpages look aweful. Not to mention that so many webpages out
there dont work well on anything except IE. In order to run the latest games
in linux I must use Wine, which is not very Ideal. First time loading of
applications in linux is slower (untill all the different the libraries get in
ram). Whenever I play movie clips on that computer, there are sorts of blips
and bloops and skipped parts. Clips play just fine on the same computer in
Windows Media Player.

Now, the reason why things work better on windows is a sad story of strong-arm
tactics, anti-competitive behaviour, and probably a dozen other things, for
which (in my opinion) they should be held accountable for.

But if you sit a CEO of a company down in front of a computer with a printer,
scanner and CD-burner, and get him to install Windows XP, he probably wont have
much trouble getting the software and hardware working. Now get him to install a
Linux distro on that same hardware, and he will probably have a very different
experience.

Servers on the other hand are a different story. Microsoft servers are a joke.
This whole comment is mostly about the desktop, which is where MOST people get
their first-hand experience from.

Anyway, I've rambled on already, and not even made all the points I wanted to
make, but I think I will stop here.

In summary, attack microsofts morals, business decisions, legal whoring, and
other things, but I think we discredit linux if we attack microsoft technology
saying it is inferior or doesnt work, etc. Because for most peoples experience,
it does work, and they wouldnt beleive anything else we have to say.

[ Reply to This | # ]

OT: Red Hat CFO resigns
Authored by: Nivuahc on Tuesday, June 15 2004 @ 10:16 AM EDT

Red Hat exec resigns just before results

The Linux firm's chief financial officer has announced he is leaving to 'pursue other interests' just three days before the publication of its quarterly results

---
My Doctor says I have A.D.D... He just doesn't understand. It's not like... Hey! Look at that chicken!

[ Reply to This | # ]

Microsoft Calls AdTI "Study" an "Unhelpful Distraction"
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, June 15 2004 @ 10:17 AM EDT
Here's a thought: now that news.google.com seems to be reachable (most of the time :-/ ) I'm perdiodically doing a search for:

microsoft adti unhelpful distraction

...just to prime the pump, as it were.

So far, news.google.com seems to be unaware:

"Your search - microsoft adti unhelpful distraction - did not match any documents.

Suggestions:
Make sure all words are spelled correctly.
Try different keywords.
Try more general keywords.
Try fewer keywords.
Also, you can browse today's headlines on the Google News homepage."

I don't know if this will really *do* anything, but what the hey...

t_t_b

---
I immediately archive every Groklaw page to which I make a comment, for the record.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Corporate Culture and Change
Authored by: CustomDesigned on Tuesday, June 15 2004 @ 10:18 AM EDT
Instead of always railing against the latest evil schemes from Microsoft, I
often like to imagine what Microsoft would do were they to have a corporate
"born again" experience. Corporations do change. Remember that IBM
was once every bit as evil and rapacious as Microsoft, fiercely defending their
mainframe monopoly by any means, legal or illegal. Like MS, they were the
subject of several anti-trust lawsuits - all delayed until irrelevant.

But people retired, and new people came in. Around 1980, the new people
experimented with a radical idea implemented by an independent business unit:
produce a small computer with completely open specs. The IBM XT was born.
Unlike most other computer products (outside the hobby industry), the IBM XT
Technical Manual (I still treasure a copy) had complete circuit diagrams of
every adapter card, and a breadboard card for developing your own adapter! To
IBM's surprise, the IBM XT was wildly profitable - despite the lack of vendor
lock in - and remained so through the IBM AT. The lack of lock in eventually
bit them as the project "forked" in a battle for the successor to AT.
IBM's MCA was overshadowed and eventually replaced by competing visions of the
successor to the AT bus standard.

But IBM had seen the light. Open technologies were like fissionable materials.
Dangerous from the point of view of providing stable repeatable profits, but
enabling incredibly powerful chain reactions of innovation. They then began to
find ways to make a stable profit from open technology, and revamped their
coporate culture to implement them.

So imagine that Bill Gates and Steve Balmer die in a tragic accident, or are
born again at a tent revival. In the ensuing upheaval, Microsoft reinvents
itself. What would be the distinctive features of an honest Microsoft? How
would they keep their profit intact while behaving ethically? Could they be
even more profitable by harnessing open technologies rather than fighting them?

If you're not bored yet, here are some of my ideas. The new Microsoft would
have products with two distinctive features: marketed to and designed for
non-geeks (a larger market than geeks) and running on commodity hardware. They
would provide the best of Apple (non-geek focus) and Linux (commodity hardware).
They would stay with Windows, but immediately provide open specifications for
all levels of Windows technology (no more secret APIs). Pieces of Windows would
become open source, with the goal to eventually open source all of it after
copyright issues are resolved. Thanks to the open specifications, open source
groups would begin to provide clean room implementations of encumbered
components.

To maintain a competitive advantage, the new MS would fiercely defend its
trademark. There would be a branding program for 3rd party products. To be
called "Windows Friendly", a product would have to pass a battery of
usability standards - key to maintaining a consistent experience for the
non-geek target market. "Windows Friendly" products would also have
to pass a compatibility suite ensuring that it works with off the shelf versions
of Windows (as opposed to depending on some open source enhancement).

By opening just the specs at first, and incrementally opening the source, the
new MS would amortize the fallout of all the security problems newly brought to
light by the new open policy. Thanks to the open policy, 3rd party security
hardened versions of Windows and Windows components would being to appear. They
could not be called Windows, of course. MS would incorporate the best of these
into its official offerings. Geeks would be comfortable experimenting with the
unofficial versions, but the far larger non-geek target market would stick with
blessed versions - maintaining Microsoft's profit for as long as the company
remains a credible steward of the Windows standard.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Ms. Didio, it's your turn. Really.
Authored by: bbaston on Tuesday, June 15 2004 @ 10:23 AM EDT
Open letter to Ms. Didio,

Perhaps you will agree, Ms. Didio, that extreme views are less conducive to knowledge. At this point, many of your published advise has, shall we say, been cast into doubt by history. It is my belief that the open source community is, by and large, surprisingly open (*) minded.

Perhaps, Laura, you could find a forum to issue your current perspectives, and perhaps those that found your original views less than realistic, might be given a better opinion of your ability to analyze the rapidly changing information technology industry. Surely Microsoft would want you to salvage your reputation with its worthy competitor, GNU/Linux.

As an example, Bill Claybrook boldly said (in an article referenced by Groklaw):

"The Get the Facts program Microsoft initiated a couple of years ago that consists of hiring various organizations to produce studies that make Microsoft Windows a big winner over Linux in just about any way that two operating systems could be compared is an embarrassment. No single operating system dominates another in every possible way that they can be compared."

Laura, I sincerely ask, what is your opinion?

---
Ben
-------------
IMBW, IANAL2, IMHO, IAVO,
imaybewrong, iamnotalawyertoo, inmyhumbleopinion, iamveryold, hairysmileyface,

[ Reply to This | # ]

Ken Brown: Like a school during Thanksgiving
Authored by: raynfala on Tuesday, June 15 2004 @ 10:24 AM EDT
Why?

No class.

Let's look at what Mr. Brown has to say for himself, now that he's been publicly spanked by his benefactors:

I asked Mr. Brown why we should believe him rather than Prof. Tannenbaum -- who, incidentally, is no fan of Linux. "There are just too many conflicting interviews and facts," Mr. Brown replied. "When those guys get their stories straight, maybe we can make some progress."

Mr. Brown says he never maintained it was impossible for Mr. Torvalds to have written Linux, just "highly unlikely." And he calls Mr. Toptygin "a great kid," albeit "a little caught up in the fanaticism of the Linux movement, which is cool with me."

Where to begin...

  • "Too many conflicting interviews..." Ah heh, considering that some of his recent interviews weren't interviews at all, but the lifting of posts from a semi-private web-based discussion forum, that takes a lot of nerve to say. Considering that nearly every interviewee has insisted that Mr. Brown twisted their words, that takes even more nerve to say.
  • "...and facts." Considering that Mr. Brown has demonstrated that he has no understanding of the fundamentals of computer science (or chooses to ignore them), and considering that Mr. Brown has yet to consult the source of Linux about its origins, it takes an extra-large helping of nerve to lecture prominent scholars about their mastery of the facts.
  • So now it was "highly unlikely" that Linus wrote Linux? Okay, by that logic, all entrepreneurial ventures that have ever succeeded should have their histories picked over with a fine-tooth comb; all of them should be considered suspect, because all entrepreneurial ventures are highly unlikely to succeeed (1 in 10, at best), and therefore, something nefarious must have contributed to their success.
  • Now that Mr. Toptygin has demonstrated that he wasn't willing to lie for monetary compensation, and even went that extra mile and exposed Mr. Brown's lack of ethics, Mr. Brown sees fit to denigrate him as a kid and a fanatic.

    Yesiree, a class act all the way, that Mr. Brown.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    • OT, but not: web sites using akadns.net sites are unavailable
    Authored by: archivist on Tuesday, June 15 2004 @ 10:36 AM EDT
    Yup affecting me in UK

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    OT, but not: web sites using akadns.net sites are unavailable
    Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, June 15 2004 @ 10:37 AM EDT
    An update:

    "...Google pulled references for akamais dns servers a short period ago. they are presently serving their own dns requests..."

    Anyone still usign *.akadns.net or Akamai DNS in general may be off the air until either Akamai resolves the issue, or individual web sites fall back to their own DNS (they *do* have backup DNS, don't they :-/ )

    hmm..

    *.yahoo.com seems to be back; SCOX is up 0.19 (3.86%) at the moment.

    Go figure!

    t_t_b

    ---
    I immediately archive every Groklaw page to which I make a comment, for the record.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    OT: How many forum members does it takes to change a light bulb?
    Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, June 15 2004 @ 10:45 AM EDT
    I am sure most of you hae seen this before...

    Totosplatz reminded me of it so I thought I would share.
    I believe credit goes to www.annoyance.org


    How many forum members does it takes to change a light bulb?


    1 to change the light bulb and to post that the light bulb has been changed
    14 to share similar experiences of changing light bulbs and how the light bulb
    could have been changed differently
    7 to caution about the dangers of changing light bulbs
    1 to move it to the Lighting section
    2 to argue then move it to the Electricals section
    7 to point out spelling/grammar errors in posts about changing light bulbs
    5 to flame the spell checkers
    3 to correct spelling/grammar flames
    6 to argue over whether it's "lightbulb" or "light bulb" ...
    another 6 to condemn those 6 as stupid
    2 industry professionals to inform the group that the proper term is
    "lamp"
    15 know-it-alls who claim they were in the industry, and that "light
    bulb" is perfectly correct
    19 to post that this forum is not about light bulbs and to please take this
    discussion to a lightbulb forum
    11 to defend the posting to this forum saying that we all use light bulbs and
    therefore the posts are relevant to this forum
    36 to debate which method of changing light bulbs is superior, where to buy the
    best light bulbs, what brand of light bulbs work best for this technique and
    what brands are faulty
    7 to post URL's where one can see examples of different light bulbs
    4 to post that the URL's were posted incorrectly and then post the corrected
    URL's
    3 to post about links they found from the URL's that are relevant to this group
    which makes light bulbs relevant to this group
    13 to link all posts to date, quote them in their entirety including all headers
    and signatures, and add "Me too"
    5 to post to the group that they will no longer post because they cannot handle
    the light bulb controversy
    4 to say "didn't we go through this already a short time ago?"
    13 to say "do a Google search on light bulbs before posting questions about
    light bulbs"
    1 forum lurker to respond to the original post 6 months from now and start it
    all over again.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Microsoft
    Authored by: capn_buzzcut on Tuesday, June 15 2004 @ 11:29 AM EDT
    You know, I think this is a good time to point out some things that bother me
    about some folks in the Linux crowd, of which I definitely consider myself a
    member.

    I think that way too many people think of being pro-Linux as equivalent to being
    anti-Microsoft. Why should that be? Why take something positive, like the
    Open-Source movement, and attach something negative, like a hate for Microsoft,
    to it? This is software, not a religion.

    Microsoft is a company out to make MONEY, that's it. The fact that they make
    software is secondary. If you had a company that produced software, but then
    had the vision, drive, and opportunity to revolutionize the entire computer
    industry and get filthy rich in the process, wouldn't you do so? No? OK, well
    what if Microsoft called you today and offered you a billion dollars a year to
    help them defeat Linux? At some point for everyone, it's all about the money.

    Here’s another thing that gets me. I don't know why people seem so shocked and
    when something Microsoft says or does looks like a conspiracy to kill the
    competition and sell more products. Of course it is, that's the whole point.
    Why else would they say or do anything? Forget the naïve notion that Microsoft
    (or any other company, for that matter) truly wants to help the computer
    industry and not promote their own agenda (making money) in the process. Who
    really believes that IBM and Novell have embraced Open-Source just because they
    think it's the right thing to do for their fellow man? Please. I hope they do
    believe that, but the bottom line is that they are here to kill the competition
    and sell more products. They both see an opportunity to revolutionize the
    computer industry and get filthy rich. Only this time, it’s with Linux.

    We’ve got to stop comparing the agenda of the Open-Source community, which truly
    does work for the good of their fellow man, to any company. Every company’s
    only true goal is to make money. End of story. Whether or not the path a
    company chooses for making money is righteous or not all depends on your
    perspective. If Microsoft were paying me a billion dollars a year, you can bet
    their actions would seem pretty righteous to me.

    Linux and the Open-Source movement will succeed or fail based on its own merits
    and the work of folks like us who believe in it and work to improve it. There's
    really no need to talk trash about Microsoft or any other company, and frankly,
    doing so makes us all look like a bunch of unprofessional hippie zealots.
    Pointing out the error of their ways is fine, but let’s keep it civil, not wild
    and ranting. And another thing: please spell out Microsoft or abbreviate it as
    MS. Writing it as M$, Micro$haft, or some other such nonsense is just plain
    childish.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Hit a raw nerve, I guess [RA NT]
    Authored by: cybervegan on Tuesday, June 15 2004 @ 11:31 AM EDT
    You're smarting simply because somebody hit a raw nerve somewhere. Your
    problem, not PJ's.

    You've got to learn some day: you just don't get anywhere by trying to be nice
    to everyone. Sometimes you've got to be brash to make your point. Try this for
    example:

    "Please don't eat meat, because it's so cruel to the
    animal you're eating, and I don't so you shouldn't".

    Yeah, right - that'll work. Actually, why not try:

    "This cute bull calf, is destined for BurgerMasters.
    He's dying to meat you."

    If what you're saying doesn't offend at least *someone*, you're either talking
    about something hopelessly boring and unimportant, or you're not getting your
    point across. Toothless, politically correct mumblings do not get people's
    attention, nor do they make an impression - sometimes you've got to be
    pragmatic, or stick your neck out - at least if you want to make any headway.

    If you don't like the analogy of clubbing seals, then it simply shows you that
    you have contradictions within your own value system. To me, it's just words,
    and it conveyed the sentiment perfectly. I'm a vegan (ghasp) and I take animal
    rights *VERY* seriously.

    PJ is outspoken, yes - but actually, not half as outspoken as some (not me)
    would like to see. Personally, I feel she strikes an excellent balance in a
    hostile environment. Some people have the courage to (a) post identifiably or
    (b) e-mail PJ personally when they have problems with her writing. From this
    perspective it appears that you don't have the courage of your convictions -
    what, exactly did you say on *your* website about the situation? A link to your
    article would be handy, but I doubt it actually exists. If you can do better,
    get out from your ivory tower and show the world your mettle - you have *no*
    *idea* how much PJ has given of herself to bring GrokLaw to you and keep doing
    it day after night.

    PJ doesn't expect everyone to agree with her - she knows the world better than
    that. Come back with a real argument when you've proved your worth on your own
    merits -with your own website that covers the fiaSCO and all other threats to
    GNU and Linux software as well as GrokLaw does, and then maybe you can
    criticise.

    You know you can't do it, so stop trolling.

    *** Shame on me for feeding a troll, but I felt it had to be said. ***

    -cybervegan


    ---
    Software source code is a bit like underwear - you only want to show it off in
    public if it's clean and tidy. Refusal could be due to embarrassment or shame...

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Microsoft Calls AdTI "Study" an "Unhelpful Distraction"
    Authored by: fxbushman on Tuesday, June 15 2004 @ 11:31 AM EDT
    Microsoft did not repudiate AdTI's book because it is a collection of lies. They repudiated it because it is widely known to be a collection of lies. I may be cynical, but I have to say that had the public reaction been otherwise Microsoft would never have spoken against Samizdat. We know that on numerous other occasions MS has not only paid for but publicised lying reports on Linux.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    ^^Troll gasping for attention^^
    Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, June 15 2004 @ 11:44 AM EDT
    If original poster logged in and didn't posted as Anonymous I'll agree with you.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    OK, I'm not anonymous...
    Authored by: N. on Tuesday, June 15 2004 @ 11:54 AM EDT
    ...and the parent post made some valid points. PJ *does* get carried away at
    times. Not too much, but just enough over the line to register. Is the fame
    going to PJ's head? Of course it will, to some extent, as anyone given the level
    of attention PJ has been given over the past year would also be affected by it.
    I also think she shoould tone down the seal-clubber-esque prose. I'm not saying
    cut down on the witticisms, it's just that the seal-clubbing phrase leaves a
    nasty taste in my mouth.

    The dilemma of "is this still a blog, or is it now something bigger such
    that PJ now has additional responsibilities?" is also a valid observation.
    I happen to believe that it's still a blog and should be treated as such. Why
    should a blogger change his/her perspective just because it's read by thousands
    of people?

    As for the comments posted here... well, it's a reflection of the Linux
    community, and there IS a significant proportion who do the M$, MicroShaft,
    MicroSucks, etc etc ad infinitum. I dislike that sort of name-calling and think
    it reflects badly on the community, but it's impossible to remove that fraction
    of the community without also losing a good chunk of knowledge and insight that
    they can provide. That's just the way a hell of a lot of Linux users are. I have
    my own theories about why that is, but now isn't the time to spark off THAT
    particular flame-fest. Let's just say that there's are reasons why the Linux
    zealot stereotype exists in its current form.

    Bottom line is: People, let's be as objective as possible here. Leave the
    hyperbole to the zealots.

    N.

    ---
    N.
    (Recent convert to Linux)

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Today's SCO comedy
    Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, June 15 2004 @ 11:58 AM EDT
    Three new SCO press releases:

    1. SCO(R) UnixWare(R) 7.1.4 Brings UNIX Security and Reliability to Small Businesses and Replicated Sites
    http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/040615/latu073_1.html

    3. SCO Announces Broad Array of New Unix Products, Channel Support and Training Programs
    http://www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/stories.pl?ACCT=109&STORY=/ww w/story/06-15-2004/0002193535&EDATE=

    3. SCO Delivers SCOx Web Services Substrate (WSS) in New UnixWare 7.1.4
    http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/040615/latu072_1.html

    From this:
    The SCOx WSS components announced today include: Ericom PowerTerm Host Publisher, SCO WebFace, and SCO SQL encapsulator. These components provide a powerful foundation for building next-generation business solutions within a Service Oriented Architecture (SOA).

    And that would be the same Web Face that SCO acquired from Vultus.

    And that would be the Vultus property which they recently realized was worthless according to their most recent 10-Q:

    Consequently, the Company has concluded that no significant future cash flows related to its Vultus assets would be realized. The Company performed an impairment analysis of its recorded goodwill related to the Vultus reporting unit in accordance with SFAS No. 142. Additionally, an impairment analysis of the intangible assets was performed in accordance with SFAS No. 144. As a result of these analyses, the Company wrote-down the carrying value of its goodwill related to the Vultus acquisition from $1,166,000 to $0 and wrote-down intangible assets related to its Vultus acquisition from $973,000 to $0.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Microsoft Calls AdTI "Study" an "Unhelpful Distraction"
    Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, June 15 2004 @ 12:04 PM EDT
    Congratulations to PJ, Groklaw, and the FOSS community. A masterful excercise in
    our free speech rights. This is a great victory and one worth celebrating! I
    think Shao Lin would be impressed PJ, you take a day off celebrate, go shopping
    and three days later MicroSoft caves in and pays lip service to serving
    customers.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    He's Right
    Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, June 15 2004 @ 12:05 PM EDT
    Call me a troll but I agree for the most part. I honestly don't know if
    critical comments are "usually" deleted but they sometimes are. I
    know because my comments get deleted. Sometimes it makes no sense because they
    aren't even critical, just relaying information.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Listen:
    Authored by: Tim Ransom on Tuesday, June 15 2004 @ 12:12 PM EDT
    I only brought enough Troll Snacks(tm) for one. Here's an idea, though: start
    your own blog! There, you can really stretch out about your problems with
    Groklaw. Go to Blogger and set one up. It takes seconds. Once you're set up, you
    and your pals can write your anti-PJ rants to your heart's content without fear
    of being deleted, rebutted, abused, or whatever (unless you allow comments).
    Then simply post a link here. Every time I post a link here, I get a gajillion
    hits.

    ---
    Thanks again,

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    I'm not glad Microsoft did this
    Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, June 15 2004 @ 12:50 PM EDT
    The only reason Microsoft is now distancing themselves from AdTI is because Microsoft hired a pig to do their arguing for them, and now Bill Gates is covered in mud.

    This is just Gates trying to wash that mud off - and I ain't buying it.

    If this hadn't gone down in flames, Microsoft would have done it again. And here's an idea: the next time Microsoft tries something lame like this, let the first one or two go by as seeming successes. Then lay into them and whoever uncritically shilled for Microsoft. No journalist wants to have it publically demonstrated that he's a lazy shill, so do this once or twice and journalists will be a lot more leery of shilling for Microsoft. Well, except for those like Enderle and Didio who don't do anything but shill for Microsoft anyway...

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Constructive criticism
    Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, June 15 2004 @ 01:08 PM EDT
    I think the original poster has a point. I'm finding this site less and less
    useful (as an interested reader following the issues covered by it) as it
    becomes more and more "rah-rah."

    While PJ may not care about my thoughts or the parent poster's thoughts, my
    (unsolicited) suggestion is that she should. I generally agree with the Groklaw
    community's assessment of the SCO case, Microsoft and the AdTI report. However,
    the cheap shots she is starting to take make her arguments and the reasoned
    arguments presented by this website much less persuasive.

    Some of the threads to this post are indicative of the increasing hostility to
    constructive criticism. As someone who believes in the ideals supported by this
    site, I think that's a shame.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Could be: If you don't like it, leave...
    Authored by: blacklight on Tuesday, June 15 2004 @ 01:25 PM EDT
    "but when certain members of the community voice their own opinions they
    are told to leave because this is "PJ's personal site""

    Certain so-called members of the community can't take a hint and move on when
    they are told to. I suggest that they start their own blog instead of taking up
    space whining on groklaw about PJ's editorial style, which is anything but
    namby-pamby - it's about as irrelevant as some corporate droid get hung up on
    the fact that I swear a lot when I do software development, without paying any
    attention to the fact my software is better written than most.

    PJ is entitled to express her editorial opinion just as the Wall Street Journal,
    the New York Times and the Washington Post express their own editorial opinions:
    I respect all these opinions because they are delivered with integrity but at
    the end of the day, I care only that the reporting of the facts is complete and
    objective. Similarly, at the end of the day, I care only that the analysis of
    groklaw be objective, because I rely on it for certain key decisions. And I
    never lose sight of the fact that PJ's and the groklaw community's opinions are
    not necessarily in lockstep with mine.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    AdTI's invoice status
    Authored by: technoCon on Tuesday, June 15 2004 @ 01:48 PM EDT
    Does this mean Microsoft won't be paying AdTI's invoice?

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Microsoft Calls AdTI "Study" an "Unhelpful Distraction"
    Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, June 15 2004 @ 02:06 PM EDT
    Microsoft is repudiating the AdTI report because it backfired.

    However, we can be sure that this will not be the last case of Microsoft
    funding FUD by an organization that will present itself as independent. I wonder
    what the next case will be?

    It would be nice if there was a website that focused on countering Microsoft
    FUD. As it is, it gets done, but in a scattered way. There ought to be a
    single place that would collect all the different refutations. That way people
    could focus their efforts and be more thorough, and it would be a place to refer
    reporters and others.

    The site could collect past instances of Microsoft FUD and spot patterns, like
    the pr rhetoric it uses. For instance, no matter what Microsoft does, it always
    says it is to server its customers better.

    I would start such a site myself, but I am too busy with other tasks.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    • some fud domains - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, June 15 2004 @ 02:25 PM EDT
      • some fud domains - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, June 15 2004 @ 02:27 PM EDT
      • some fud domains - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, June 16 2004 @ 03:31 AM EDT
    Could be: If you don't like it, leave...
    Authored by: brooker on Tuesday, June 15 2004 @ 02:30 PM EDT
    Quote>"The very worst thing about this is that criticism is always
    deleted. It's impossible to read the other side of the story because the
    "moderators" are purposefully deleting anything that doesn't glow with
    praise for PJ."<Quote
    =====================================================

    Hmmm, if it's true that criticism is ALWAYS deleted, then how did I get to read
    your post?

    Very strange.

    I'm thinkin' that PJ has always been pretty sharp with her wit, at least she has
    been since I've been following her writings. She is at the forefront these days
    in the battle to keep the FUD from overflowing...she can't stop it completely,
    but this site has helped to educate more than just "The Community". I
    am a good example of that.

    And if it can educate "Aunt Jane" or "Uncle Fred" from down
    the street, then maybe it can also educate the "Linux zealots" (as
    I've seen them called) to the idea that name calling and Microsoft bashing -
    just for the sake of bashing - doesn't produce results.

    I think most people that come here to Groklaw already know better.

    I don't hate Windows, I am old enough to understand that hating an inanimate
    thing is foolish. I DO hate the direction that Microsoft is heading with
    Longhorn and their patents push. And now that I have learned more of their past
    history of business dealings, I am less inclined to continue supporting their
    products with my future dollars.

    PJ's goal with this web site (as I understand it) was providing - in one
    centralized place - resources for interested people to learn about the SCO law
    suits, and to strip away the FUD and expose the facts.

    If along the way she also expresses her opinions in a wickedly funny and pointed
    way, that's fine too. She makes the documentation available for folks to read
    and make up their own minds. She doesn't ask anyone to just take her word for
    anything.

    From what I have read this year, folks like PJ who undertake to fight the FUD
    cannot be wishy-washy about it.

    It ain't a war for shrinking violets or sissies. If PJ tweaks the lion's tail
    occasionally, then so be it.

    If she were my daughter, I'd be proud as punch of her grit and courage. I think
    she's aware that she'll never be able to please everyone, so the next best thing
    is to be true to herself.

    I think she does that admirably.

    ...And, being a bit of a shrinking violet myself, I can't believe I've actually
    posted here twice in two days...hmmmm...maybe courage is catching.

    brooker



    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Microsoft Windows is an "Unhelpful Distraction"
    Authored by: AIB on Tuesday, June 15 2004 @ 02:33 PM EDT
    For those computer scientists with an abiding interest in creating and promoting
    superior software, allowing peer review and market forces to select the best of
    breed -- Microsoft Windows has for decades been a most unhelpful distraction.

    -AIB.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    'It is an altar to PJ. No wonder it has gone to her head.'
    Authored by: Tim Ransom on Tuesday, June 15 2004 @ 02:46 PM EDT
    - this is 'reasonable'?

    ---
    Thanks again,

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    The End for SCO is Nigh
    Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, June 15 2004 @ 02:51 PM EDT
    When even best friend and bosom-buddy Microsoft abandons them, there is no hope
    they will ever succeed in court. Microsoft has to wash up, to avoid
    deep-pocket-seeking lawyers from coming after them when SCO collapses.

    As "friends" go, SCO has lost:

    - the friendship of the open source community
    - the friendship of judges they've lied to
    - the friendship of small investors
    - the friendship of large investors RBC and BayStar
    - the friendship of employees
    - the friendship of customers
    - the friendship of co-workers
    - the friendship of partners
    - the friendship of the "Evil Empire"
    - the "friendship" of a $10M + lawyer who still hasn't even shown
    up for court. And maybe a singing Senator too?
    - and, one hopes, the friendship of the SEC, Attorney General, and other
    offices who should protect the above folks, fairly and without payoffs to look
    the other way, but have so far failed (miserably) to do their jobs. What's up,
    fellas? Afraid of what will come to light?

    But maybe, just maybe, Darl, Kevin, Chris, Blake, Ralph, and the Canopy and SCOG
    BoD members can still make some friends:

    - the new judges we all hope they'll meet
    - the bailiffs and court guards
    - the jailhouse guards
    - Bubba and his buddies
    - the rest of the folks in the shower room, one at a time and with fake
    smiles. Just like they tried to do to us.

    Stock down, earnings down, company down, friends down, investors down, employees
    down. Yup, Darl you old cowboy - you sure know how to run a company. Right
    into the ground.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    .... an "Unhelpful Distraction"
    Authored by: webster on Tuesday, June 15 2004 @ 02:57 PM EDT
    What does M$ mean by this? What is an "Unhelpful Distraction"?

    Is an "unhelpful Distraction" better than a "helpful
    distraction"?

    Did they intend for it to be a "helpful focusing" or "helpful
    concentration"?

    What is "Unhelpful" about it? The fact that it is untrue, was found
    out, or that they sponsored it?

    Why is it a distraction? What was it supposed to distract from? Or is it
    unhelpful because it became a distraction, like an unscooped pile of FUD on its
    own?

    We are getting into the realm of 'nonliteral copying' here. This item in itself
    is becoming an unhelpful distraction to the writer, reader, subjects and
    certainly the work undone here on the desk next to this key.....

    This is a phrase for the Groklaw hall of fame.

    ---
    webster

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Microsoft is still the enemy
    Authored by: arch_dude on Tuesday, June 15 2004 @ 03:26 PM EDT
    Microsoft called the AdTI report an "unhelpful distraction." They did
    not call it "incorrect," or "deceitful." They did not
    comment on its ludicrous "methodology." They did not venture any
    opinion on it conclusion.

    If Microsoft had any sense of fair play or business integrity, they would have
    said that the report was wrong, not jus an "unhelpful distraction." As
    it is they appear to be attempting to distance themselves from a disaster fo
    their own making.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Microsoft Calls AdTI "Study" an "Unhelpful Distraction"
    Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, June 15 2004 @ 03:40 PM EDT
    Yup, it was so blatantly false even their stomach couldn't bear it. Though they
    advertised Microsoft to be cheaper not so long ago :)

    This doesn't sound good for ADTI, most likely they won't get fund from Microsoft
    and no one else will trust their word either.

    Next time they (or their followers) will be wiser, and come out with a subtler
    lie.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    What a week it's been!
    Authored by: ray08 on Tuesday, June 15 2004 @ 04:01 PM EDT
    In the more than 1 year since all this litigation began, there hasn't been a
    better week for GNU/Linux than this past week! I sure hope it keeps up.

    And PJ, no M$ didn't listen to you. They only listen to their marketing
    strategy. They'll spin anything for any reason to better their position in the
    marketplace. My belief is that when the experts interviewed by KB repudiated him
    (repeatedly), M$ knew that in the public image, they were tainted. They did what
    they had to "save face".

    We're winning some really important battles, but the war is not over. Keep up
    the vigilance!

    ---
    Caldera is toast! And Groklaw is the toaster! (with toast level set to BURN)

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Question about SCO unix chart
    Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, June 15 2004 @ 04:02 PM EDT
    On SCO's scousource site is a chart which says it is by Eric Levenitz (sp?)

    I looked at the SCO chart, then located the original of the same chart

    If you compare the SCO version Linux is a Cyan (light green blue line)
    highlighted. Prior to Linux 0.01 is a dotted cyan line going back to UNIX V7
    (implying Linux 0.01 is descended from V7 or something)

    I do not see anything like this on the original.

    Thoughts?

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Alexey Toptygin: A man of integrity
    Authored by: edumarest on Tuesday, June 15 2004 @ 04:37 PM EDT
    Quote lifted from the AP article that PJ links to in her preamble:

    "For his research, Mr. Brown hired a University of Maryland, College Park,
    student, Alexey Toptygin, to run software that could find matches between Minix
    and the early Linux. But there were none. We know this not because it is in the
    study -- Mr. Brown conspicuously omits mention of that. Instead, Mr. Toptygin,
    appalled by the way Mr. Brown was ignoring the evidence, posted his work online.
    (He also refused his paycheck.)"

    'nuff said.

    ---
    ...if you cannot measure it then you cannot troubleshoot it, you can only
    guess...
    SuSE 9.0 on hp pavilion ze 4560us

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    kudos to pj
    Authored by: webster on Tuesday, June 15 2004 @ 04:38 PM EDT
    I have long thought the time and space spent on ADT and K Brown had extended too
    long. However gaining this acknowledgment from MS was well worth it and totally
    undermines the "book." Obviously you have learned long ago not to go
    by what others such as I think. Well done.

    ---
    webster

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    OT: TSCOG's Chief Technical Officer quits
    Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, June 15 2004 @ 04:45 PM EDT
    Off the Yahoo! Finance board:

    http://finance.messages.yahoo.com/bbs?.mm=FN&action=m&boar d=1600684464&tid=cald&sid=1600684464&mid=145328&thr=145328&c ur=145328&dir=d

    ...which actually provides a link to Scott Lemon's blog:

    http://the.inevitable.org/anism/ < p>

      "...I am out.

      After just slightly more than a year, I am no longer working at The SCO Group. It has been quite an experience..."
    I'll bet...

    t_t_b

    ---
    I immediately archive every Groklaw page to which I make a comment, for the record.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    This guy never stops shovelling it!
    Authored by: ray08 on Tuesday, June 15 2004 @ 04:46 PM EDT
    "I asked Mr. Brown why we should believe him rather than Prof. Tannenbaum
    -- who, incidentally, is no fan of Linux. "There are just too many
    conflicting interviews and facts," Mr. Brown replied. "When those guys
    get their stories straight, maybe we can make some progress." "

    I guess Prof Tannebaum, Dr Ritchie and all the others who were
    "interviewed" are the real source of KB FUD, ah, confusion. And we all
    know it's not KB's fault, right?

    What a walking pile of nonhuman matter! (I can't post what I really feel and
    think, but to say KB is detestable is a true understatement).

    ---
    Caldera is toast! And Groklaw is the toaster! (with toast level set to BURN)

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Where did you find...
    Authored by: nanook on Tuesday, June 15 2004 @ 05:04 PM EDT
    a request for "Constructive Criticism" on this site?

    Or in the alternative; who was the unhelpful person in your formative years that led you to believe that you have a right to voice your opinion with regard to how, what, or why, someone holds an opinion, or acts as an individual or otherwise in a manner with which you happen to disagree?

    Where's the proof that you are entitled to attempt to "correct" the behaviour of anyone not under your care, and for whom you were never asked to assume responsibility?

    Just curious...

    Charlie

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    This is normal.
    Authored by: Turin on Tuesday, June 15 2004 @ 05:25 PM EDT
    Any kind of 'activist' type web site degenerates over time into this kind of
    thing. It's basically this: the principals are used to the antagonist (in this
    case SCO). They see them in a worse and worse light as time goes on. The
    invective gets harsher and less respectful. The assumption is that everyone is
    on board here. There is an ego factor as well. The more kudos the site gets,
    the more overblown the rhetoric seems to grow.

    The problem is that the newcomer and the only peripherally involved do not grow
    more intolerant of the antagonist over time. They see insults against the
    antagonist as detracting from the message of the site. Therefore, this site
    grows more and more ineffective with time.

    I note that my reading of this site has perceptibly declined in recent times,
    for instance. I don't think the process is reversible in any event. Once you
    start to lose audience, the hemmohraging rarely stops. It's hard to get back
    into the correct frame of mind after you've crossed the line into unprofessional
    baiting of your target, and almost impossible to attract back the readers after
    they've grown disgusted.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Microsoft turnaround time is improving
    Authored by: tz on Tuesday, June 15 2004 @ 05:37 PM EDT
    A year ago they would have waited until after the book was out before distancing
    themselves from this wreck-in-progress. They are starting to get the idea that
    you should stop gardening when even astroturf turns Brown.

    Their FUD has always failed after a time because they don't understand FOSS, nor
    does it work for the encrusted pot to call the polished copper kettle
    "black" as when they attempt to do a security comparison (which often
    coincides with the latest worm attack).

    The least they could have done is to have a second-rate history-of-unix book
    written with the linux-as-leprosy mentioned strongly, but only by implication.
    Innuendo is more difficult to counter than obvious bald-faced lies.

    Or they could actually have rewritten Windows along the UNIX paradigm (modular,
    use appropriate tool, text files...) to create something as stable and secure as
    Linux. Right now it has those dozens of services and open ports, but because it
    isn't modular, they aren't independent. They wanted and got a blob.

    KDE/GNU/Linux is thousands of small, independent pieces - each comprehensible,
    so it is easy to know what might be affected by a change, or the potential for
    security holes. Or even how to use and program the pieces. Or get them working
    from the Zaurus (which now has Firebird!) up to mainframes. They could learn
    something.

    But they would have to unlearn too much first.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Microsoft Calls AdTI "Study" an "Unhelpful Distraction"
    Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, June 15 2004 @ 06:42 PM EDT
    I might as well throw this link in, personally it's not a great surprise, but
    YMMV and it's a balanced, though slightly tabloid-ish piece from Mr Lyons.

    http://www.forbes.com/technology/enterprisetech/2004/06/15/cz_dl_0615ibmlinux.ht
    ml

    My summary would be "IBM still sells proprietary software. Salesmen
    handling proprietary accounts want to keep their commission thankyou very much.
    Competitors outraged..."

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    OT: Internet Downloading Patented....
    Authored by: eamacnaghten on Tuesday, June 15 2004 @ 09:09 PM EDT
    http://news. zdnet.co.uk/business/0,39020645,39157640,00.htm

    'Nuff said..

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Why M$ wants into the Search Engine biz...
    Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, June 15 2004 @ 09:51 PM EDT
    If they can control what is "presented" to search queries, then they
    have more control over what people "know". Those people aren't
    stupid, they're just unprincipled.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Satanic Messages from Windows
    Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, June 15 2004 @ 11:08 PM EDT
    If you play the Windows installation disc backwards you will be able to hear
    satanic messages.
    However, if you play the installation disc forwards something even worse
    happens: it installs Windows!

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Miscellaneous links
    Authored by: eddsouza on Tuesday, June 15 2004 @ 11:16 PM EDT
    People, sorry if someone has already posted these; I just thought I'd bunch them together in one post.

    The hilarious part of this one's that Ashlee Vance has dished it out to ol' M$ (a bit), and the page footer contains the usual M$ Partner Program advert bit...talk about misplaced advertising!
    Here's half the article:
    There is comic value in Microsoft swallowing some pride to keep microsoft.com up with the help of Linux caching servers. Grizzle, grumble, why must we be associated with this cancerous free software collective? In the end, Microsoft could not let the association go on forever. As an IT leader, it's important to at least give the appearance your products are good enough for the masses. So, it's back to Windows 2003 Server and IIS 6.0 again


    Also in the news today:
    Eddie

    P.S. Not that it's really relevant, but great news for Yahoo Mail users:
    Yahoo responding to Gmail with you guessed it, more storage

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    You actually reposted the grandparent
    Authored by: Tim Ransom on Tuesday, June 15 2004 @ 11:22 PM EDT
    from another thread? Get a freakin' life!

    ---
    Thanks again,

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Microsoft Calls AdTI "Study" an "Unhelpful Distraction"
    Authored by: defender2803 on Wednesday, June 16 2004 @ 02:12 PM EDT
    Posted to ADTi's website

    Maybe you should start questioning your investors. Who actually owns DOS? Bill
    Gates bought it from SCP and then modified it for his use and IBM's. Where did
    Windows come from? Xerox? Has your money supplier ever created his own
    software? All his are derivatives and knockoffs of others.

    Minix is open source and freely distributed. Why not use it as a pattern for
    another OS? Bill Gates has done it for more than 2 decades. Has Ken Brown ever
    produced an operating system? Maybe he should try and see what he gets? Does
    open source destroy democracy? Does Microsoft already rule the computer world?
    Does ADTi quash free thinking and, from your mission statement, "...the
    basic goodness, perfectability, and nobility of mankind and of the human
    community"? Before you throw accusations out and throw out quotes from
    people you wish to drag through the mud, take a good look in the mirror and say
    to yourself, "Am I part of this, 'basic goodness, perfectability, and
    nobility of mankind and of the human community'"? You say you don't rush
    to judgement, but you Ken Brown, you just did? Maybe you should ask Eric
    Raymond what he meant instead of putting up his quote as if a man on a cross,
    before all the people to see, and ridiculing the man on it for his own thoughts
    and beliefs. I weep at your so called "nobility of mankind". May
    you, Microsoft, and SCO rule the future with all your tyrannical exploits to
    destroy that which is good.

    I posted this to ADTi's idiotic "Ken Brown needs help learning
    English" postings. I hope they actually read it and follow there own
    mission statement. Sad.

    pf

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Microsoft Calls AdTI "Study" an "Unhelpful Distraction"
    Authored by: John Elliott on Thursday, June 17 2004 @ 05:09 AM EDT

    (drops cloak of anonymity)

    blush

    Why, thank you. I did a few checks on earlier versions and it looks like this ugly code entered MS-DOS between versions 3.3 and 4.0 (in date terms, somewhere between 1987 and 1988, ). The previous version (3.3) only seems to check for the first 2 characters being equal to "3." and the final digit being less than "1".

    This doesn't surprise me particularly. MS-DOS 4.0 had a reputation for being buggy; many users refused to upgrade to it. There are apparently other corrupt-your-disk bugs in MS-DOS 4.0 so I'm quite willing to believe that this was another one that no-one noticed.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Linux Goes Mainstream
    Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, June 17 2004 @ 07:17 AM EDT
    In a front page article today in:
    USATODAT
    http://www.usatoday.com/tech/news/2004-06-16-linux-munich_x.htm

    German city picks Linux over Microsoft
    By Byron Acohido, USA TODAY

    SEATTLE - In a milestone loss for Microsoft (MSFT), the city of
    Munich has affirmed its decision to make the switch from Windows
    and Office to competing Linux software on 14,000 desktop PCs.

    [ Reply to This | # ]
    Groklaw © Copyright 2003-2013 Pamela Jones.
    All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners.
    Comments are owned by the individual posters.

    PJ's articles are licensed under a Creative Commons License. ( Details )     		Site layout based on Woodlands theme by Bryan Bell.
    Groklaw logo by John Crowley.
    News Picks logo by Ted Thompson.
    Powered By GeekLog
    Created this page in 0.08 seconds