General discussion

Locked

Microsoft VX Free Code

By brike ·
Microsoft said on 5/2/01 that it will be a strong foe to free code. They say that it is an attack to the intelectual property rules, yada, yada, yada(http://www.nytimes.com/2001/05/03/technology/03SOFT.html). They believe in innovation. I say that innovation is fine as long as it comes from Microsoft, apparently. What about those that are not so big? I also read that they are offering prizes to distributors who send them a list of customers who order PC's without an operating system. What is happening? KGBism?

This conversation is currently closed to new comments.

13 total posts (Page 1 of 2)   01 | 02   Next
| Thread display: Collapse - | Expand +

All Comments

Collapse -

Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt....

by admin In reply to Microsoft VX Free Code

the cornerstones of Microsofts marketing...
As pointed out in other discussions, it's interesting that Microsoft has opensource code existing in some of it's releases, but disallows any decompilation or extraction of it's own..... same old same old...

Collapse -

You're surprised?

by epepke In reply to Microsoft VX Free Code

Didn't you know this was going to happen five years ago?

This is getting kind of old. Every time Microsoft does something 500-pound-gorilla-like, people get upset and say they are fed up and aren't going to take it any more. Then about 45 nanoseconds later they forget all about it and all is forgiven and they're spending $200 on an *upgrade*.

If you don't like it, don't vote for it. Those green pieces of paper in your wallet are votes.

Collapse -

You are so right!

by brike In reply to You're surprised?

We forgot how to exercise the consumer's right to choose against a monopoly. What about the right one has to buy something and do with it whatever they want? Gone??

Collapse -

Prizes = Intimidation

by Former MS Supporter In reply to Microsoft VX Free Code

Gee, it sounds like MS just turned the punishment they received over intimidating and threatening companies not wanting to preload their stuff around. So instead of punishing their 'offenders', they're offering gifts to their 'friends'. Hmm - I wonder if Compaq, IBM, HP, and others who're preloading with variations of UNIX/Linux have their feelings hurt? I doubt it. But it still seems quite an intimidation for small companies, having to either fight other companies who're 'getting help' from MS, or follow suit to make a go of it. BTW, yeah I still use and like MS products (not exclusively though), but I'm getting tired of their business practices. They're starting to remind me of the RIAA, especially with the software registration keycode stance. And didn't MS just release the statement concerning being more open and free with their code? Which statement and policy concerning the code should we listen to?

Collapse -

Big, big trouble for Microsoft

by dcavanaugh In reply to Microsoft VX Free Code

Consider the Internet itself. It originated with a grant-funded program, for essentially military purposes. Lots of money in the budget, profitability was not an issue.<p>
Now we have developing countries adopting Linux as a government standard, since they don't have the money to pay M$.<p>
Now consider the NSA version of Linux. I assume the result of an expensive NSA program will be something that will not be hacked by the first VB script kiddie that comes along.<p>
When government agencies try to grapple with security/privacy issues (and reduce cost and licensing BS at the same time), it will be hard for them to resist the NSA-endorsed version of Linux. Every new virus that comes out will be another nail in the M$ coffin.<p>
M$ cannot outspend the government, nor can it undercut the price of open source. IMHO, Microsoft fears the combination of government money + GPL/open source. This could easily kill off a substantial chunk of the M$ empire.<p>
Is M$ in a position to make their products so secure that NSA-Linux is unnecessary? I doubt it.

Collapse -

And who made the internet popular?

by admin In reply to Big, big trouble for Micr ...

Unfortunately, not the Unix shell accounts that work so technically well. It was browsers running on MS.

>Is M$ in a position to make their products so secure that NSA-Linux is unnecessary?

We have secure (relatively) OS's available now that the general public can't seem to get the hang of.
My question is: Can the government or GPL/OpenSource produce a product the public can (and will) use?
****, there is already much better, cheaper server products available, and a bunch of the IT pro's here can't seem to figure out how to install them, much less use them. How can we expect the public to do this soon? I don't think Joe Public likes a secure, reliable system that much. He seems to prefer to complain like mad and buy the next MS product. MS products, like it or not, are the products of the people. People who don't want tech hero's to save them. People who, like Joe Dirt, can feel that they are somehow smart and superior sticking their heads in an alligators mouth and somehow living. The mythology that has built up around this is amazing. Sure, people will say Joe Dirt is a bad movie and MS sucks -but they'll pay for both and skip the Sundance festival and Linux tickets.

Collapse -

That's what we used to say about DOS

by brike In reply to And who made the internet ...

Someone has to star something, like Bill Gates did. Let them do it, like IBM let Bill Gates do it.

Collapse -

Internet popular in spite of M$

by Shanghai Sam In reply to And who made the internet ...

As I recall, it was first Mosaic on Unix stations and later Netscape on multiple platforms that made the Internet popular. Sure, M$ released IE, essentially a poor Netscape clone at the time. Nobody waited for IE; there was no need to. What did early IE do that Netscape did't do already? On the other hand, it took a while for modems to exceed 14.4K; plenty of people waited for that.

To answer your "Can they build an OS the public will use" question, let's see what happens when M$ uses mandatory product activation on their next consumer-grade OS, and bumps the price to $250 or so.

I think the push for M$ comes not from consumer/users but from their employers. Cheap software (borrowed from the office), cheap hardware (clones madein Taiwan) were behind the success of the PC as much as anything M$ ever did. Macs are suppoedly easier to use, but who uses them at work?

As employers get tired of script-kiddie e-mail meltdowns and the "Blue Screen Of Death", they just might look for cheaper alternatives. Add this to the escalation of M$ license costs, and the door is wide open for a govt/open source OS and supporting software.

If my employer adopts a company-wide OS and/or supporting software (M$ or not), I will surely install it on my home computer, just for compatibility. I have seen more than a few Mac-heads dragged into M$ compliance via this method.

Collapse -

Right place at the right time

by brike2001 In reply to Internet popular in spite ...

PC's used to be something for companies, perhaps for use at some colleges, and they did not do much but store small databases and letters. It was a very rough calculator that took up a whole building sometimes. The regular Joe Public did not even dream about it because they did not need it, and they could not afford it. Macs were more popular at least in my school days because they were smaller and they could be installed at home. All they did, though, was to provide entertainment at a high cost and some tools for people like me and my brothers to write our homework. We never spent more than a few hours a week on the computer. Until very recently, PC's were still business machines, except for the Macs. They did not attract Joe Public, still. They were slow and dull. Windows started making PC's more interesting and affordable (not so much, though), but they were still not so user-friendly as the Macs. When Gates started the world was a virgin market, ready to accept anything that was less dull and less expensive at the same time. Today's software developers have to prove they are at least close to Windows or Mac. It is a much harder road, but didn't MS succeed? And neither IBM nor Apple sued them, or put a price tag on users who used Windows. If not for their closed policy Apple computers would have been on everyone's desk today, and this forum would be about Macs, not PC's. Open source has to exist. They can bring innovation too. Didn't MS?

Collapse -

Good points, however...

by admin In reply to Internet popular in spite ...

To clarify, I was not thinking of IE when I wrote this. I was thinking of Windows, which is where Netscape (yes it was the most popular) was used. I too used Mosaic, although myself (and a lot of others at the time) swore by the shell. You really couldn't beat shell access (yes, part because of modem speed) at the time. However, even with faster modems, I can't honestly say I think average users would have gotten the internet where it is today (I'm not saying it's a good thing)if they would of had to use Unix. Oddly enough, while I think Unix makes more sense as an OS and find it more "intuitive" personally, most people have trouble with it.
I do agree that the low cost of MS products has been a factor. I would even argue that the relative ease (all the worry about organized crime, when many home users think a license covers an entire family)of stealing the software cheaply has been a key to establishing it's exponential growth. At any rate, you are right that the low expense has been a big part of it, otherwise, MAC would still have the mojo....
Your comment on script kids and D0S attacks though....... you know, although exploits aren't aimed at Linux as much, they will be as it becomes more popular. There is definately a long tradition of knowledge regarding the inner workings of Unix, and someone (unfortunately) will make easier interfaces for them to use if more of them have it at home.

Back to Community Forum
13 total posts (Page 1 of 2)   01 | 02   Next

Related Discussions

Related Forums