[plug] M$ running scared

[Jon Miller]

Interesting that M$ is running scared where a company like Novell has seemed
to adopt the Linux platform.  If you want to see what I mean, run up a copy
of NetWare 6, granted it cost a bit, but wait till you see how they've
changed the OS on the server.  With new features such as Logger you now have
a logging feature like dmesg and messages in one.  When the server is
loading you have a status of all files loading with the [OK] on the right
side.  We were quite impressed.
Most other features are mainly web-based. Remember the CEO of Caldera is an
ex-Novell CEO, so who knows what meeting are taking place behind the BIG RED
doors.

Jon

-------Original Message-------

From: plug at plug.linux.org.au
Date: Friday, 01 March 2002 07:38:36
To: plug at plug.linux.org.au
Subject: Re: [plug] M$ running scared

Bill Gates described the GPL as Pacman-like. Microsoft is a Pacman-like
company.

Now Craig Mundie (also from Micro$oft) is bitching again because they
are scared of Linux and they dispise the fact that they can't just
buy it up or rip it off.

I agree that GPL has it's flaws but so does the commercial model. The
problem with the commercial model is that you often have to create all
your own "prior art" otherwise you can end up with library bugs you can't
fix.

Perhaps Micro$oft could start leading the way by releasing all their code
under the far more "commercially viable" LGPL or Apache license.

An important point that they also seem to have missed is that if something
is available as GPL it doesn't actually mean that you can't commercialise
it - it's just that you can't commercialise it FOR FREE and without the
consent of the authors.

I guess you guys already know this. Oh well.. next time I'll just keep it
more concise like this:

Microsoft sux. There's no denying it.

Anthony

On Fri, 1 Mar 2002, The Thought Assassin wrote:

> On Fri, 1 Mar 2002, Michael Hunt wrote:
> > Microsoft's Craig Mundie criticizes the GPL at an Australian conference.
> > "The problem with general public license advocates is that they don't
> > understand that people need the opportunity to commercialize software".
>
> He then tries to justify this: "If commercialization was cut down,
> investors would not support research and development in the IT sector"
>
> Which I kind find of laughable, but I got me thinking:
> When was the last time a real software innovation actually arrived in
> commercial, off-the-shelf-payware form?
>
> I can't think of anything within the last ten years, but I'm sure that
> must be my lack of imagination. Any ideas? Let's try to salvage some kind
> of dignity for this deluded Microserf. :)
>
> -Greg
>