08.16.08
Posted in Formats, Microsoft, Standard, Interoperability, FOSS, ISO, Quote at 9:47 am by Roy Schestowitz
Open source? Microsoft?!?! Yes, indeedy… as long as it’s all about Microsoft and all about its proprietary software stack — from an operating system (Windows) to databases and to proprietary file formats like OOXML and XAML.
We recently commented on Microsoft’s latest scheme in the Philippines [1, 2]. Our criticism is being echoed by everyone who comments in Linux Today. Here is an example:
“The ISV program is open to all developers that have demonstrated worthy open-source projects. Our goal is to help them expand our market,” [Microsoft’s] Dela Cruz said.
There you go Mr. Dela Cruz. Fixed that for you.
Remember that, from Microsoft’s point of view, open source is all about paying Microsoft [1, 2], making it reside atop a non-Free stack that would secure and amass fortunes to Microsoft.
Here is another comment on why interoperability should be easy.
Start by using open standards and then everyone will be able to inter-operate. Stop spreading all the FUD and last of all rewrite your buggy 25 year old operating system.
Interoperability is a no-brainer if one obeys open standards. But “interoperability” is a propaganda word, which Microsoft spreads in order to confuse people.
Also related to this, watch what Glyn Moody writes in Linux Journal:
I would like to suggest that the free software world should start looking at things from a different perspective – not how many percentage points GNU/Linux gains on the desktop, but how many Microsoft is losing to *all* of the alternatives to Windows. Free software has nothing to fear from a heterogeneous environment – indeed, mixing technologies almost forces open standards upon manufacturers if they want to provide full interoperability.
As a reminder of why OOXML is to be shunned and buried, watch the latest from Rambus, which started to attack the entire industry over a de facto standard.
RAMBUS IS to take an axe to its own workforce, chopping around 90 jobs, or some 21 per cent of its staff.
Read the comment that says: “And what might those be? Litigation and cry baby tactics against more productive innovative companies that do honest engineering and production work that actually make real products that benefit people.”
Microsoft’s ‘open’ source and ‘open’ standards are a scam. They deserve to be mocked because they comprise redefinitions of existing terms. █
“ISO has lost its credibility as a standards-setting organization. It has proven that technical merit plays no role in its decisions, which likely carries across all facets of its operation.”
–Tony O’Bryan
Permalink
Send this to a friend 
View as PDF
04.30.08
Posted in Microsoft, Novell, Servers, Interoperability, Virtualization, Quote at 9:16 pm by Roy Schestowitz
Standards Mean “First Benefit Consumers”
This one comes from Joe Wilcox.
Interoperability: First Benefit Microsoft
[…]
The way I see it, interoperability is for Microsoft a means to an end, the end being competitive gains more than customer benefits. Microsoft is the first beneficiary of its interoperability efforts. The new management tools clearly show what interoperability really means to Microsoft: increasing its footprint in heterogenous platform environments. That’s going to be most important in established markets like the United States, where most companies that need servers have them already.
The news that he refers to we have commented on in [1, 2]. Keep this quote in mind when Microsoft calls OOXML “interoperable”. █
Permalink
Send this to a friend View as PDF
04.29.08
Posted in Microsoft, SCO, Novell, UNIX, Courtroom, Quote at 10:29 pm by Roy Schestowitz
We typically mention the SCO-Novell case only on Saturdays, but this one, posted in reference to the SCO-Novell case, is an eye-catcher.
Subject: MS/Novell vs. whomever
Yes, no doubt SCO will get their comeuppence. But I can’t help but think the M$/Novell comglomerate had anticipated this when they formed their non-compete alliance. What this trial didn’t do, and should have, is determine that there is no unix code in linux. Or, Unix code in M$. Say what you will, those boys know how to play both sides of the litigation game.
Also see: Could Microsoft 'Borrow' Novell to Hurt Linux with UNIX? █
Permalink
Send this to a friend View as PDF
04.13.08
Posted in Microsoft, Bill Gates, Open XML, Quote at 1:32 am by Roy Schestowitz
Here is something for you to bear in mind in light of the reality that Microsoft will never implement OOXML.
“We don’t do a new version to fix bugs. We don’t. Not enough people would buy it.”
–Bill Gates (a lot more here)
For the record, this quote is not exceptional if you consider another one that we shared here before. Gates says the only aim is to sell more copies, quality being an unimportant or negligible factor. How can ISO ever rely on such an attitude? █
Permalink
Send this to a friend View as PDF
04.01.08
Posted in Microsoft, Deception, Quote at 8:39 am by Roy Schestowitz
Teveral people refused to understood why we had given up on Slashdot. I found the following new comment from Pamela Jones very quote-worthy. Perhaps so will you.
MS shill blogs— Groklaw unfair
Authored by: PJ on Tuesday, April 01 2008 @ 03:59 AM EDT
boo hoo
I don’t do that. It’s not well known. It’s SCO
that used to claim that, if you remember. I loved
the moment when Darl said he liked Slashdot, because
it was really free discussions. Hahahaha.
Doug said that not because it is true but because
Microsoft can’t compete with decency, so they have
to slime the other side. He did the same thing
to Yoon-Kit, if you recall. Slime, slime, slime.
It’s what they do.
I saw what Microsoft did to Slashdot. Any time
you have moderation by the community, you open
yourself up to hordes of Microsoft shills showing
up and eventually taking over. Microsoft has
too much money, and they can throw more and more
troops into battle. That’s the impression I formed,
anyway.
I don’t want Groklaw ruined, so when I find
what I believe are astroturfers
and shills pretending to be FOSS people, I do
throw their fannies over the fence. I give
them every chance to cut it out and stay, but
if they persist, they are outahere. It’s in
our comments policy, so it shouldn’t be a
surprise.
I didn’t know Doug was one of them, until now.
That doesn’t mean they can’t read and comment
but they can’t do it as members, because Groklaw
is for group work, and I really don’t want
people who are only here to disrupt to be
members.
I could tell you some stories. We even had a
lawyer who had done work for Microsoft show up,
pretending to be a community person.
He didn’t say he was a lawyer or that he was
connected to Microsoft in any way, but I knew
his name. So we had a private
little discussion. I told him that he could
express himself freely but only if he told
all of you who he was here representing.
Not one comment after that. I didn’t expel
him, but I was disgusted.
We had a guy from CompTIA also. He pretended he
was just expressing his personal views, not
the company. So I mentioned that I doubted that,
since he was posting from CompTIA. Again, no
further comments were ever posted. With him too
I didn’t expel him or remove his comments, but
I let him know that I expected him to be honest.
That’s what Groklaw is about. I don’t think
anyone has the right to come to someone’s web
site and play underhanded games.
We have other Microsoft names you’d know who are
members. I doubt they are here to participate
in what we do. I don’t out them, of course, as
long as they stay within the guidelines for
behavior here.
We don’t censor comments here, but the frequency of abusive comments has fortunately remained low. For our views on Slashdot see:
There are several more items which are cited there. One of our readers also ran a somewhat scientific experiment to demonstrate bias. You can find it all in our previous postings
For recent examples of Microsoft AstroTurfing, start here. it’s real, and this tradition is very much alive. It includes smears for OOXML and anonymous voices, sometimes from Microsoft employees. █
Permalink
Send this to a friend View as PDF
03.29.08
Posted in Finance, Novell, Quote at 12:04 pm by Roy Schestowitz
What to make of of this (Before the Bell)? Your call.
“Novell goes back a long ways,” said Werlinich. “You can almost make the case that it’s hard to understand that Novell is in existence anymore.”
Recall our earlier post about Novell’s past and present. █
Permalink
Send this to a friend View as PDF
02.29.08
Posted in Finance, Novell, Quote at 8:52 am by Roy Schestowitz
“Well, I doubt, I tend… I don’t know who reported on that, but I saw something where they say, you know, this probably isn’t due to Novell massaging its numbers around Linux, which is what Dana Blakenhorn at ZDNet had claimed, I mean, I can tell you absolutely for a verifiable fact for that Novell does do that, but then again everybody does that. So… I’ve.. I’ve got the sales guys at Novell telling me that, that they do this, but it just doesn’t matter, I… I suspect that this is a tech… like a technicality that Novell has run afoul of and not a big deal, but maybe I’ll.. maybe we’ll be wrong, maybe I’ll be wrong, we should see.”
–Matt Asay
Permalink
Send this to a friend View as PDF
02.06.08
Posted in Microsoft, Deception, Open XML, IBM, Quote at 5:20 am by Roy Schestowitz
This one come from The Register:
On his blog Rough Type, tech-minded author, speaker, and friend of The Reg Nicholas Carr says that he opened up his email client to find a note trumpeting the latest reports from Forrester Research. One of these reports - issued on January 31, a day before Microsoft announced its bid for Yahoo! - was called “Microsoft Will Make Small Acquisitions: Its Size, Visibility To Antitrust Bodies, And Strategy Rule Out Big Deals.”
Analysts? Gotta love them.
We have had our fair share of criticisms of analysts, e.g. [1, 2, 3].
There’s a close second for “Quote of the Day”. It’s the comment “Microsoft OOXML == Dog Stool”.
Microsoft’s capacity for deceit is unbelievable - OOXML is not a standard, it is an incomplete and disorganized collection of ancient .DOC errors and incompatible exceptions that will NEVER be fully utilized, especially not by MS OFFICE 2007 (Microsoft Big Lie number 1,265,487.0).
Microsoft’s attempt to fast-track OOXML was foiled when people actually started to examine the 6000+ pages of often contradictory declarations and references to external undocumented proprietary blobs (almost certainly covered by MS patents).
Now some Microsoft mis-representative is whining “it’s all IBM’s fault” when they get caught and have to explain their bad behavior (attempting to coerce ISO fast-track adoption with bribes and stacking the deck with Microsoft ‘Partners’).
[…]
More about Microsoft’s insults against IBM here. █
Permalink
Send this to a friend View as PDF
« Previous entries ·
Highlight: Novell was the first to acknowledge that Microsoft FUD tactics had substance. Novell then used anti-Linux FUD to market itself. 
Highlight: Xandros let Microsoft make patent claims and brag about (paid-for) OOXML support. 
Highlight: Linspire's CEO not only fell into Microsoft arms, but he also assisted the company's attack on GNU/Linux. 
Highlight: Microsoft craves pseudo (proprietary) standards and gets its way using proxies and influence which it buys. 
Highlight: The invasion into the open source world is intended to leave Linux companies neglected, due to financial incentives from Microsoft. 
Analysis: Xen, an open source hypervisor, possibly fell victim to Microsoft's aggressive (and stealthy) acquisition-by-proxy strategy.