From owner-freebsd-advocacy Sun Jun 24 2:32:21 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from mail.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com (mail.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com [206.29.169.15]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B4F5337B401 for ; Sun, 24 Jun 2001 02:32:16 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from tedm@toybox.placo.com) Received: from tedm.placo.com (nat-rtr.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com [206.29.168.154]) by mail.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com (8.11.1/8.11.1) with SMTP id f5O9WAl92961; Sun, 24 Jun 2001 02:32:10 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from tedm@toybox.placo.com) From: "Ted Mittelstaedt" To: "Shannon Hendrix" , Subject: RE: Ask a question.. Thanks.. Date: Sun, 24 Jun 2001 02:32:09 -0700 Message-ID: <004201c0fc90$8a3cbb60$1401a8c0@tedm.placo.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2173.0 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3155.0 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: <20010622101630.C32692@widomaker.com> Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG >-----Original Message----- >From: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG >[mailto:owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG]On Behalf Of Shannon Hendrix > >> While it seems that compartmentalizing is more secure, the security >> of ANY box is only as good as the administrator in charge of it. >> There's an old saying KISS (Keep It Simple Stupid) and I would be >> real concerned about a box that had "security" customizations to >> the level you describe. It seems more like an auditing nightmare. > >It's nothing new, and it's not an auditing nightmare, at least not any >more than any system of it's kind is. It's a lot like Multics was. You >have a system where you are protected even from root. Files cannot be >given to people whose security level is lower than the file, even by a >user with high security privs. root cannot read your private email >or files, only do their admin work. Mandatory access is useful in a >wide range of systems. > Yes, I understand that kind of thinking, it's useful for military or medical or high-security government systems where a single mistake can kill people. Just remember, though that people all jumped onto the UNIX bandwagon precisely to _get away_ from the multi-layering of systems like Multics. They didn't call it "Mutt-Licks" for nothing, you know. >Anyway, their goal is a system that supports security and access control >like some other systems have (Multics), not to patch up every utility >program out there. > In short, to throw computing back 30 years. OK, maybe I'm too harsh, but along with all this goodness comes a lot of ugliness of putting systems into place that can allow admins that have really screwey ideas to create monstrosities of systems that are so intricate and have so many rules that if the admin leaves you just may as well reformat and start over because your never going to untangle the mess otherwise. There's an extreme usefulness in the UNIX system of having a single user account that can cut any gordion knot if need be. >Think about ISPs running systems like this, where your email is really >yours, and even their admins cannot read it. Their role could be defined >as delete only since obviously they need to be able to get rid of >accounts. But they need never be able to actually read your files. Just >an example. > I think that your not giving any credibility to the existing UNIX permissions systems. Is there any reason that all your ISP admins _need_ to have root access? What about creating groups and putting permission bits on files and controlling it that way? Too boring? >I think features like this are useful for general use UNIX systems >myself. It's definitely not for every server out there, but there have >been a lot of times when I could have used things like this. > Your example of internal control is useful to illustrate the point, but it's getting away from the topic of protecting from attackers and into the topic of "how best to administer a UNIX system" Getting back to the original topic, the "internal access control" argument in the context of a system that needs to be hardened to the outside predicates one thing - that your just assuming that the attackers _are_ going to get in. That's a rather defeatist argument to me, and it almost seems to encourage sloppy programming - it's like "so what our crappy code is full of security holes, you can depend on this great internal access control a-la Multics to keep them from doing anything" Your statement "...recommend _you_ patch things like that..." even carries echos of this "security holes are the end-user's problem, not the developer's" attitude. Anyway, all of this internal control horse pucky is a mirage for security anyway. So you have a convoluted internal control sytem that prevents root from reading people's mail. So what? All your doing is giving the cracker another target - now it's the internal control system. If your going to assume that he can make it onto the system eventually, then to be consistent then you have to assume that the internal control system itself is capabable of having security breaches. So, the cracker makes it onto the system, then sets about cracking the NSA add-ons, cracks them, and your system is just as hosed as the other guy's system that didn't have the NSA add-ons. There's a lot to be said for assuming that attackers making it inside is abnormal - and taking steps to close holes as fast as they are discovered. After all, a hole that exists in a UNIX or other system that only ONE person in the entire world knows about is not really a security problem, because that one person could never crack even 1% of all systems on the Internet if he spent the rest of his life cracking systems one after another. It only becomes a security problem when the cracking community starts disseminating the information - and since the good guys are perfectly able to read the same crack websites and mailing lists as the bad guys, one word gets out patches are released and the hole is no longer of any value. Ted Mittelstaedt tedm@toybox.placo.com Author of: The FreeBSD Corporate Networker's Guide Book website: http://www.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Tue Jun 26 21:45:30 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from wilma.widomaker.com (wilma.widomaker.com [204.17.220.5]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A1EB237B401 for ; Tue, 26 Jun 2001 21:45:24 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from shannon@widomaker.com) Received: from [209.96.179.84] (helo=escape.shannon.net) by wilma.widomaker.com with esmtp (Exim 3.22 #2) id 15F7Cb-0006w3-00; Wed, 27 Jun 2001 00:45:21 -0400 Received: (from shannon@localhost) by escape.shannon.net (8.11.0/8.8.8) id f5R4bYB29592; Wed, 27 Jun 2001 00:37:34 -0400 (EDT) Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2001 00:37:33 -0400 From: Shannon To: Ted Mittelstaedt Cc: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Ask a question.. Thanks.. Message-ID: <20010627003733.B27564@widomaker.com> Mail-Followup-To: Ted Mittelstaedt , freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org References: <20010622101630.C32692@widomaker.com> <004201c0fc90$8a3cbb60$1401a8c0@tedm.placo.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i In-Reply-To: <004201c0fc90$8a3cbb60$1401a8c0@tedm.placo.com>; from tedm@toybox.placo.com on Sun, Jun 24, 2001 at 02:32:09AM -0700 Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Sun, Jun 24, 2001 at 02:32:09AM -0700, Ted Mittelstaedt wrote: > Yes, I understand that kind of thinking, it's useful for military or > medical or high-security government systems where a single mistake can > kill people. Things like mandatory access controls are also useful in banking and customer database applications, just to name two I've been involved in recently. > Just remember, though that people all jumped onto the UNIX > bandwagon precisely to _get away_ from the multi-layering of systems > like Multics. No idea where you got that idea from. The majority of people who have jumped on the UNIX bandwagon never even saw Multics. Many of them probably don't even know what it is. > In short, to throw computing back 30 years. I don't see it that way. I'm not suggesting everything in Trusted BSD or SELInux (insert trusted system name here) should be made mainstream, and I don't see how you get the idea it will have this particular negative effect. The UNIX security model is nearly 25 years old BTW... are we throwing ourselves back by using it? > OK, maybe I'm too harsh, but along with all this goodness comes a lot of > ugliness of putting systems into place that can allow admins that have > really screwey ideas to create monstrosities of systems that are so Exactly how does UNIX right now prevent admins from doing this? I don't believe you should limit technology to that which does the least damage in the hands of a moron. > There's an extreme usefulness in the UNIX system of having a single user > account that can cut any gordion knot if need be. How do the new features being added or suggested for FreeBSD prevent this? For that matter, how was a Multics operator prevented from handling this? Keep in mind that a primary difference between these feature on Multics and UNIX is that it should be largely transpartent in the latter if you don't make use of the feature. My main workstation has access control lists and file flags, but they aren't being used, so they do no harm by being there. > I think that your not giving any credibility to the existing UNIX > permissions systems. Is there any reason that all your ISP admins > _need_ to have root access? What about creating groups and putting > permission bits on files and controlling it that way? Too boring? I think you assume too much: I agree with you. In the absence of mandatory access control, I have used front-end programs to get data to users, in situations where I could not have them giving copies of that data to anyone else. I'm sure you are aware of the fact that there are limits to what can be done with groups and permission bits on file, and I don't see why we should not address that. Some things I have done would have been much easier if with better file access controls. > Getting back to the original topic, the "internal access control" > argument in the context of a system that needs to be hardened to > the outside predicates one thing - that your just assuming that the > attackers _are_ going to get in. I don't think we should assume they will not. I think it is dangerous to make that assumption. Therefore, I see internal security as another tool to fight the same problem. > That's a rather defeatist argument to me, and it almost seems to encourage > sloppy programming [snip] ...and that sounds irrational to me. In fact, assuming external security is just as likely to encourage sloppy behavior. If people assume no one will ever get through a firewall or a system's security, then they may also decide there is therefore no need to secure their internal network. > holes, you can depend on this great internal access control a-la Multics > to keep them from doing anything" Your statement "...recommend _you_ > patch things like that..." even carries echos of this "security holes > are the end-user's problem, not the developer's" attitude. You got your attribution wrong, I didn't say that. I think security is ulimately everyone's problem, especially when it fails. > Anyway, all of this internal control horse pucky is a mirage for > security anyway. Bah! It's useful at a system and a network level, and we have a lot of historical evidence to prove it. The "impervious door" method of security is foolish. > So you have a convoluted internal control sytem [snip] If the administration of the system is so bad that the internal controls are convoluted as you say, then the problem is the people. That's a constant for all systems. > There's a lot to be said for assuming that attackers making it inside > is abnormal - and taking steps to close holes as fast as they are I don't disagree. But at the same time, I welcome changes to FreeBSD that support more internal controls. You don't have to use it, and as with all features, potential for abuse should not dictate its inclusion into a system. -- shannon@widomaker.com _________________________________________________ ______________________/ armchairrocketscientistgraffitiexenstentialist "And in billows of might swell the Saxons before her,-- Unite, oh unite! Or the billows burst o'er her!" -- Downfall of the Gael To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Wed Jun 27 1:41:23 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from mail.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com (mail.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com [206.29.169.15]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7DD3137B405 for ; Wed, 27 Jun 2001 01:41:16 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from tedm@toybox.placo.com) Received: from tedm.placo.com (nat-rtr.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com [206.29.168.154]) by mail.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com (8.11.1/8.11.1) with SMTP id f5R8fCl08201; Wed, 27 Jun 2001 01:41:13 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from tedm@toybox.placo.com) From: "Ted Mittelstaedt" To: "Shannon" Cc: Subject: RE: Ask a question.. Thanks.. Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2001 01:41:10 -0700 Message-ID: <000801c0fee4$ea8bc140$1401a8c0@tedm.placo.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2173.0 In-Reply-To: <20010627003733.B27564@widomaker.com> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3155.0 Importance: Normal Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG >-----Original Message----- >From: Shannon [mailto:shannon@widomaker.com] >Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2001 9:38 PM >To: Ted Mittelstaedt >Cc: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org >Subject: Re: Ask a question.. Thanks.. > > >On Sun, Jun 24, 2001 at 02:32:09AM -0700, Ted Mittelstaedt wrote: > > >> Just remember, though that people all jumped onto the UNIX >> bandwagon precisely to _get away_ from the multi-layering of systems >> like Multics. > >No idea where you got that idea from. The majority of people who have >jumped on the UNIX bandwagon never even saw Multics. Many of them >probably don't even know what it is. > Back when UNIX was first being used in the Universities the students preferred it over VMS or other proprietary systems. This is well documented just read any detailed UNIX history. Granted there were a lot of other reasons than easier-to-deal-with security, but the ability to actually do things with a system without having to go running for the administrator every 5 minutes is a good thing to have. Of course, there's a place for everything. Obviously you wouldn't want this in a corporate environment like a bank where you have to maintain security to the nth level, but most corporate environments aren't like that. > >I don't believe you should limit technology to that which does the least >damage in the hands of a moron. > Perhaps for this, but would you want the most advanced technological developments in armaments posted for the world to view? Or would you want the government to permit television sets to be placed in automobiles in view of the driver? > >Keep in mind that a primary difference between these feature on Multics >and UNIX is that it should be largely transpartent in the latter if you >don't make use of the feature. > Tell that to the Kerberos people who made Kerberos installation the default for FreeBSD. It's definitely not transparent if you forget to uncheck the Kerberos libraries when your installing FreeBSD, from that point on you get lots of irritating messages about "unknown realm" and such when you login to the system. Yes, any new security features SHOULD be transparent to the user unless they deliberately turn them on - but it appears the history of FreeBSD is that when new security features are developed they are forced on people, and you have to deliberately turn them off. For example, MD5 passwords were forced, sshd was forced, Kerberos was forced, syslogd change of defaults was forced, etc. etc. etc. > >I'm sure you are aware of the fact that there are limits to what can be >done with groups and permission bits on file, and I don't see why we >should not address that. Some things I have done would have been much >easier if with better file access controls. > Oh I agree there are limits, but I think that most admins THINK they are being limited when in reality they just don't understand permission bits. How long did it take before we finally started getting people to put each user in it's own group? It's been said before but the permissions bits are coarse-grained access control, ACL's are fine-grained access control. Well fine-grained allows you to do a lot of things but if you use it then it's more complicated than coarse. In short for the additional functionality you do lose some simplicity. >> Getting back to the original topic, the "internal access control" >> argument in the context of a system that needs to be hardened to >> the outside predicates one thing - that your just assuming that the >> attackers _are_ going to get in. > >I don't think we should assume they will not. I think it is dangerous to >make that assumption. Therefore, I see internal security as another tool >to fight the same problem. > I'm not saying to assume that they won't get in, I'm just saying not to assume they will. Hair-splitting perhaps, but not really because what it means is what do you consider abnormal? I consider them getting in as completely abnormal and grounds to destroy the system and remake it from scratch. If your going to expect them to get in, it follows that when they do your not going to be as concerned with flushing the system. >...and that sounds irrational to me. In fact, assuming external security >is just as likely to encourage sloppy behavior. If people assume no one >will ever get through a firewall or a system's security, then they may >also decide there is therefore no need to secure their internal network. > Is there any evidence that assuming external security is weak will push people into securing their internal network? It seems to me that people eiter are going to secure their internal net or they won't, irregardless of external security. There's a fundamental issue with security that I'm sure your aware of - when internal security is intrusive people want to try to go around it, because they consider it a nuisance. In a bank, or military, or hospital, or whatever the administrators have a tremendous physological advantage to force users to jump through hoops to get at data. People will accept having to remember nine different passwords that get aged every month in a hospital because you can wave "patient confidentiality" around the moment they complain, and the rest of the users in the hospital will sit on the complainer. But, in a casual office environment you simply won't be able to enforce this because at some level people realize that every scrap of data on the planet is NOT of the same importance. ACL's may be really cool but they will go out the window the first time the Director of Marketing goes to the CEO and says "why can't we just have one area on the server that everybody can have the same full access to the marketing data, we trust people" > >I think security is ulimately everyone's problem, especially when it >fails. > Exactly. But this infers that it's not just the administrators problem, it's the users problem too. And most users I've met do not wish to complicate their own access to the data they work with and will work against you when you try to force them to secure their work. >> Anyway, all of this internal control horse pucky is a mirage for >> security anyway. > >Bah! It's useful at a system and a network level, and we have a lot >of historical evidence to prove it. The "impervious door" method of >security is foolish. > A network with an "impervious door" that the admin is paying attention to will be more secure than a "many little doors" network that the admin does not pay attention to. fine-grained access controls like your advocating have a lot of theoretical security advantages over coarse-grained like the "impervious door" method. But it's the maintainence and implementation that is what really determines which method is more effective. > >I don't disagree. But at the same time, I welcome changes to FreeBSD >that support more internal controls. You don't have to use it, see Kerberos treatment above... >and as >with all features, potential for abuse should not dictate its inclusion >into a system. > Frankly I don't know if there's anyone who can write a good criteria for including or not including anything in the base FreeBSD distribution. Some things are obvious - BIND for example - but your getting into a much greyer area with some of these security things. There's nothing wrong with making a feature optional - the ports directories are stuffed with numerous Good Programs that have tremendous reason for inclusion in the base distribution. For example Apache - it's probably used far more then Kerberos is, yet Kerberos is included by default and Apache isn't. Ted Mittelstaedt tedm@toybox.placo.com Author of: The FreeBSD Corporate Networker's Guide Book website: http://www.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Wed Jun 27 9:18: 9 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from stox.sa.enteract.com (stox.sa.enteract.com [207.229.132.161]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DBE6C37B401 for ; Wed, 27 Jun 2001 09:18:05 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from stox@stox.sa.enteract.com) Received: (from stox@localhost) by stox.sa.enteract.com (8.11.4/8.11.3) id f5RGI1g06578 for freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG; Wed, 27 Jun 2001 11:18:01 -0500 (CDT) (envelope-from stox) Message-ID: X-Mailer: XFMail 1.4.0 on FreeBSD X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit MIME-Version: 1.0 Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2001 11:18:01 -0500 (CDT) Organization: Imaginary Landscape, LLC. From: "Kenneth P. Stox" To: freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: FreeBSD and Microsoft Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/a/dotnet/2001/06/27/dotnet.html ---------------------------------- E-Mail: Kenneth P. Stox Date: 27-Jun-01 Time: 11:16:38 ---------------------------------- To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Wed Jun 27 11:34:16 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from odin.acuson.com (odin.acuson.com [157.226.230.71]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B78BF37B405 for ; Wed, 27 Jun 2001 11:34:13 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from djohnson@acuson.com) Received: from acuson.com ([157.226.46.72]) by odin.acuson.com (Netscape Messaging Server 3.54) with ESMTP id AAA4567; Wed, 27 Jun 2001 11:40:30 -0700 Message-ID: <3B3A2720.815A74C0@acuson.com> Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2001 11:34:08 -0700 From: David Johnson Organization: Acuson X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (X11; U; SunOS 5.5.1 sun4u) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Kenneth P. Stox" Cc: freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: FreeBSD and Microsoft References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG "Kenneth P. Stox" wrote: > > http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/a/dotnet/2001/06/27/dotnet.html Quick summary: Microsoft is going to offer some .NET stuff for FreeBSD, including CLI, C# and an ECMAscript compiler. Throughout the interview the Microsoft guys, David Stutz, mumbles a lot and casts forth heaps of double speak. Some particular quotes: "We don't feel comfortable with Linux because of the GPL nature of the kernel ..." Now, I'm not a kernel hacker. I haven't written a compiler in twenty years. I don't know anything about .NET. But for the life of me I can't figure out why the licensing of a kernel stops them from making a Linux port as well. Are they planning to make C# a kernel module? Are they confused and think that glibc is under the GPL as well? "We have chosen FreeBSD because of licensing issues, yes." Didn't I predict this just one or two weeks ago? Nothing Microsoft is doing with a .NET port to Unix has anything at all to do with the GPL. They aren't writing any Linux kernel drivers, they aren't modifying any GPL sources, and they aren't linking to any GPL libraries. It's nice that they chose FreeBSD over Linux, but their motivation has nothing to do with viral licenses. The GPL is completely irrelevant in this case. I'm bracing for the backlash from the Linux guys, which will undoubtedly aimed at us... David To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Wed Jun 27 11:54: 7 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from mb1i0.ns.pitt.edu (mb1i0.ns.pitt.edu [136.142.186.35]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 832CD37B401; Wed, 27 Jun 2001 11:54:01 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from pfg1+@pitt.edu) Received: from pitt.edu ("port 1129"@[136.142.89.102]) by pitt.edu (PMDF V5.2-32 #41462) with ESMTP id <01K59KCZ7EJA002HUI@mb1i0.ns.pitt.edu>; Wed, 27 Jun 2001 14:54:00 EST Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2001 15:04:15 -0400 From: "Pedro F. Giffuni" Subject: Re: Microsoft giving back to FreeBSD !! To: Rick Hamell Cc: freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG, freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.org Message-id: <3B3A2E2F.A74DDCC8@pitt.edu> Organization: University of Pittsburgh MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.76 [en] (Win98; U) Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Accept-Language: en,pdf,es-CO References: Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG (CCd to advocacy) Rick Hamell wrote: > > > This is very cool! > > > > http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/a/dotnet/2001/06/27/dotnet.html > > To bad the.NET project is Microsoft's latest attempt to take over > the Internet.... :( > > Rick Resistance is futile, they will be assimilated ! ;) Seriously, Java is putting a serious weight so it won't be that easy. They will have to have real technical merits to be successful in their attempt. FWIW, it is really weird to find SUN somewhat ignoring us in all this while MS is actually playing clean. What is nice here is that in an unprecedented Press Release, Microsoft is encouraging people to use FreeBSD. The could have released binaries for Linux, after all most of this is userland code, but they chose us, apparently with a very user friendly license, and whatever reason they might have it is very good to have them around. Perhaps now that they are working with Corel on this, and FreeBSD is one of the two supported platforms we can finally get a native port of Corel's office suite. (there you go ... a plausible campaign). I have this feeling that FreeBSD doesn't need more hackers, but rather a real strategist. Apple, Microsoft, Wind River.... all big companies in their fields: the spotlight is on FreeBSD now! Pedro. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Wed Jun 27 12: 7:23 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from nwlynx.network-lynx.net (nwlynx.network-lynx.net [63.122.185.99]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7B0BE37B407; Wed, 27 Jun 2001 12:07:18 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from Don@Silver-Lynx.com) Received: from Silver-Lynx.com (doze-1.network-lynx.net [63.122.185.106]) by nwlynx.network-lynx.net (8.11.1/8.9.3/Who.Cares) with ESMTP id f5RJ79U28676; Wed, 27 Jun 2001 13:07:09 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from Don@Silver-Lynx.com) Message-ID: <3B3A2ECF.6FECA0E3@Silver-Lynx.com> Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2001 13:06:55 -0600 From: Don Wilde X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (Win98; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Pedro F. Giffuni" Cc: Rick Hamell , freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG, freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: Microsoft giving back to FreeBSD !! References: <3B3A2E2F.A74DDCC8@pitt.edu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG "Pedro F. Giffuni" wrote: > > > Perhaps now that they are working with Corel on this, and FreeBSD is > one of the two supported platforms we can finally get a native port of > Corel's office suite. (there you go ... a plausible campaign). > My understanding is that Corel has been running away at hyperspeed from Linux. Their Corel Draw graphics suite is no longer supported as a front-line product, for example. -- Don Wilde http://www.Silver-Lynx.com Silver Lynx Embedded Microsystems Architects 2218 Southern Bl. Ste. 12 Rio Rancho, NM 87124 505-891-4175 FAX 891-4185 To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Wed Jun 27 12:13:26 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from ilhawaii.net (maile.ilhawaii.net [207.12.19.104]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A636337B406 for ; Wed, 27 Jun 2001 12:13:23 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from source@hilo.net) Received: from hilo.net (max3-76.ilhawaii.net [64.75.181.76]) by ilhawaii.net (8.10.1/8.10.1) with ESMTP id f5RJ7IA27237 for ; Wed, 27 Jun 2001 09:07:18 -1000 (HST) Message-ID: <3B3A2F72.6783462E@hilo.net> Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2001 09:09:38 -1000 From: Bruce Meier X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.76 [en] (X11; U; FreeBSD 4.3-STABLE i386) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: FreeBSD and Microsoft References: <3B3A2720.815A74C0@acuson.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Sounds like divide and conquer to me. Bruce Meier David Johnson wrote: > > "Kenneth P. Stox" wrote: > > > > http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/a/dotnet/2001/06/27/dotnet.html > > Quick summary: Microsoft is going to offer some .NET stuff for FreeBSD, > including CLI, C# and an ECMAscript compiler. Throughout the interview > the Microsoft guys, David Stutz, mumbles a lot and casts forth heaps of > double speak. > > Some particular quotes: > > "We don't feel comfortable with Linux because of the GPL nature of the > kernel ..." > > Now, I'm not a kernel hacker. I haven't written a compiler in twenty > years. I don't know anything about .NET. But for the life of me I can't > figure out why the licensing of a kernel stops them from making a Linux > port as well. Are they planning to make C# a kernel module? Are they > confused and think that glibc is under the GPL as well? > > "We have chosen FreeBSD because of licensing issues, yes." > > Didn't I predict this just one or two weeks ago? Nothing Microsoft is > doing with a .NET port to Unix has anything at all to do with the GPL. > They aren't writing any Linux kernel drivers, they aren't modifying any > GPL sources, and they aren't linking to any GPL libraries. It's nice > that they chose FreeBSD over Linux, but their motivation has nothing to > do with viral licenses. The GPL is completely irrelevant in this case. > > I'm bracing for the backlash from the Linux guys, which will undoubtedly > aimed at us... > > David > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org > with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Wed Jun 27 12:16:31 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from sasami.jurai.net (sasami.jurai.net [64.0.106.45]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2275A37B405 for ; Wed, 27 Jun 2001 12:16:29 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from scanner@jurai.net) Received: from localhost (scanner@localhost) by sasami.jurai.net (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA97090; Wed, 27 Jun 2001 15:16:24 -0400 (EDT) Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2001 15:16:24 -0400 (EDT) From: To: Bruce Meier Cc: freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: FreeBSD and Microsoft In-Reply-To: <3B3A2F72.6783462E@hilo.net> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Wed, 27 Jun 2001, Bruce Meier wrote: > Sounds like divide and conquer to me. Hrmm that reminds me of something.. what could it be.. oh yeah the GPL. gnuls, gdb, groff, g77, ... ============================================================================= -Chris Watson (316) 326-3862 | Sr. Unix Administrator Work: chris.watson@twa.com | Trans World Airlines, Kansas City, MO Home: scanner@jurai.net | http://www.twa.com ============================================================================= WINDOWS: "Where do you want to go today?" LINUX: "Where do you want to go tomorrow?" BSD: "Are you guys coming or what?" ============================================================================= irc.openprojects.net #FreeBSD -Join the revolution! ICQ: 20016186 To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Wed Jun 27 12:44:36 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from odin.acuson.com (odin.acuson.com [157.226.230.71]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B6A6637B406 for ; Wed, 27 Jun 2001 12:44:33 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from djohnson@acuson.com) Received: from acuson.com ([157.226.46.72]) by odin.acuson.com (Netscape Messaging Server 3.54) with ESMTP id AAA6BA4; Wed, 27 Jun 2001 12:50:48 -0700 Message-ID: <3B3A379D.9EFCA43F@acuson.com> Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2001 12:44:29 -0700 From: David Johnson Organization: Acuson X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (X11; U; SunOS 5.5.1 sun4u) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Bruce Meier Cc: freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: FreeBSD and Microsoft References: <3B3A2720.815A74C0@acuson.com> <3B3A2F72.6783462E@hilo.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Bruce Meier wrote: > > Sounds like divide and conquer to me. The vast majority of responses at Linux Today to this and a related article see this as what it is, a transparent tactic to get us fighting each other. Of course, we'll have to wait until RMS, ESR and BP weigh in. Since it doesn't involve microkernels, LT will keep out of the fray :-) David To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Wed Jun 27 12:49:53 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from out4.mx.nwbl.wi.voyager.net (out4.mx.nwbl.wi.voyager.net [169.207.1.77]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1026637B401 for ; Wed, 27 Jun 2001 12:49:50 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from fpawlak@execpc.com) Received: from pop0.nwbl.wi.voyager.net (pop0.nwbl.wi.voyager.net [169.207.1.115]) by out4.mx.nwbl.wi.voyager.net (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f5RJoWV23932; Wed, 27 Jun 2001 14:50:32 -0500 (CDT) Received: from john.execpc.com (d148.as2.nwbl0.wi.voyager.net [169.207.95.22]) by pop0.nwbl.wi.voyager.net (8.10.2/8.10.2) with ESMTP id f5RJmj890405; Wed, 27 Jun 2001 14:48:45 -0500 (CDT) Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20010627144405.02633958@127.0.0.1> X-Sender: fpawlak/mail.execpc.com@127.0.0.1 X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2001 14:51:20 -0500 To: Bruce Meier , freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG From: Frank Pawlak Subject: Re: FreeBSD and Microsoft In-Reply-To: <3B3A2F72.6783462E@hilo.net> References: <3B3A2720.815A74C0@acuson.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG I agree. That was the first thought to cross my mind as I read the article. At the risk of a flame war, (please don't), Linux has the installed based that could possibly be perceived as a threat to M$. So lets throw some bones toward FreeBSD, and put the possible competitor in a bad position. Linux doesn't have a BSD emulator. IMHO, just another of M$ ploys to dominate and close a market and then be able to turn to referee, the Justice Dept and others, and say who plays dirty? Not me! . Frank > At 09:09 AM 6/27/2001 -1000, Bruce Meier wrote: >Sounds like divide and conquer to me. > >Bruce Meier > > >David Johnson wrote: > > > > "Kenneth P. Stox" wrote: > > > > > > http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/a/dotnet/2001/06/27/dotnet.html > > > > Quick summary: Microsoft is going to offer some .NET stuff for FreeBSD, > > including CLI, C# and an ECMAscript compiler. Throughout the interview > > the Microsoft guys, David Stutz, mumbles a lot and casts forth heaps of > > double speak. > > > > Some particular quotes: > > > > "We don't feel comfortable with Linux because of the GPL nature of the > > kernel ..." > > > > Now, I'm not a kernel hacker. I haven't written a compiler in twenty > > years. I don't know anything about .NET. But for the life of me I can't > > figure out why the licensing of a kernel stops them from making a Linux > > port as well. Are they planning to make C# a kernel module? Are they > > confused and think that glibc is under the GPL as well? > > > > "We have chosen FreeBSD because of licensing issues, yes." > > > > Didn't I predict this just one or two weeks ago? Nothing Microsoft is > > doing with a .NET port to Unix has anything at all to do with the GPL. > > They aren't writing any Linux kernel drivers, they aren't modifying any > > GPL sources, and they aren't linking to any GPL libraries. It's nice > > that they chose FreeBSD over Linux, but their motivation has nothing to > > do with viral licenses. The GPL is completely irrelevant in this case. > > > > I'm bracing for the backlash from the Linux guys, which will undoubtedly > > aimed at us... > > > > David > > > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org > > with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message > >To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org >with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Wed Jun 27 13:11:45 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from mooseriver.com (erie.mooseriver.com [205.166.121.26]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C316937B405 for ; Wed, 27 Jun 2001 13:11:42 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from jgrosch@mooseriver.com) Received: (from jgrosch@localhost) by mooseriver.com (8.11.3/8.11.2) id f5RKBQP52552; Wed, 27 Jun 2001 13:11:26 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from jgrosch) Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2001 13:11:25 -0700 From: Josef Grosch To: Frank Pawlak Cc: Bruce Meier , freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: FreeBSD and Microsoft Message-ID: <20010627131125.A52377@mooseriver.com> Reply-To: jgrosch@mooseriver.com References: <3B3A2720.815A74C0@acuson.com> <3B3A2F72.6783462E@hilo.net> <5.1.0.14.2.20010627144405.02633958@127.0.0.1> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 1.0.1i In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20010627144405.02633958@127.0.0.1>; from fpawlak@execpc.com on Wed, Jun 27, 2001 at 02:51:20PM -0500 Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Wed, Jun 27, 2001 at 02:51:20PM -0500, Frank Pawlak wrote: > I agree. That was the first thought to cross my mind as I read the > article. At the risk of a flame war, (please don't), Linux has the > installed based that could possibly be perceived as a threat to M$. So > lets throw some bones toward FreeBSD, and put the possible competitor in a > bad position. Linux doesn't have a BSD emulator. IMHO, just another of M$ > ploys to dominate and close a market and then be able to turn to referee, > the Justice Dept and others, and say who plays dirty? Not me! I completely agree. This is just divide and conquer again. Microsoft has staked a position that the GPL is a virus license thus creating in the minds of people who do not understand the licensing issues or know much about Open Source that Linux is a virus or harbors virus. Then they throw FreeBSD a bone. FreeBSD being the largest of the *BSD and also not using the GPL. Thus creating hate and discontent in the ranks of the Open Source community. Remember, "The enemy of my enemy is my friend". FreeBSD and Linux have a great deal in common. We are far better off by sticking together and collectively telling Microsoft to fuck off. Josef -- Josef Grosch | Another day closer to a | FreeBSD 4.3 jgrosch@MooseRiver.com | Micro$oft free world | www.bafug.org To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Wed Jun 27 13:47:55 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from out4.mx.nwbl.wi.voyager.net (out4.mx.nwbl.wi.voyager.net [169.207.1.77]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 47E9237B405 for ; Wed, 27 Jun 2001 13:47:51 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from fpawlak@execpc.com) Received: from pop3.nwbl.wi.voyager.net (pop3.nwbl.wi.voyager.net [169.207.1.83]) by out4.mx.nwbl.wi.voyager.net (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f5RKmYV49777; Wed, 27 Jun 2001 15:48:34 -0500 (CDT) Received: from john.execpc.com (d13.as12.nwbl0.wi.voyager.net [169.207.135.13]) by pop3.nwbl.wi.voyager.net (8.10.2/8.10.2) with ESMTP id f5RKkwS47003; Wed, 27 Jun 2001 15:46:59 -0500 (CDT) Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20010627152730.026c4a08@127.0.0.1> X-Sender: fpawlak/mail.execpc.com@127.0.0.1 X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2001 15:48:54 -0500 To: jgrosch@mooseriver.com From: Frank Pawlak Subject: Re: FreeBSD and Microsoft Cc: Bruce Meier , freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG In-Reply-To: <20010627131125.A52377@mooseriver.com> References: <5.1.0.14.2.20010627144405.02633958@127.0.0.1> <3B3A2720.815A74C0@acuson.com> <3B3A2F72.6783462E@hilo.net> <5.1.0.14.2.20010627144405.02633958@127.0.0.1> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG I couldn't have phrased it better Josef. Here is some real flame bait, but before you do the ready aim, fire, stuff, please hear me out. As a non-practicing economist I happen to agree with the US Justice Department that M$ is a monopoly. That said, I will continue to state the we now have in the US a political administration that if anything will attempt to let M$ off the hook. From what I read the Justice suite is already in trouble, and that implies that M$ will just step-up their half-truths, FUD and general horse shit, to try to stomp on anything and everything that appears to get in their way. Watch their reaction to OS X as it begins to gain momentium. Yes there is some money behind Linux these days, but not nearly enough to keep the evil empire from further corrupting the desktop and server OS market. Unfortunately, this comes at a very bad time because now there is a bit more than a glimmer of hope that open source can begin to effectively compete with them, and erode their market share. It is really a sad state that better products like BSD and Linux have to fight with their hands tied behind their backs. It is my hope that Justice will win out and slap their ass and free the market for us. One small thing further. From what I read in the rags, which I don't read very much, there are some rumbling that CIO's are becoming fed up with M$'s bully boy tactics. That could be just what the Dr., ordered for the open source community. One can only hope. Are there any doubts about my feelings toward M$? ;-) Frank At 01:11 PM 6/27/2001 -0700, Josef Grosch wrote: >On Wed, Jun 27, 2001 at 02:51:20PM -0500, Frank Pawlak wrote: > > I agree. That was the first thought to cross my mind as I read the > > article. At the risk of a flame war, (please don't), Linux has the > > installed based that could possibly be perceived as a threat to M$. So > > lets throw some bones toward FreeBSD, and put the possible competitor in a > > bad position. Linux doesn't have a BSD emulator. IMHO, just another > of M$ > > ploys to dominate and close a market and then be able to turn to referee, > > the Justice Dept and others, and say who plays dirty? Not me! > >I completely agree. This is just divide and conquer again. Microsoft has >staked a position that the GPL is a virus license thus creating in the >minds of people who do not understand the licensing issues or know much >about Open Source that Linux is a virus or harbors virus. Then they throw >FreeBSD a bone. FreeBSD being the largest of the *BSD and also not using >the GPL. Thus creating hate and discontent in the ranks of the Open Source >community. Remember, "The enemy of my enemy is my friend". FreeBSD and >Linux have a great deal in common. We are far better off by sticking >together and collectively telling Microsoft to fuck off. > > >Josef > > >-- >Josef Grosch | Another day closer to a | FreeBSD 4.3 >jgrosch@MooseRiver.com | Micro$oft free world | www.bafug.org > > >To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org >with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Wed Jun 27 14:11:51 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from web13603.mail.yahoo.com (web13603.mail.yahoo.com [216.136.175.114]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id E01F737B403 for ; Wed, 27 Jun 2001 14:11:49 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from bzdik@yahoo.com) Message-ID: <20010627211149.57098.qmail@web13603.mail.yahoo.com> Received: from [24.16.193.228] by web13603.mail.yahoo.com; Wed, 27 Jun 2001 14:11:49 PDT Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2001 14:11:49 -0700 (PDT) From: Bzdik BSD Subject: Re: FreeBSD and Microsoft To: freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20010627152730.026c4a08@127.0.0.1> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG --- Frank Pawlak wrote: [snipped for brevity] > One small thing further. From what I read in the rags, which I don't > read > very much, there are some rumbling that CIO's are becoming fed up > with M$'s > bully boy tactics. Yes, but the evidence is anecdotal and resistance at Fortune 100 is spotty. All those CIOs ask not to be named when it comes to big Co's. Keep in mind that an Armada of lawyers is waiting for the outcome of DOJ case, plus AG of CT and IA are standing by with a big class action crowd on the States level comparable with tobacco rip-off. if there is a money to be split, it will be split. That's why I always maintaned that it's not gonna be me or you who keeps pathetic attempts to educate public=CIOs, it's gonna be lawyers who'll trim down our friends from Redmond lead by Mr Gates and Dr Ballmer :) I don't imply that education is bad, just keep in mind that there is no big difference between institutions be their name IBM, MSFT, SUN ... anybody remembers how Apple behaved when its installed base was much bigger in past? Anything that gets institutionalised outlives its purpose, the question is when... Few are able to truly reinvent themselves, the rest is stuck in [comfortable] death process slowly spreading their deseases. __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/ To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Wed Jun 27 20:16:58 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from femail22.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail22.sdc1.sfba.home.com [24.0.95.147]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DF93937B406 for ; Wed, 27 Jun 2001 20:16:55 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from tech_info@threespace.com) Received: from Atlanta.threespace.com ([24.21.224.204]) by femail22.sdc1.sfba.home.com (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with ESMTP id <20010628031655.JSNG14966.femail22.sdc1.sfba.home.com@Atlanta.threespace.com> for ; Wed, 27 Jun 2001 20:16:55 -0700 Message-Id: <4.3.2.7.2.20010627215902.017e9e70@threespace.com> X-Sender: tech@threespace.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.2 Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2001 22:08:31 -0400 To: FreeBSD Advocacy From: Technical Information Subject: Re: FreeBSD and Microsoft In-Reply-To: <20010627131125.A52377@mooseriver.com> References: <5.1.0.14.2.20010627144405.02633958@127.0.0.1> <3B3A2720.815A74C0@acuson.com> <3B3A2F72.6783462E@hilo.net> <5.1.0.14.2.20010627144405.02633958@127.0.0.1> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Are you kidding? Microsoft has one of the best PR machines on the planet. If they wanna do some stuff to promote FreeBSD as a viable alternative to Linux and port some of their software, I hardly see that as A Bad Thing (TM). The people in the Linux and other BSD camps aren't as susceptible as you think. They'll quickly figure out the same things that we have. No one can exactly "blame" us for Microsoft's decision to port to FreeBSD. Also, the FreeBSD community may soon find itself being judged by its reaction to this development and how readily others are welcomed. --Chip Morton At 04:11 PM 6/27/2001, you wrote: >Remember, "The enemy of my enemy is my friend". FreeBSD and >Linux have a great deal in common. We are far better off by sticking >together and collectively telling Microsoft to fuck off. > > >Josef > > >-- >Josef Grosch | Another day closer to a | FreeBSD 4.3 >jgrosch@MooseRiver.com | Micro$oft free world | www.bafug.org To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Wed Jun 27 23:42: 5 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from mail.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com (mail.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com [206.29.169.15]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6EF5137B405 for ; Wed, 27 Jun 2001 23:42:02 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from tedm@toybox.placo.com) Received: from tedm.placo.com (nat-rtr.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com [206.29.168.154]) by mail.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com (8.11.1/8.11.1) with SMTP id f5S6fvl11693; Wed, 27 Jun 2001 23:41:57 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from tedm@toybox.placo.com) From: "Ted Mittelstaedt" To: "David Johnson" , "Bruce Meier" Cc: Subject: RE: FreeBSD and Microsoft Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2001 23:41:56 -0700 Message-ID: <000001c0ff9d$6d03fc60$1401a8c0@tedm.placo.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2173.0 In-Reply-To: <3B3A379D.9EFCA43F@acuson.com> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3155.0 Importance: Normal Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG >-----Original Message----- >From: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG >[mailto:owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG]On Behalf Of David Johnson >Sent: Wednesday, June 27, 2001 12:44 PM >To: Bruce Meier >Cc: freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG >Subject: Re: FreeBSD and Microsoft > > >Bruce Meier wrote: >> >> Sounds like divide and conquer to me. > >The vast majority of responses at Linux Today to this and a related >article see this as what it is, a transparent tactic to get us fighting >each other. > What rot. They are just pissed off because now they are going to have to put a FreeBSD emulator in Linux if they want the stuff. Where were these hoseheads when we had to put a Linuxulator in FreeBSD, Huh? Ted Mittelstaedt tedm@toybox.placo.com Author of: The FreeBSD Corporate Networker's Guide Book website: http://www.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Thu Jun 28 0:15:34 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from mail.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com (mail.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com [206.29.169.15]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 25C9C37B403 for ; Thu, 28 Jun 2001 00:15:29 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from tedm@toybox.placo.com) Received: from tedm.placo.com (nat-rtr.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com [206.29.168.154]) by mail.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com (8.11.1/8.11.1) with SMTP id f5S7FJl11757; Thu, 28 Jun 2001 00:15:19 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from tedm@toybox.placo.com) From: "Ted Mittelstaedt" To: "David Johnson" , "Kenneth P. Stox" Cc: Subject: RE: FreeBSD and Microsoft Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 00:15:18 -0700 Message-ID: <000101c0ffa2$15f5f7c0$1401a8c0@tedm.placo.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2173.0 In-Reply-To: <3B3A2720.815A74C0@acuson.com> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3155.0 Importance: Normal Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG >-----Original Message----- >From: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG >[mailto:owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG]On Behalf Of David Johnson >Sent: Wednesday, June 27, 2001 11:34 AM >To: Kenneth P. Stox >Cc: freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG >Subject: Re: FreeBSD and Microsoft > > >"Kenneth P. Stox" wrote: >> >> http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/a/dotnet/2001/06/27/dotnet.html > >Quick summary: Microsoft is going to offer some .NET stuff for FreeBSD, >including CLI, C# and an ECMAscript compiler. Throughout the interview >the Microsoft guys, David Stutz, mumbles a lot and casts forth heaps of >double speak. > >Some particular quotes: > >"We don't feel comfortable with Linux because of the GPL nature of the >kernel ..." > >Now, I'm not a kernel hacker. I haven't written a compiler in twenty >years. I don't know anything about .NET. But for the life of me I can't >figure out why the licensing of a kernel stops them from making a Linux >port as well. Are they planning to make C# a kernel module? Are they >confused and think that glibc is under the GPL as well? > It doesen't. However, the issue is pure politics and has nothing to do with technology. If the Linux people want to port any of the Microsoft FreeBSD code to Linux, they can. Microsoft isn't going to prevent this (although obviously they won't permit their code released under the BSD license from being re-released under the GPL license) I'm sure that there will even be Linux people willing to do the work too. The Linux people haven't said squat as commercial ISV after commercial ISV has started to release Linux binaries and no FreeBSD binaries, and supplied code optimized for Linux and not FreeBSD. It's certainly time now for them to do some work porting our stuff to their stuff, rather than expecting that the FreeBSD Linuxulator will relieve them of responsibility for porting their code to FreeBSD. (which is what is going on now) Unless Microsoft releases a license with their code that somehow mandates that it cannot be ported to Linux specifically (which I think is not going to happen) then there is nothing technically preventing the Linux people from porting it to Linux. Undoubtedly, Microsoft will try to release their code with a license that is itself somewhat viral in nature as it will mandate that any of their code they release cannot be moved under the GPL at a later date, but I don't see a problem with this. The Linux supporters have no problem porting Sendmail to Linux and I don't see as how the Sendmail code that comes with Linux distributions has it's license changed to be under the GPL. (although up to Sendmail 8.8 this could have legally been done) The real reason that the Linux rank-and-file are pissed off now is that they see this as a political slap in the face, because now what is going to happen is that as the Fortune 1000 CIO's that want to start integrating some Open Source into their Windows networks see Bill Gates waving people down the FreeBSD road, it now becomes OK for those people to introduce FreeBSD and publically admit this. I can easily see that a CEO of a Fortune 1000 company that knows shit about technology could be asking the question of their CIO: "Jim, I've heard you say that we need to get more familiar with Open Source before, I'm concerned because I understand that your using Linux. I have read that Microsoft is telling people that Linux is bad, and that the FreeBSD Open Source is good, couldn't you use FreeBSD instead of Linux for your Open Source projects?" In short, the Linux rank-and-file have spent years and years on missionary work trying to get corporations to use Linux. (not FreeBSD, note) They have finally now begun to see some small successes and all the sudden they find that all the arguments they have used to convince people to use Linux are now being echoed back by those same people as reasons that they are going to use FreeBSD. From the Linux rank-and-file's point of view, the FreeBSD users haven't done near as much work getting people to use FreeBSD instead of Linux, and yet we are the ones that are getting set up to reap the benefits, not them. > >Didn't I predict this just one or two weeks ago? Nothing Microsoft is >doing with a .NET port to Unix has anything at all to do with the GPL. >They aren't writing any Linux kernel drivers, they aren't modifying any >GPL sources, and they aren't linking to any GPL libraries. It's nice >that they chose FreeBSD over Linux, but their motivation has nothing to >do with viral licenses. The GPL is completely irrelevant in this case. > >I'm bracing for the backlash from the Linux guys, which will undoubtedly >aimed at us... > I don't think your going to see as much as you think. Note that Tim O'Reilly has NO FreeBSD books, has ix-nayed several FreeBSD book projects, has many Linux books, and was a signatory on that Bruce Peren's letter. Yet he is the one publishing this FreeBSD article that rightly should have appeared on Daemonnews. I think instead that if Microsoft is successful in getting corporate users to use FreeBSD over Linux that all of the major Linux people are suddennly going to be turncoating and running around the country giving speeches and interviews acting like they have been staunch FreeBSD supporters all this time. Their swan song, of course, will be "It's all about the Open Source" instead of "Linux Forever" which it is now. It's going to be sickening. Save all the nasty quotes from Bruce you can find about FreeBSD because I bet that in a year he is going to be The FreeBSD Projects best friend, and there will be a massive whitewashing campaign to paint over all that. By then "VA-Linux" will be name-changed to "VA-FreeBSD" and Linus Torvalds will amazingly have been transmorgified from an ex-Finnish student into an ex-Finnish student that did Student Exchange at University of California, Berkeley. Ted Mittelstaedt tedm@toybox.placo.com Author of: The FreeBSD Corporate Networker's Guide Book website: http://www.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Thu Jun 28 0:47: 1 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from mail.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com (mail.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com [206.29.169.15]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 432C737B407; Thu, 28 Jun 2001 00:46:50 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from tedm@toybox.placo.com) Received: from tedm.placo.com (nat-rtr.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com [206.29.168.154]) by mail.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com (8.11.1/8.11.1) with SMTP id f5S7jnl11832; Thu, 28 Jun 2001 00:45:50 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from tedm@toybox.placo.com) From: "Ted Mittelstaedt" To: "Pedro F. Giffuni" , "Rick Hamell" Cc: , Subject: RE: Microsoft giving back to FreeBSD !! Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 00:45:48 -0700 Message-ID: <000401c0ffa6$58c2f680$1401a8c0@tedm.placo.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2173.0 In-Reply-To: <3B3A2E2F.A74DDCC8@pitt.edu> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3155.0 Importance: Normal Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG >-----Original Message----- >From: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG >[mailto:owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG]On Behalf Of Pedro F. Giffuni >Sent: Wednesday, June 27, 2001 12:04 PM >To: Rick Hamell >Cc: freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG; freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG >Subject: Re: Microsoft giving back to FreeBSD !! > > >(CCd to advocacy) > >Rick Hamell wrote: >> > >> > This is very cool! >> > >> > http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/a/dotnet/2001/06/27/dotnet.html >> >> To bad the.NET project is Microsoft's latest attempt to take over >> the Internet.... :( >> >> Rick > >Resistance is futile, they will be assimilated ! ;) > >Seriously, Java is putting a serious weight so it won't be that easy. >They will have to have real technical merits to be successful in their >attempt. FWIW, it is really weird to find SUN somewhat ignoring us in >all this while MS is actually playing clean. > There's a reason for this that's not political. C# is not a money-making product now, Java is. Sun has enough to do fighting against the other money-making competitors to Java, they don't need to blow effort on fighting a competitive implementation that may die on the vine. >What is nice here is that in an unprecedented Press Release, Microsoft >is encouraging people to use FreeBSD. The could have released binaries >for Linux, after all most of this is userland code, but they chose us, >apparently with a very user friendly license, and whatever reason they >might have it is very good to have them around. > Keep in mind that Microsoft isn't releasing binaries for FreeBSD either - they are releasing source that compiles on FreeBSD. There's nothing preventing anyone from modifying that source and compiling it on Linux. Granted, some of their stuff they are going to be releasing will have a "non-commercial" license on it - but quite a number of Open Source programs have such licenses already. Take Sendmail - it's license is a "non-commercial" one in that it's illegal to take Sendmail 9.X and later code, compile it, and sell the compiled binary for other than a nominal media and handling fee. But, this certainly doesen't prevent people from using the Open Source version of Sendmail for Internet servers used in a commercial setting, for example. >Perhaps now that they are working with Corel on this, and FreeBSD is >one of the two supported platforms we can finally get a native port of >Corel's office suite. (there you go ... a plausible campaign). > I think it's much more likely to see Microsoft Office ported to FreeBSD. Consider they have to do 90% of the work already to port it to MacOS X. >I have this feeling that FreeBSD doesn't need more hackers, but rather >a real strategist. :-) Ah, you know, after all I _did_ write a book on interoperating Microsoft Windows and FreeBSD quite well in advance of anyone's predicting this shotgun wedding. BSD already _has_ some good strategists. However, your not necessairly going to find them working at BSDi. Look instead at the userbase. The problem is not _getting_ good strategists, we already have them. The problem is getting the BSD _userbase_ to _listen_ to the strategists. Unlike Linux, most BSD users are not interested in being soldiers in the "FreeBSD Army" and don't take orders very well, (or at all) nor are they much swayed by so-called "personal charisma" of a single leader. While this does keep us from taking advantage of "snap of the moment" incidents and grinding out the publicity mileage from them that the Linux camp is so good at doing, it is actually one of the movement's strengths. With Linux, they are so bent on Torvalds and so lockstepped with the road that he has laid out for them, that now even if they all wanted to change direction they can't, they are stuck on that path. With BSD, the movement has many different strategies operating at once and this gives us a resiliance that Linux doesen't have. Consider also that Microsoft is used to fighting a massive organization, they are specialists at it. I kind of think that someone at Microsoft sat down one day and looked at BSD and at Linux and asked the question: "We are opposed to both of what these groups are doing and ultimately we are going to come to blows with them if we both keep doing what we are doing. Can we successfully beat either of these groups?" I think the answer was that "we can beat Linux if we want to, we know how to beat that kind of organization. But, we cannot fight the wind in the fields, and if we attempt to fight BSD we will end up like the US Government did in Vietnam, we will spend millions of dollars and thousands of productive hours doing it and end up not making any difference" So, they decided if you can't beat them, join them. Ted Mittelstaedt tedm@toybox.placo.com Author of: The FreeBSD Corporate Networker's Guide Book website: http://www.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Thu Jun 28 1: 0:57 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from mail.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com (mail.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com [206.29.169.15]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 447C837B406 for ; Thu, 28 Jun 2001 01:00:54 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from tedm@toybox.placo.com) Received: from tedm.placo.com (nat-rtr.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com [206.29.168.154]) by mail.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com (8.11.1/8.11.1) with SMTP id f5S80ol11881; Thu, 28 Jun 2001 01:00:50 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from tedm@toybox.placo.com) From: "Ted Mittelstaedt" To: "Frank Pawlak" , "Bruce Meier" , Subject: RE: FreeBSD and Microsoft Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 01:00:49 -0700 Message-ID: <000501c0ffa8$71e51100$1401a8c0@tedm.placo.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2173.0 In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20010627144405.02633958@127.0.0.1> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3155.0 Importance: Normal Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG >-----Original Message----- >From: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG >[mailto:owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG]On Behalf Of Frank Pawlak >Sent: Wednesday, June 27, 2001 12:51 PM >To: Bruce Meier; freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG >Subject: Re: FreeBSD and Microsoft > > >I agree. That was the first thought to cross my mind as I read the >article. At the risk of a flame war, (please don't), Linux has the >installed based that could possibly be perceived as a threat to M$. So >lets throw some bones toward FreeBSD, and put the possible competitor in a >bad position. Linux doesn't have a BSD emulator. IMHO, just >another of M$ >ploys to dominate and close a market and then be able to turn to referee, >the Justice Dept and others, and say who plays dirty? Not me! You forget that the Justice department case has been built on damage done to commercial competitors, not to Open Source. It is indeed a creative stretch to say that the Sherman Anti-Trust act even legally _covers_ what is essentially non-commercial software that isn't even sold, only the media is sold. The anti-trust act was written to prevent a sole supplier from dominating a market - well a market is defined as a place that goods and services are sold, not given away. If all the market competitors are NOT making money from the market, and a monopolist takes the market away, then they cannot make any legally valid case that they have suffered damage at the hands of the monopolist, and so I doubt that they even have basis for a legal claim. In fact it's an interesting legal question to even claim that competition (according to the legal definition) even exists in the Open Source market, because nobody is directly profiting from sale of the programs that comprise Open Source. The claims that the Linux vendors that are making their living off of selling support and training for Linux would be damaged by a monopoly on Linux itself, are equivalent to saying that the automobile manufacturers suffered by Standard Oil's monopolization of the Oil Business, because they raised prices on gasoline and thus fewer people bought cars because gas was too expensive. While such claims may be true, they have no little to no legal weight in an anti-trust case. If Microsoft were to point to their work with FreeBSD as evidence they are not a monopoly, I think that Justice would have perfectly legal grounds to object to the testimony as being irrelevant, and I don't see that Microsoft could have any legal grounds to override the objection. While their work with FreeBSD certainly has lots of publicity mileage, I think their lawyers would be morons to even waste time on such an angle. Ted Mittelstaedt tedm@toybox.placo.com Author of: The FreeBSD Corporate Networker's Guide Book website: http://www.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Thu Jun 28 1:10: 8 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from harrier.mail.pas.earthlink.net (harrier.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.121.12]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E6B2437B407 for ; Thu, 28 Jun 2001 01:10:00 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from tlambert2@mindspring.com) Received: from mindspring.com (dialup-209.244.104.249.Dial1.SanJose1.Level3.net [209.244.104.249]) by harrier.mail.pas.earthlink.net (EL-8_9_3_3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id BAA21493; Thu, 28 Jun 2001 01:09:57 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <3B3AE676.79EB397D@mindspring.com> Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 01:10:30 -0700 From: Terry Lambert Reply-To: tlambert2@mindspring.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en]C-CCK-MCD {Sony} (Win98; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: David Johnson Cc: "Kenneth P. Stox" , freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: FreeBSD and Microsoft References: <3B3A2720.815A74C0@acuson.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG David Johnson wrote: > "We don't feel comfortable with Linux because of the GPL nature > of the kernel ..." > > Now, I'm not a kernel hacker. I haven't written a compiler in > twenty years. I don't know anything about .NET. But for the > life of me I can't figure out why the licensing of a kernel > stops them from making a Linux port as well. Are they planning > to make C# a kernel module? Are they confused and think that > glibc is under the GPL as well? The "glibc" is LGPL, though Stallman has been suggesting that, for it and a number of other LGPL packages, that it is now time to consider converting them over to the GPL. I think they are more worried about possible scenarios, as in: o I have this .NET code from Microsoft that I'm trying to extend o I have this deadline, fast approaching o I have this boss breathing down my neck o I have this GPL'ed kernel code that almost does exactly what I need, and which I don't have the time to rewrite the functionality from scratch o What do I do? I've worked at a company where this has happened, only the GPL'ed code in question was squid. IBM made us rip squid out of the product, and not distribute it with modifications that would enable it to use the Cyber Patrol database library to block web site access. It was a deal breaker: we did it, or they didn't acquire the company. I think there's also the possibility of code going the other way, where some patented technology ends up in the GPL'ed code, because someone wasn't careful. IBM objected to squid on those grounds, as well, in that it has code which IBM claims is covered by no less than 5 IBM patents -- and IBM distributing code under the GPL that is covered under their patents grants, in their expert legal opinion, the right to use the patents, royalty free. But it gets worse: companies that deal with the government are not permitted to be discriminatory in terms of pricing: therefore, if you offer it at one price to one company, you must offer it at the same price to all companies, particularly in the case of a monopoly. A patent is a government granted monopoly. Case closed. But wait, there's a third option! You could improve the code with your GPL'ed addition, and, through negligence, fail to identify the origin of the code (or not know it), and give it back to Microsoft -- and thus Microsoft takes it, and incorporates the change in their code -- and now _ALL_ their code is GPL'ed, and _ALL_ the code that uses snippets of that code elsewhere, is _ALSO_ GPL'ed. IBM has a 1 week class, part of which is an 18 slide presentation on the handling of GPL'ed code. If you wish to work with GPL'ed code in IBM, taking this class is mandatory. In addition, after passing the class, you can only use GPL'ed code from approvide IBM FTP sites: this ensures that the code was vetted to not embody any IBM patents (needless to say, tracking a GPL:'ed developement project is a right royal pain... you are always behind by enough to cause problems with integration). So Microsoft aren't the only people who feel the GPL puts them at potentially significant risk, just by being nearby. -- Terry To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Thu Jun 28 1:19:34 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from nef.ens.fr (nef.ens.fr [129.199.96.32]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2CE8E37B406 for ; Thu, 28 Jun 2001 01:19:29 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from Rahul.Siddharthan@lpt.ens.fr) Received: from corto.lpt.ens.fr (corto.lpt.ens.fr [129.199.122.2]) by nef.ens.fr (8.10.1/1.01.28121999) with ESMTP id f5S8JNp98546 ; Thu, 28 Jun 2001 10:19:23 +0200 (CEST) Received: from (rsidd@localhost) by corto.lpt.ens.fr (8.9.3/jtpda-5.3.1) id KAA11243 ; Thu, 28 Jun 2001 10:20:30 +0200 (CEST) Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 10:20:30 +0200 From: Rahul Siddharthan To: Technical Information Cc: FreeBSD Advocacy Subject: Re: FreeBSD and Microsoft Message-ID: <20010628102030.B9802@lpt.ens.fr> References: <5.1.0.14.2.20010627144405.02633958@127.0.0.1> <3B3A2720.815A74C0@acuson.com> <3B3A2F72.6783462E@hilo.net> <5.1.0.14.2.20010627144405.02633958@127.0.0.1> <20010627131125.A52377@mooseriver.com> <4.3.2.7.2.20010627215902.017e9e70@threespace.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i In-Reply-To: <4.3.2.7.2.20010627215902.017e9e70@threespace.com>; from tech_info@threespace.com on Wed, Jun 27, 2001 at 10:08:31PM -0400 X-Operating-System: FreeBSD 3.4-STABLE i386 Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Technical Information said on Jun 27, 2001 at 22:08:31: > Are you kidding? Microsoft has one of the best PR machines on the > planet. If they wanna do some stuff to promote FreeBSD as a viable > alternative to Linux and port some of their software, I hardly see that as > A Bad Thing (TM). I have to wonder, why the heck are Microsoft doing this? If more and more people start to learn that Linux isn't the only MS-alternative out there, there's another OS with friendlier licensing which does everything linux can (including running linux binaries like StarOffice) and is used by Microsoft itself (and on doing some research, they'll also learn that the same OS is used by Apple), exactly how does that help Microsoft? It's certainly good for FreeBSD; it's not necessarily bad for linux (whose users don't really care about Microsoft donations); but I don't see how it will be good for Microsoft. R To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Thu Jun 28 1:19:36 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from mail.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com (mail.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com [206.29.169.15]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 75E6637B403 for ; Thu, 28 Jun 2001 01:19:28 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from tedm@toybox.placo.com) Received: from tedm.placo.com (nat-rtr.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com [206.29.168.154]) by mail.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com (8.11.1/8.11.1) with SMTP id f5S8JMl11925; Thu, 28 Jun 2001 01:19:23 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from tedm@toybox.placo.com) From: "Ted Mittelstaedt" To: , "Frank Pawlak" Cc: "Bruce Meier" , Subject: RE: FreeBSD and Microsoft Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 01:19:22 -0700 Message-ID: <000601c0ffab$08f15ca0$1401a8c0@tedm.placo.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2173.0 In-Reply-To: <20010627131125.A52377@mooseriver.com> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3155.0 Importance: Normal Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG >-----Original Message----- >From: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG >[mailto:owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG]On Behalf Of Josef Grosch >Sent: Wednesday, June 27, 2001 1:11 PM >To: Frank Pawlak > Microsoft has >staked a position that the GPL is a virus license thus creating in the >minds of people who do not understand the licensing issues or know much >about Open Source that Linux is a virus or harbors virus. Then they throw Let me point out that Eric Raymond himself used the term "virus" to describe the GPL. Even if Microsoft originated the analogy of virus, the Linux community has not seemed to believe that there is any danger to use of the term. While I think that your correct in that this is an example of Microsoft's physological department defining negative terminology, until the Linux community starts to object to this, we can hardly knock Microsoft for it. >FreeBSD a bone. FreeBSD being the largest of the *BSD and also not using >the GPL. Thus creating hate and discontent in the ranks of the Open Source >community. No, creating hate and discontent in the GPL community. As I've tried to tell people in the past, Open Source DOES NOT equal GPL, or Linux. GPL is just a subset of Open Source. >Remember, "The enemy of my enemy is my friend". FreeBSD and >Linux have a great deal in common. And after Microsoft is finished, FreeBSD and Microsoft will have things in common. Does this scare you? We are far better off by sticking >together and collectively telling Microsoft to fuck off. > If we tell Microsoft to not use the BSD license or port their stuff to BSD then we are doing exactly what the GPL license is all about - forcing or views of how source is to be used on others who want to use it. In case you haven't read the BSD license recently, this is completely contrary to what BSD is all about. Further, your objecting to Microsoft bitching about GPL on the grounds that they shouldn't be telling other people what is or is not a good Open Source license to use. Then you turn around and tell us to tell Microsoft what license they should or should not use? I think your dislike of Microsoft has clouded your judgement. What BSD is all about is freedom - and freedom means allowing others to do things they want to do that you may not approve of, no matter how much you dislike it. The collective BSD community has the Moral Authority to tell Microsoft that they are wrong to criticize GPL, but only because we espouse freedom. The second we start telling Microsoft what to do we no longer are espousing freedom, and thus we lose any moral authority we have had to object to their criticizing GPL. What's sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander. Freedom is worthless unless tested, and this is the biggest test in FreeBSD's history, more significant I believe than the USL/AT&T/UCB trial. Now we will find out if the FreeBSD users that are using FreeBSD really embrace the BSD license values or not. Remember the quote: "I may disagree with what software license you use but I'll defend to the death your right to use it" Ted Mittelstaedt tedm@toybox.placo.com Author of: The FreeBSD Corporate Networker's Guide Book website: http://www.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Thu Jun 28 2: 8:45 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from mail.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com (mail.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com [206.29.169.15]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 17E6F37B405 for ; Thu, 28 Jun 2001 02:08:40 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from tedm@toybox.placo.com) Received: from tedm.placo.com (nat-rtr.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com [206.29.168.154]) by mail.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com (8.11.1/8.11.1) with SMTP id f5S983l12470; Thu, 28 Jun 2001 02:08:03 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from tedm@toybox.placo.com) From: "Ted Mittelstaedt" To: "Rahul Siddharthan" , "Technical Information" Cc: "FreeBSD Advocacy" Subject: RE: FreeBSD and Microsoft Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 02:08:02 -0700 Message-ID: <001a01c0ffb1$d5a18300$1401a8c0@tedm.placo.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2173.0 In-Reply-To: <20010628102030.B9802@lpt.ens.fr> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3155.0 Importance: Normal Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG >-----Original Message----- >From: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG >[mailto:owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG]On Behalf Of Rahul >Siddharthan >Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2001 1:21 AM >To: Technical Information >Cc: FreeBSD Advocacy >Subject: Re: FreeBSD and Microsoft > > >Technical Information said on Jun 27, 2001 at 22:08:31: >> Are you kidding? Microsoft has one of the best PR machines on the >> planet. If they wanna do some stuff to promote FreeBSD as a viable >> alternative to Linux and port some of their software, I hardly >see that as >> A Bad Thing (TM). > >I have to wonder, why the heck are Microsoft doing this? If more and >more people start to learn that Linux isn't the only MS-alternative >out there, there's another OS with friendlier licensing which does >everything linux can (including running linux binaries like >StarOffice) and is used by Microsoft itself (and on doing some >research, they'll also learn that the same OS is used by Apple), >exactly how does that help Microsoft? > Because to put it simply, Microsoft knows that Open Source will not go away. Even Linux, while they are probably operating under the delusion that they can completely wipe Linux off the face of the earth, will not go away. So they have 2 choices - fight against Open Source or work with it. Certainly, they can gain some things if they fight against Open Source, and in the beginning they tried this and undoubtedly they were successful in slowing the introduction of Open Source in some entities, thus slightly prolonging sales of Windows in those entities. But, Open Source did eventually get introduced, despite Microsoft. Now that the camel's nose is under the tent, so to speak, it's only a matter of time and perserverence before the rest of the camel is inside. And, the Open Source community was here a long time before Microsoft was, and will be around long after the current principals of Microsoft have gone to their graves. Microsoft, as big and as rich as it is, is nowhere near as large as Open Source is and simply does not have the collective perserverence that Open Source has. Nothing they can do will stop the inevitable increase in it's use. So, it's now time for Microsoft to decide how their own future as a company is going to play out in this environment. Naturally, they want to make sure that however they are going to fit in, it's going to be in an area that makes money. And, what they are seeing is examples of companies like IBM and Apple who are in effect taking a base of Open Source and creating a superset of functionality that is layered on top of it, then charging for that functionality. And, people are paying them for it. Now, in most cases, that layering is not really critical to the functionality of the base package. For example, a FreeBSD-based router is a FreeBSD-based router, whether or not it has a fancy web-based GUI on it that the administrator can use to manage it, or whether the administrator has to make the changes by editing /etc/rc.conf. But, the software market has shown repeatedly in the past that there's a lot more people willing to pay for the fancy web-based GUI than are interested in saving a few bucks by learning how to edit /etc/rc.conf. It also so happens that for various physological reasons having to do with how people interact with technology, that a good fancy web-based GUI is a lot more complicated and harder to write than the routing functionality is, because while the routing functionality only has to deal with clearly-defined inputs, the fancy GUI has to work for everyone from the most technologically knowledgeable network administrator to the moron off the street that has never seen a fileserver before and who bought your router because he saw a commercial about it with a cute girl in it. This is why so many really good Open Source software projects DON'T have a fancy GUI that takes a gagabit of processing speed to run - the designer writes the core of the code first then once it gets working, there's little incentive to spend a lot of effort writing GUI code that they personally would never use anyway. If you look closely at Microsoft products, you will see that in general they are mostly about style, not substance. For any given package, 90% of it is user-interface code, and about 10% of it actually does useful work. Since the majority of software purchasers pay for style before substance, it's no surprise why Microsoft has been so successful. Microsoft, contrary to what you might think, knows all about this. And, when they contemplated that their strategy of fighting against Open Source wasn't ultimately going to succeed, they obviously asked the question "why can't we apply our very successful 90/10 rule of GUI/substance code to Open Source UNIX as well?" Ted Mittelstaedt tedm@toybox.placo.com Author of: The FreeBSD Corporate Networker's Guide Book website: http://www.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Thu Jun 28 2:16:14 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from nef.ens.fr (nef.ens.fr [129.199.96.32]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id ADA0437B403 for ; Thu, 28 Jun 2001 02:16:08 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from Rahul.Siddharthan@lpt.ens.fr) Received: from corto.lpt.ens.fr (corto.lpt.ens.fr [129.199.122.2]) by nef.ens.fr (8.10.1/1.01.28121999) with ESMTP id f5S9G4p05161 ; Thu, 28 Jun 2001 11:16:04 +0200 (CEST) Received: from (rsidd@localhost) by corto.lpt.ens.fr (8.9.3/jtpda-5.3.1) id LAA13222 ; Thu, 28 Jun 2001 11:17:10 +0200 (CEST) Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 11:17:10 +0200 From: Rahul Siddharthan To: Ted Mittelstaedt Cc: FreeBSD Advocacy Subject: Re: FreeBSD and Microsoft Message-ID: <20010628111710.E9802@lpt.ens.fr> References: <20010628102030.B9802@lpt.ens.fr> <001a01c0ffb1$d5a18300$1401a8c0@tedm.placo.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i In-Reply-To: <001a01c0ffb1$d5a18300$1401a8c0@tedm.placo.com>; from tedm@toybox.placo.com on Thu, Jun 28, 2001 at 02:08:02AM -0700 X-Operating-System: FreeBSD 3.4-STABLE i386 Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Ted Mittelstaedt said on Jun 28, 2001 at 02:08:02: > > So, it's now time for Microsoft to decide how their own future as a company > is going to play out in this environment. Naturally, they want to make sure > that however they are going to fit in, it's going to be in an area that > makes money. And, what they are seeing is examples of companies like IBM > and Apple who are in effect taking a base of Open Source and creating a > superset of functionality that is layered on top of it, then charging for > that functionality. And, people are paying them for it. -snip- > If you look closely at Microsoft products, you will see that in general they > are mostly about style, not substance. For any given package, 90% of it is > user-interface code, and about 10% of it actually does useful work. Since > the majority of software purchasers pay for style before substance, it's no > surprise why Microsoft has been so successful. > > Microsoft, contrary to what you might think, knows all about this. And, > when they contemplated that their strategy of fighting against Open Source > wasn't ultimately going to succeed, they obviously asked the question "why > can't we apply our very successful 90/10 rule of GUI/substance code to Open > Source UNIX as well?" Are you suggesting that Microsoft plans in the long term to roll its own pretty-face products based on FreeBSD (or other open-source Unix), like Apple is doing? Do you have any evidence for that suggestion? Incidentally, recent moves by Caldera seem to suggest that per-seat licensing of a "prettified" distribution is not incompatible with linux either. This week's lwn.net editorial takes a surprisingly positive stance on this. - R To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Thu Jun 28 2:46:22 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from mail.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com (mail.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com [206.29.169.15]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 631B137B403 for ; Thu, 28 Jun 2001 02:46:13 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from tedm@toybox.placo.com) Received: from tedm.placo.com (nat-rtr.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com [206.29.168.154]) by mail.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com (8.11.1/8.11.1) with SMTP id f5S9k3l12603; Thu, 28 Jun 2001 02:46:04 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from tedm@toybox.placo.com) From: "Ted Mittelstaedt" To: "Rahul Siddharthan" Cc: "FreeBSD Advocacy" Subject: RE: FreeBSD and Microsoft Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 02:46:03 -0700 Message-ID: <001b01c0ffb7$2525b4a0$1401a8c0@tedm.placo.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2173.0 In-Reply-To: <20010628111710.E9802@lpt.ens.fr> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3155.0 Importance: Normal Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG >-----Original Message----- >From: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG >[mailto:owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG]On Behalf Of Rahul >Siddharthan > >Are you suggesting that Microsoft plans in the long term to roll its >own pretty-face products based on FreeBSD (or other open-source Unix), >like Apple is doing? Do you have any evidence for that suggestion? > I am not suggesting that they are planning right now to do this, I don't know anyone at Microsoft. However, I'm stating that when they start down the Open Source cooperation path that eventually they won't have a choice. There's a very strong suggestion of this in that interview at: http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/a/dotnet/2001/06/27/dotnet.html I'll point out these statements from that interview: "...FreeBSD has traditionally been an operating system that encouraged unencumbered experimentation. ... And that's what we're using it for. We're using it to prove the point that you can actually implement the CLI on Unix. It's been around a long time, people use it commercially. Microsoft uses it commercially, actually...." In case you missed it he just said that Microsoft uses FreeBSD commercially. "it" in this context refers to FreeBSD, not CLI. "Also, there are high performance memory managers, garbage collectors and compilers that are in the commercial version, but not in the shared source version. "That's something that we want to charge for."" Now, consider that according to this Microsoft is planning on releasing an Open Source version of CLI that's restricted to "non-commercial" use, on FreeBSD. Suppose that a customer goes and gets the free Shared Source version of this and starts experimenting with it - 6 months later they have built an entire working system with it on FreeBSD that uses CLI in part of it and that they are satisfied with. But, they want to scale it up and to do so they are going to need to increase it's performance. So they go back to Microsoft and ask about the "High Performance" commercial version of CLI. Now, imagine what would happen if Microsoft tells them "Sorry, you have to scrap most of the system and reimplement your CLI-based system on Windows" Kiss that sale goodbye. >Incidentally, recent moves by Caldera seem to suggest that per-seat >licensing of a "prettified" distribution is not incompatible with >linux either. This week's lwn.net editorial takes a surprisingly >positive stance on this. It never has been incompatible. Nothing in the GPL prevents people from charging for the source - but they must make any source touched by GPL available for free. Obviously when you do this you can't charge much for it. In Caldera's case they most likely haven't released all their "prettified" code under GPL, thus they don't have to redistribute that, and thus they can charge higher prices for the distribution that includes the pretty code. Ted Mittelstaedt tedm@toybox.placo.com Author of: The FreeBSD Corporate Networker's Guide Book website: http://www.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com > >- R > >To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org >with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Thu Jun 28 2:57:14 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from nef.ens.fr (nef.ens.fr [129.199.96.32]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3E9DB37B409 for ; Thu, 28 Jun 2001 02:57:03 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from Rahul.Siddharthan@lpt.ens.fr) Received: from corto.lpt.ens.fr (corto.lpt.ens.fr [129.199.122.2]) by nef.ens.fr (8.10.1/1.01.28121999) with ESMTP id f5S9uvp10254 ; Thu, 28 Jun 2001 11:56:57 +0200 (CEST) Received: from (rsidd@localhost) by corto.lpt.ens.fr (8.9.3/jtpda-5.3.1) id LAA14934 ; Thu, 28 Jun 2001 11:58:03 +0200 (CEST) Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 11:58:03 +0200 From: Rahul Siddharthan To: Ted Mittelstaedt Cc: FreeBSD Advocacy Subject: Re: FreeBSD and Microsoft Message-ID: <20010628115803.G9802@lpt.ens.fr> References: <20010628111710.E9802@lpt.ens.fr> <001b01c0ffb7$2525b4a0$1401a8c0@tedm.placo.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i In-Reply-To: <001b01c0ffb7$2525b4a0$1401a8c0@tedm.placo.com>; from tedm@toybox.placo.com on Thu, Jun 28, 2001 at 02:46:03AM -0700 X-Operating-System: FreeBSD 3.4-STABLE i386 Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Ted Mittelstaedt said on Jun 28, 2001 at 02:46:03: > "...FreeBSD has traditionally been an operating system that encouraged > unencumbered experimentation. ... And that's what we're using it for. We're > using it to prove the point that you can actually implement the CLI on Unix. > It's been around a long time, people use it commercially. Microsoft uses it > commercially, actually...." > > In case you missed it he just said that Microsoft uses FreeBSD commercially. > "it" > in this context refers to FreeBSD, not CLI. I think they mean things like Hotmail. Or maybe they borrowed some stuff for Win2K... > >Incidentally, recent moves by Caldera seem to suggest that per-seat > >licensing of a "prettified" distribution is not incompatible with > >linux either. This week's lwn.net editorial takes a surprisingly > >positive stance on this. > > It never has been incompatible. Nothing in the GPL prevents people from > charging for the source - but they must make any source touched by GPL > available for free. Obviously when you do this you can't charge much for > it. The GPL is not incompatible with selling a boxed distribution, but it is incompatible with a "per seat" license. You can sell it to A, but you can't stop A from further redistributing it, or insist that it can be installed only on one machine (or used only by one user). > In Caldera's case they most likely haven't released all their "prettified" > code under GPL, thus they don't have to redistribute that, and thus they can > charge higher prices for the distribution that includes the pretty code. The lwn.net report suggests that their distribution includes third-party commercial software, which is why the distribution as a whole cannot be freely distributed and a per-seat license is possible. They had released their installer under an open-source (I think GPL) license: I don't know whether that has now changed. You are still free to yank out any GPL-covered components of their distribution and redistribute those separately... R To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Thu Jun 28 7:16: 7 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from picard.skynet.be (picard.skynet.be [195.238.3.131]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5C8DB37B406; Thu, 28 Jun 2001 07:16:02 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from brad.knowles@skynet.be) Received: from [194.78.241.123] ([194.78.241.123]) by picard.skynet.be (8.11.2/8.11.2/Skynet-OUT-2.11) with ESMTP id f5SEFVY24888; Thu, 28 Jun 2001 16:15:35 +0200 (MET DST) (envelope-from ) Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: bs663385@pop.skynet.be Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <000401c0ffa6$58c2f680$1401a8c0@tedm.placo.com> References: <000401c0ffa6$58c2f680$1401a8c0@tedm.placo.com> Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 14:14:10 +0200 To: "Ted Mittelstaedt" , "Pedro F. Giffuni" , "Rick Hamell" From: Brad Knowles Subject: RE: Microsoft giving back to FreeBSD !! Cc: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG At 12:45 AM -0700 6/28/01, Ted Mittelstaedt wrote: > Take Sendmail - it's license is a > "non-commercial" one in that it's illegal to take Sendmail 9.X and later > code, compile it, and sell the compiled binary for other than a nominal > media and handling fee. Uh, where have you seen a license for Sendmail 9.x? The latest version of sendmail I know of is 8.12 (IIRC, currently still in beta), although I have heard of the name that has been attached as the release engineer for 8.13. -- Brad Knowles, /* efdtt.c Author: Charles M. Hannum */ /* Represented as 1045 digit prime number by Phil Carmody */ /* Prime as DNS cname chain by Roy Arends and Walter Belgers */ /* */ /* Usage is: cat title-key scrambled.vob | efdtt >clear.vob */ /* where title-key = "153 2 8 105 225" or other similar 5-byte key */ dig decss.friet.org|perl -ne'if(/^x/){s/[x.]//g;print pack(H124,$_)}' To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Thu Jun 28 9:45:56 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from mb1i0.ns.pitt.edu (mb1i0.ns.pitt.edu [136.142.186.35]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 47B7F37B406; Thu, 28 Jun 2001 09:45:49 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from pfg1+@pitt.edu) Received: from pitt.edu ("port 1187"@[136.142.89.102]) by pitt.edu (PMDF V5.2-32 #41462) with ESMTP id <01K5AU6CNFJK002IJ6@mb1i0.ns.pitt.edu>; Thu, 28 Jun 2001 12:45:46 EST Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 12:56:08 -0400 From: "Pedro F. Giffuni" Subject: Re: Microsoft giving back to FreeBSD !! To: Ted Mittelstaedt Cc: freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG, freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Message-id: <3B3B61A8.AEFE2888@pitt.edu> Organization: University of Pittsburgh MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.76 [en] (Win98; U) Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Accept-Language: en,pdf,es-CO References: <000401c0ffa6$58c2f680$1401a8c0@tedm.placo.com> Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Ted Mittelstaedt wrote: > ... > > Keep in mind that Microsoft isn't releasing binaries for FreeBSD either - > they are releasing source that compiles on FreeBSD. There's nothing > preventing anyone from modifying that source and compiling it on Linux. > Yeah, it seems like they are being clean and that they didn't misundertand free software at all. It was also interesting to see that most of the Slashdot comments were not really negative. > > I think it's much more likely to see Microsoft Office ported to FreeBSD. > Consider they have to do 90% of the work already to port it to MacOS X. > As I wrote on another email: if they are split they will certainly consider it. My hope would be that Corel understands this before MS does. I am gladly surprised by Microsoft's approach but that doesn't mean I like them. > >I have this feeling that FreeBSD doesn't need more hackers, but rather > >a real strategist. > > :-) Ah, you know, after all I _did_ write a book on interoperating > Microsoft Windows and FreeBSD quite well in advance of anyone's predicting > this > shotgun wedding. > > BSD already _has_ some good strategists. However, your not necessairly > going to find them working at BSDi. Look instead at the userbase. The > problem is not _getting_ good strategists, we already have them. The > problem > is getting the BSD _userbase_ to _listen_ to the strategists. Unlike > Linux, most BSD users are not interested in being soldiers in the "FreeBSD > Army" and don't take orders very well, (or at all) nor are they much swayed > by so-called "personal charisma" of a single leader. > OK probably I meant a (strategist + leader). Linux doesn't have them either... their leaders are clowns and the lusers like to laugh so it's some sort of a circus there ;). I gave it a thought overnight, and it's actually better not to have clowns: we have overlooked something very important that has ocurred recently: The FreeBSD Foundation. The Foundation is definitely the instrument to set the guidelines and manage our resources and interests as a group. Hmm...perhaps Microsoft will do a generous donation now :). > I think the answer was that "we can beat Linux if we want to, we know how to > beat that kind of organization. But, we cannot fight the wind in the > fields, and if we attempt to fight BSD we will end up like the US Government > did in Vietnam, we will spend millions of dollars and thousands of > productive hours doing it and end up not making any difference" So, they > decided if you can't beat them, join them. > Yes, Microsoft has always known about FreeBSD. Gates and friends are rich enough that they don't care very much what happens; for them this is just a game where they want to continue being number one. I think your term "shotgun wedding" is what best describes the situation :). This will not be exactly a long term marriage though.. but FreeBSD has much to gain and nothing to lose. Pedro. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Thu Jun 28 10:24:44 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from softweyr.com (mail.dobox.com [208.187.122.44]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AD98C37B403 for ; Thu, 28 Jun 2001 10:24:41 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from wes@softweyr.com) Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=softweyr.com ident=ca9eed84e44777c4d44bf774caf5ae59) by softweyr.com with esmtp (Exim 3.16 #1) id 15Ffaw-0000Bm-00; Thu, 28 Jun 2001 11:28:46 -0600 Message-ID: <3B3B694E.736EF309@softweyr.com> Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 11:28:46 -0600 From: Wes Peters Organization: Softweyr LLC X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12 i386) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Rahul Siddharthan Cc: Technical Information , FreeBSD Advocacy Subject: Re: FreeBSD and Microsoft References: <5.1.0.14.2.20010627144405.02633958@127.0.0.1> <3B3A2720.815A74C0@acuson.com> <3B3A2F72.6783462E@hilo.net> <5.1.0.14.2.20010627144405.02633958@127.0.0.1> <20010627131125.A52377@mooseriver.com> <4.3.2.7.2.20010627215902.017e9e70@threespace.com> <20010628102030.B9802@lpt.ens.fr> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Rahul Siddharthan wrote: > > I have to wonder, why the heck are Microsoft doing this? If more and Just another poke at Linux, I suspect. > more people start to learn that Linux isn't the only MS-alternative > out there, there's another OS with friendlier licensing which does > everything linux can (including running linux binaries like And it's cheaper to license than Caldera OpenLinux. > StarOffice) and is used by Microsoft itself (and on doing some > research, they'll also learn that the same OS is used by Apple), > exactly how does that help Microsoft? > > It's certainly good for FreeBSD; it's not necessarily bad for linux > (whose users don't really care about Microsoft donations); but I don't > see how it will be good for Microsoft. That we agree on. Microsoft hasn't seemed to learn the lesson "there is no such thing as bad press, as long as they spell your name right." What they seem to be accomplishing with all this "fighting Linux" hoopla is getting Linux mentioned in the mainstream press more often than they ever have before. Now they're dragging FreeBSD into the limelight also, some- thing that 8 years of FreeBSD advocacy have managed to do only once or twice. It seems they imagine FreeBSD is somehow allied with them, and it is to some extent. Any cool features added to FreeBSD can be poked into MS proprietary products wholesale or piecemeal; the same cool feature added to Linux cannot be without violating the GPL. That does not really make FreeBSD their ally; we are still about burying their unreliable, slow, bloated software on the computing scrapheap. On the other hand, if they import enough of our work, they might actually end up with a system that works reliably. It's working for Apple. ;^) I expect the response from the more enlightened in the Linux community will be "Cool. If the FreeBSD guys find some value in this, we'll port it. If not, let them discover that it's just a ruse." We've certainly taken that attitude with Linux apps often enough. Or maybe it'll convince them it's time to write a FreeBSD binary API interface like our Linuxulator. -- "Where am I, and what am I doing in this handbasket?" Wes Peters Softweyr LLC wes@softweyr.com http://softweyr.com/ To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Thu Jun 28 10:27:37 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from softweyr.com (mail.dobox.com [208.187.122.44]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8BA7237B405 for ; Thu, 28 Jun 2001 10:27:34 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from wes@softweyr.com) Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=softweyr.com ident=1fa930f7de0bf008159440e2044130db) by softweyr.com with esmtp (Exim 3.16 #1) id 15FfdQ-0000CK-00; Thu, 28 Jun 2001 11:31:20 -0600 Message-ID: <3B3B69E7.963060B@softweyr.com> Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 11:31:19 -0600 From: Wes Peters Organization: Softweyr LLC X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12 i386) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Ted Mittelstaedt Cc: jgrosch@mooseriver.com, Frank Pawlak , Bruce Meier , freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: FreeBSD and Microsoft References: <000601c0ffab$08f15ca0$1401a8c0@tedm.placo.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Ted Mittelstaedt wrote: > > >-----Original Message----- > >From: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG > >[mailto:owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG]On Behalf Of Josef Grosch > >Sent: Wednesday, June 27, 2001 1:11 PM > >To: Frank Pawlak > > > Microsoft has > >staked a position that the GPL is a virus license thus creating in the > >minds of people who do not understand the licensing issues or know much > >about Open Source that Linux is a virus or harbors virus. Then they throw > > Let me point out that Eric Raymond himself used the term "virus" to describe > the GPL. Even if Microsoft originated the analogy of virus, the Linux > community has not seemed to believe that there is any danger to use of the > term. Viral is one thing. Comparing Linux (or any other non-criminal) human endeavor to CANCER is quite another. Ballmer should have his mouth washed out with surgical soap for that one. -- "Where am I, and what am I doing in this handbasket?" Wes Peters Softweyr LLC wes@softweyr.com http://softweyr.com/ To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Thu Jun 28 10:38:43 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from softweyr.com (mail.dobox.com [208.187.122.44]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3891037B409 for ; Thu, 28 Jun 2001 10:38:40 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from wes@softweyr.com) Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=softweyr.com ident=659cf1e3ad4fcb6cec96423fe4c5301a) by softweyr.com with esmtp (Exim 3.16 #1) id 15Ffoq-0000CU-00; Thu, 28 Jun 2001 11:43:08 -0600 Message-ID: <3B3B6CAC.48C6B819@softweyr.com> Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 11:43:08 -0600 From: Wes Peters Organization: Softweyr LLC X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12 i386) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Ted Mittelstaedt Cc: David Johnson , Bruce Meier , freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: FreeBSD and Microsoft References: <000001c0ff9d$6d03fc60$1401a8c0@tedm.placo.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Ted Mittelstaedt wrote: > > >-----Original Message----- > >From: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG > >[mailto:owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG]On Behalf Of David Johnson > >Sent: Wednesday, June 27, 2001 12:44 PM > >To: Bruce Meier > >Cc: freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG > >Subject: Re: FreeBSD and Microsoft > > > > > >Bruce Meier wrote: > >> > >> Sounds like divide and conquer to me. > > > >The vast majority of responses at Linux Today to this and a related > >article see this as what it is, a transparent tactic to get us fighting > >each other. > > > > What rot. They are just pissed off because now they are going to have > to put a FreeBSD emulator in Linux if they want the stuff. Where were these > hoseheads when we had to put a Linuxulator in FreeBSD, Huh? No they won't. Linux users don't seem to have any problems at all compiling and running BSD-licensed code on their systems: BIND, Sendmail, DHCP, etc. If Microsoft releases under anything remotely like an open license, it'll be ported to Linux in a matter of days. Just because they can, if for no other reason. Then some group of Linux hackers will pick it up, move chunks of it into a Linux kernel module, and prove that Linux can run the C# equivalent of "while (1) gethostname();" faster than FreeBSD or Win2K/XP. -- "Where am I, and what am I doing in this handbasket?" Wes Peters Softweyr LLC wes@softweyr.com http://softweyr.com/ To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Thu Jun 28 12:47:27 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from femail22.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail22.sdc1.sfba.home.com [24.0.95.147]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 587AD37B403 for ; Thu, 28 Jun 2001 12:47:24 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from tech_info@threespace.com) Received: from Atlanta.threespace.com ([24.21.224.204]) by femail22.sdc1.sfba.home.com (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with ESMTP id <20010628194723.MXLY14966.femail22.sdc1.sfba.home.com@Atlanta.threespace.com> for ; Thu, 28 Jun 2001 12:47:23 -0700 Message-Id: <4.3.2.7.2.20010628152216.017e6008@threespace.com> X-Sender: tech@threespace.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.2 Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 15:24:18 -0400 To: FreeBSD Advocacy From: Technical Information Subject: Re: FreeBSD and Microsoft In-Reply-To: <20010628102030.B9802@lpt.ens.fr> References: <4.3.2.7.2.20010627215902.017e9e70@threespace.com> <5.1.0.14.2.20010627144405.02633958@127.0.0.1> <3B3A2720.815A74C0@acuson.com> <3B3A2F72.6783462E@hilo.net> <5.1.0.14.2.20010627144405.02633958@127.0.0.1> <20010627131125.A52377@mooseriver.com> <4.3.2.7.2.20010627215902.017e9e70@threespace.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG At 04:20 AM 6/28/2001, Rahul Siddharthan wrote: >I have to wonder, why the heck are Microsoft doing this? If more and >more people start to learn that Linux isn't the only MS-alternative >out there, there's another OS with friendlier licensing which does >everything linux can (including running linux binaries like >StarOffice) and is used by Microsoft itself (and on doing some >research, they'll also learn that the same OS is used by Apple), >exactly how does that help Microsoft? > >It's certainly good for FreeBSD; it's not necessarily bad for linux >(whose users don't really care about Microsoft donations); but I don't >see how it will be good for Microsoft. > >R Why does the drug dealer give you the first couple of hits of cocaine for free? Not only does it engender some good will in the beginning, but once you're hooked, they're in a position where they get to dictate the terms of the arrangement absolutely. --Chip Morton To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Thu Jun 28 16:43: 9 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from mail.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com (mail.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com [206.29.169.15]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9946D37B403; Thu, 28 Jun 2001 16:43:05 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from tedm@toybox.placo.com) Received: (from nobody@localhost) by mail.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com (8.11.1/8.11.1) id f5SNgq514765; Thu, 28 Jun 2001 16:42:52 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from tedm@toybox.placo.com) From: Ted Mittelstaedt X-Authentication-Warning: mail.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com: nobody set sender to tedm@toybox.placo.com using -f To: Brad Knowles Subject: RE: Microsoft giving back to FreeBSD !! Message-ID: <993771771.3b3bc0fbe0737@mail.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com> Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 16:42:51 -0700 (PDT) Cc: Ted Mittelstaedt , "Pedro F. Giffuni" , Rick Hamell , freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG, freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG References: <000401c0ffa6$58c2f680$1401a8c0@tedm.placo.com> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit User-Agent: IMP/PHP IMAP webmail program 2.2.3 X-Originating-IP: 205.139.102.133 Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Quoting Brad Knowles : > At 12:45 AM -0700 6/28/01, Ted Mittelstaedt wrote: > > > Take Sendmail - it's license is a > > "non-commercial" one in that it's illegal to take Sendmail 9.X and > later > > code, compile it, and sell the compiled binary for other than a > nominal > > media and handling fee. > > Uh, where have you seen a license for Sendmail 9.x? The latest Oops - how embarassing, I meant 8.9 (and later)! Ted To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Thu Jun 28 17: 1:19 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from mail.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com (mail.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com [206.29.169.15]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D5CAD37B406 for ; Thu, 28 Jun 2001 17:01:15 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from tedm@toybox.placo.com) Received: (from nobody@localhost) by mail.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com (8.11.1/8.11.1) id f5T018S14841; Thu, 28 Jun 2001 17:01:08 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from tedm@toybox.placo.com) From: Ted Mittelstaedt X-Authentication-Warning: mail.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com: nobody set sender to tedm@toybox.placo.com using -f To: Rahul Siddharthan Subject: Re: FreeBSD and Microsoft Message-ID: <993772867.3b3bc543b74ab@mail.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com> Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 17:01:07 -0700 (PDT) Cc: Ted Mittelstaedt , FreeBSD Advocacy References: <20010628111710.E9802@lpt.ens.fr> <001b01c0ffb7$2525b4a0$1401a8c0@tedm.placo.com> <20010628115803.G9802@lpt.ens.fr> In-Reply-To: <20010628115803.G9802@lpt.ens.fr> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit User-Agent: IMP/PHP IMAP webmail program 2.2.3 X-Originating-IP: 205.139.102.133 Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Quoting Rahul Siddharthan : > > The GPL is not incompatible with selling a boxed distribution, but it > is incompatible with a "per seat" license. You can sell it to A, but > you can't stop A from further redistributing it, or insist that it can > be installed only on one machine (or used only by one user). > True, but you can say that unless B buys a registered copy of the GPL code from you that they don't get support. Or more interestingly, it might be quite possible to write a module that provides some critical function that is distributed as binary only and that requires some kind of encrypted key exchange between a server you control on the Internet and itself. Then you could modify the GPL code to exchange data with that module using a pipe or script or some such. Depending on the app and how you wrote it, I think you could make serialization difficult enough to break that most people wouldn't make the effort. Naturally, someone could simply read the GPL modifications and rewrite the module you wrote under GPL, but they already do that anyway when people write GPL programs that are functionally identical to commercial programs. With enough ingenuity, someone could defeat the intent of the GPL on a particular piece of software, with value-added software that is a separate module that is separately licensed. As Terry said it would greatly increase administrative overhead because of all the auditing you would have to do, but the GPL is no panacea in this regard. - indeed one of the reasons for the FreeBSD ports system is to sidestep all of the rediculous redistribution requirements that a number of packages place on themselves. Ted To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Thu Jun 28 17: 7:56 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from mail.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com (mail.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com [206.29.169.15]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7479137B401 for ; Thu, 28 Jun 2001 17:07:54 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from tedm@toybox.placo.com) Received: (from nobody@localhost) by mail.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com (8.11.1/8.11.1) id f5T07gw14913; Thu, 28 Jun 2001 17:07:42 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from tedm@toybox.placo.com) From: Ted Mittelstaedt X-Authentication-Warning: mail.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com: nobody set sender to tedm@toybox.placo.com using -f To: Wes Peters Subject: Re: FreeBSD and Microsoft Message-ID: <993773261.3b3bc6cddadca@mail.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com> Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 17:07:41 -0700 (PDT) Cc: Ted Mittelstaedt , jgrosch@mooseriver.com, Frank Pawlak , Bruce Meier , freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG References: <000601c0ffab$08f15ca0$1401a8c0@tedm.placo.com> <3B3B69E7.963060B@softweyr.com> In-Reply-To: <3B3B69E7.963060B@softweyr.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit User-Agent: IMP/PHP IMAP webmail program 2.2.3 X-Originating-IP: 205.139.102.133 Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Quoting Wes Peters : > > Viral is one thing. Comparing Linux (or any other non-criminal) human > endeavor > to CANCER is quite another. Ballmer should have his mouth washed out > with > surgical soap for that one. > Speaking as one who has had cancer myself (and a serious one at that) and who no longer has it, there's viruses that are for more deadly than many types of cancer. Given a choice, for example I'd rather have prostate cancer than Ebola any day. Both comparisons are equally silly or equally offensive depending on your point of view. Ted To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Fri Jun 29 2: 8:48 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from mail.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com (mail.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com [206.29.169.15]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 825C637B408 for ; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 02:08:44 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from tedm@toybox.placo.com) Received: from tedm.placo.com (nat-rtr.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com [206.29.168.154]) by mail.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com (8.11.1/8.11.1) with SMTP id f5T98al16615; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 02:08:40 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from tedm@toybox.placo.com) From: "Ted Mittelstaedt" To: "Technical Information" , "FreeBSD Advocacy" Subject: RE: FreeBSD and Microsoft Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2001 02:08:35 -0700 Message-ID: <001601c1007b$13969e60$1401a8c0@tedm.placo.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2173.0 In-Reply-To: <4.3.2.7.2.20010628152216.017e6008@threespace.com> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3155.0 Importance: Normal Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG >-----Original Message----- >From: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG >[mailto:owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG]On Behalf Of Technical >Information >Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2001 12:24 PM >To: FreeBSD Advocacy >Subject: Re: FreeBSD and Microsoft > > >At 04:20 AM 6/28/2001, Rahul Siddharthan wrote: >>I have to wonder, why the heck are Microsoft doing this? If more and >>more people start to learn that Linux isn't the only MS-alternative >>out there, there's another OS with friendlier licensing which does >>everything linux can (including running linux binaries like >>StarOffice) and is used by Microsoft itself (and on doing some >>research, they'll also learn that the same OS is used by Apple), >>exactly how does that help Microsoft? >> >>It's certainly good for FreeBSD; it's not necessarily bad for linux >>(whose users don't really care about Microsoft donations); but I don't >>see how it will be good for Microsoft. >> >>R > >Why does the drug dealer give you the first couple of hits of cocaine for >free? Not only does it engender some good will in the beginning, but once >you're hooked, they're in a position where they get to dictate the >terms of >the arrangement absolutely. > People that get hooked (addicted) to drugs can't get off of them even if they want to. But software is a different matter - nobody is holding a gun to their heads and telling them that they _have_ to keep using Microsoft software. Ted Mittelstaedt tedm@toybox.placo.com Author of: The FreeBSD Corporate Networker's Guide Book website: http://www.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Fri Jun 29 8:19:17 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from exchange.nils.lib.il.us (134.10.63.207.lth2.k12.il.us [207.63.10.134]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EE3B637B403 for ; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 08:19:13 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from nathanw@nils.lib.il.us) Received: by EXCHANGE with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id ; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 10:22:21 -0500 Message-ID: <94B701C29FC0D411B22100508BAF32AA03B96F@EXCHANGE> From: Nathan Williams To: Technical Information , FreeBSD Advocacy Subject: RE: FreeBSD and Microsoft Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2001 10:22:20 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Yes, but the notion of peer pressure is the same on both fronts. nathan -----Original Message----- From: Ted Mittelstaedt [mailto:tedm@toybox.placo.com] Sent: Friday, June 29, 2001 4:09 AM To: Technical Information; FreeBSD Advocacy Subject: RE: FreeBSD and Microsoft >-----Original Message----- >From: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG >[mailto:owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG]On Behalf Of Technical >Information >Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2001 12:24 PM >To: FreeBSD Advocacy >Subject: Re: FreeBSD and Microsoft > > >At 04:20 AM 6/28/2001, Rahul Siddharthan wrote: >>I have to wonder, why the heck are Microsoft doing this? If more and >>more people start to learn that Linux isn't the only MS-alternative >>out there, there's another OS with friendlier licensing which does >>everything linux can (including running linux binaries like >>StarOffice) and is used by Microsoft itself (and on doing some >>research, they'll also learn that the same OS is used by Apple), >>exactly how does that help Microsoft? >> >>It's certainly good for FreeBSD; it's not necessarily bad for linux >>(whose users don't really care about Microsoft donations); but I don't >>see how it will be good for Microsoft. >> >>R > >Why does the drug dealer give you the first couple of hits of cocaine for >free? Not only does it engender some good will in the beginning, but once >you're hooked, they're in a position where they get to dictate the >terms of >the arrangement absolutely. > People that get hooked (addicted) to drugs can't get off of them even if they want to. But software is a different matter - nobody is holding a gun to their heads and telling them that they _have_ to keep using Microsoft software. Ted Mittelstaedt tedm@toybox.placo.com Author of: The FreeBSD Corporate Networker's Guide Book website: http://www.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Fri Jun 29 9:18:16 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from stox.sa.enteract.com (stox.sa.enteract.com [207.229.132.161]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9AE3537B401 for ; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 09:18:13 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from stox@stox.sa.enteract.com) Received: (from stox@localhost) by stox.sa.enteract.com (8.11.4/8.11.3) id f5TGI6L23448 for freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 11:18:06 -0500 (CDT) (envelope-from stox) Message-ID: X-Mailer: XFMail 1.4.0 on FreeBSD X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit MIME-Version: 1.0 Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2001 11:18:06 -0500 (CDT) Organization: Imaginary Landscape, LLC. From: "Kenneth P. Stox" To: freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Is BSD the tortoise? Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/zd/20010629/tc/is_bsd_the_tortoise__1.html -Ken Stox stox@imagescape.com To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Fri Jun 29 9:45:36 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from 1upmc-msximc2.isdip.upmc.edu (1upmc-msximc2.isdip.upmc.edu [128.147.18.40]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4F7DB37B407 for ; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 09:45:28 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from personrp@ccbh.com) Received: by 1UPMC-MSXIMC2 with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id ; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 12:44:08 -0400 Message-ID: <46AEB8C1B628D511969200508B6FE42A668463@1upmc-msx6.isdip.upmc.edu> From: "Person, Roderick" To: "'Kenneth P. Stox'" , freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: RE: Is BSD the tortoise? Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2001 12:44:09 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C100BA.B8437430" Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand this format, some or all of this message may not be legible. ------_=_NextPart_001_01C100BA.B8437430 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" It says that Jordan announced his hiring by apple. I search the archives on announce and I can find anything, or am i looking in the wrong place? Roderick P. Person Programmer II personrp@ccbh.com http://www.ccbh.com > -----Original Message----- > From: Kenneth P. Stox [mailto:stox@imagescape.com] > Sent: June 29, 2001 12:18 PM > To: freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG > Subject: Is BSD the tortoise? > > > > http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/zd/20010629/tc/is_bsd_the_tortois > e__1.html > > -Ken Stox > stox@imagescape.com > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org > with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message > ------_=_NextPart_001_01C100BA.B8437430 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable RE: Is BSD the tortoise?

It says that Jordan announced his hiring by apple. I = search the archives on announce and I can find anything, or am i = looking in the wrong place?

Roderick P. Person
Programmer II
personrp@ccbh.com
http://www.ccbh.com




> -----Original Message-----
> From: Kenneth P. Stox [mailto:stox@imagescape.com]
> Sent: June 29, 2001 12:18 PM
> To: freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG
> Subject: Is BSD the tortoise?
>
>
>
> http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/zd/20010629/tc/is_bsd_the= _tortois
> e__1.html
>
> -Ken Stox
>  stox@imagescape.com
>
> To Unsubscribe: send mail to = majordomo@FreeBSD.org
> with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" = in the body of the message
>

------_=_NextPart_001_01C100BA.B8437430-- To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Fri Jun 29 9:54:16 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from nef.ens.fr (nef.ens.fr [129.199.96.32]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7340E37B401 for ; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 09:54:12 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from Rahul.Siddharthan@lpt.ens.fr) Received: from corto.lpt.ens.fr (corto.lpt.ens.fr [129.199.122.2]) by nef.ens.fr (8.10.1/1.01.28121999) with ESMTP id f5TGs9p80439 ; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 18:54:09 +0200 (CEST) Received: from (rsidd@localhost) by corto.lpt.ens.fr (8.9.3/jtpda-5.3.1) id SAA86099 ; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 18:55:17 +0200 (CEST) Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2001 18:55:17 +0200 From: Rahul Siddharthan To: "Person, Roderick" Cc: "'Kenneth P. Stox'" , freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Is BSD the tortoise? Message-ID: <20010629185517.H78388@lpt.ens.fr> Mail-Followup-To: "Person, Roderick" , "'Kenneth P. Stox'" , freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG References: <46AEB8C1B628D511969200508B6FE42A668463@1upmc-msx6.isdip.upmc.edu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i In-Reply-To: <46AEB8C1B628D511969200508B6FE42A668463@1upmc-msx6.isdip.upmc.edu>; from personrp@ccbh.com on Fri, Jun 29, 2001 at 12:44:09PM -0400 X-Operating-System: FreeBSD 3.4-STABLE i386 Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Person, Roderick said on Jun 29, 2001 at 12:44:09: > It says that Jordan announced his hiring by apple. I search the archives on > announce and I can find anything, or am i looking in the wrong place? http://docs.freebsd.org/cgi/getmsg.cgi?fetch=0+0+current/freebsd-announce Not archived yet, probably To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Fri Jun 29 10: 4: 8 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from vnode.vmunix.com (vnode.vmunix.com [209.112.4.20]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1B1C637B406 for ; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 10:04:06 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from chrisc@vmunix.com) Received: by vnode.vmunix.com (Postfix, from userid 1005) id 4725C11; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 13:04:05 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by vnode.vmunix.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3C28149A13; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 13:04:05 -0400 (EDT) Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2001 13:04:05 -0400 (EDT) From: Chris Coleman To: Rahul Siddharthan Cc: "Person, Roderick" , "'Kenneth P. Stox'" , freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Is BSD the tortoise? In-Reply-To: <20010629185517.H78388@lpt.ens.fr> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG http://daily.daemonnews.org/view_story.php3?story_id=2143 Chris Coleman Editor in Chief Daemon News E-Zine http://www.daemonnews.org Print Magazine http://magazine.daemonnews.org Open Packages http://www.openpackages.org On Fri, 29 Jun 2001, Rahul Siddharthan wrote: > Person, Roderick said on Jun 29, 2001 at 12:44:09: > > It says that Jordan announced his hiring by apple. I search the archives on > > announce and I can find anything, or am i looking in the wrong place? > > http://docs.freebsd.org/cgi/getmsg.cgi?fetch=0+0+current/freebsd-announce > Not archived yet, probably > > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org > with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Fri Jun 29 13:52:29 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from mailsrv.otenet.gr (mailsrv.otenet.gr [195.170.0.5]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 43DD537B403 for ; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 13:52:25 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from keramida@ceid.upatras.gr) Received: from hades.hell.gr (patr530-a201.otenet.gr [212.205.215.201]) by mailsrv.otenet.gr (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f5TKqEF11910; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 23:52:15 +0300 (EEST) Received: (from charon@localhost) by hades.hell.gr (8.11.4/8.11.3) id f5TK84a18321; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 23:08:04 +0300 (EEST) (envelope-from keramida@ceid.upatras.gr) Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2001 23:08:03 +0300 From: Giorgos Keramidas To: Frank Pawlak Cc: jgrosch@mooseriver.com, Bruce Meier , freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Lets not bash Windows or M$ at every opportunity {was: FreeBSD and Microsoft} Message-ID: <20010629230803.A18249@hades.hell.gr> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Wed, Jun 27, 2001 at 03:48:54PM -0500, Frank Pawlak wrote: > Unfortunately, this comes at a very bad time because now there is a > bit more than a glimmer of hope that open source can begin to > effectively compete with them, and erode their market share. > It is really a sad state that better products like BSD and Linux > have to fight with their hands tied behind their backs. What fight? Who ties their hands? Better products than ...? Please do not start making generalizations like those above. If by 'better products' you mean Windows, then I'd have to be the devil's advocate and suggest that Windows does have some good things that Linux and/or FreeBSD don't have. For instance, they do have support for more multimedia file formats. I know that we are talking about closed, proprietary formats now, but the support is there in Windows, and it's not in Linux or FreeBSD. In this simple and small part of the system (multimedia support) Windows seems to be `better' than Linux or FreeBSD. Therefore, I'm still at a loss at how you defined 'better'. Oh, and then, there's that `fight thing' and the tied hands. Am not sure I got any point out of this, sorry... > It is my hope that Justice will win out and slap their ass and free > the market for us. You had me agree there, up until 'Justice will win out'. Yes, my hope is that Justice will win out too. I am also afraid of seeing something bad happen, such as the Justice Department winning Microsoft in this case, and making a habit of stopping companies that grow `large' in their opinion. Then as time passes, this `large' might begin to shrink in size, and that would be most improper. Some things are a bit tricky :/ -giorgos To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Fri Jun 29 14:17:58 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from femail21.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail21.sdc1.sfba.home.com [24.0.95.146]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9A9E937B405 for ; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 14:17:53 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from tech_info@threespace.com) Received: from Atlanta.threespace.com ([24.21.224.204]) by femail21.sdc1.sfba.home.com (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with ESMTP id <20010629211753.YAOG16359.femail21.sdc1.sfba.home.com@Atlanta.threespace.com> for ; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 14:17:53 -0700 Message-Id: <4.3.2.7.2.20010629164758.03a52ff0@threespace.com> X-Sender: tech@threespace.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.2 Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2001 16:52:34 -0400 To: "FreeBSD Advocacy" From: Technical Information Subject: RE: FreeBSD and Microsoft In-Reply-To: <001601c1007b$13969e60$1401a8c0@tedm.placo.com> References: <4.3.2.7.2.20010628152216.017e6008@threespace.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Nobody is forcing software users to use Microsoft, but there's also nobody out there forcing drug addicts to smoke that next gram either. My point is that once you've chosen a particular way of doing things, there's a certain "inertia" that can make it hard to change. Habits, good or bad, are often hard to break. Convincing users that there are technically superior alternatives to Windows isn't difficult. Convincing them to switch is. I suspect this is what will become of .NET once everyone is writing apps/services for it. --Chip Morton At 05:08 AM 6/29/2001, Ted Mittelstaedt wrote: > >Why does the drug dealer give you the first couple of hits of cocaine for > >free? Not only does it engender some good will in the beginning, but once > >you're hooked, they're in a position where they get to dictate the > >terms of > >the arrangement absolutely. > > > >People that get hooked (addicted) to drugs can't get off of them even if >they want to. But software is a different matter - nobody is holding a gun >to >their heads and telling them that they _have_ to keep using Microsoft >software. > > > >Ted Mittelstaedt tedm@toybox.placo.com >Author of: The FreeBSD Corporate Networker's Guide >Book website: http://www.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com > > >To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org >with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Fri Jun 29 20:32:36 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from wilma.widomaker.com (wilma.widomaker.com [204.17.220.5]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2678337B406 for ; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 20:32:30 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from shannon@daydream.shannon.net) Received: from [209.96.179.117] (helo=escape.shannon.net) by wilma.widomaker.com with esmtp (Exim 3.22 #2) id 15GBUi-0003sb-00 for advocacy@freebsd.org; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 23:32:28 -0400 Received: from daydream (daydream.shannon.net [192.168.1.10]) by escape.shannon.net (8.11.0/8.8.8) with ESMTP id f5U2uYc20733 for ; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 22:56:34 -0400 (EDT) Received: from shannon by daydream with local (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian)) id 15GAvy-00017f-00 for ; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 22:56:34 -0400 Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2001 22:56:34 -0400 From: Shannon Hendrix To: FreeBSD Advocacy Subject: Re: FreeBSD and Microsoft Message-ID: <20010629225633.B3383@widomaker.com> Mail-Followup-To: FreeBSD Advocacy References: <001601c1007b$13969e60$1401a8c0@tedm.placo.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <001601c1007b$13969e60$1401a8c0@tedm.placo.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.18i Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Fri, Jun 29, 2001 at 02:08:35AM -0700, Ted Mittelstaedt wrote: > People that get hooked (addicted) to drugs can't get off of them even if > they want to. But software is a different matter - nobody is holding a gun > to their heads and telling them that they _have_ to keep using Microsoft > software. True, but there are a number of services that run poorly or not at all unless you use Windows. I have even hit US Government and State of Virginia web pages that I was unable to read from my UNIX box, and there are plenty of basic services (financial organizations for example) that require Windows, or are very difficult to use without it. This has been getting slowly worse as time goes on. Granted, there are emulators available, but let's face it: they suck, and they don't always work. Even some services available on the WWW run poorly unless you use a browser like IE, and I mean government sites, not just commercial ones. -- "There is no such thing as security. Life is either bold | | | adventure, or it is nothing -- Helen Keller" | | | ________________________________________________________________ / | \ s h a n n o n @ w i d o m a k e r . c o m _/ | \_ To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Fri Jun 29 20:32:39 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from wilma.widomaker.com (wilma.widomaker.com [204.17.220.5]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 67AE437B408 for ; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 20:32:31 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from shannon@daydream.shannon.net) Received: from [209.96.179.117] (helo=escape.shannon.net) by wilma.widomaker.com with esmtp (Exim 3.22 #2) id 15GBUj-0003sb-00 for freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 23:32:30 -0400 Received: from daydream (daydream.shannon.net [192.168.1.10]) by escape.shannon.net (8.11.0/8.8.8) with ESMTP id f5U37Jc20816 for ; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 23:07:19 -0400 (EDT) Received: from shannon by daydream with local (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian)) id 15GB6N-0001A1-00 for ; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 23:07:19 -0400 Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2001 23:07:19 -0400 From: Shannon Hendrix To: freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Lets not bash Windows or M$ at every opportunity {was: FreeBSD and Microsoft} Message-ID: <20010629230718.C3383@widomaker.com> Mail-Followup-To: freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG References: <20010629230803.A18249@hades.hell.gr> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20010629230803.A18249@hades.hell.gr> User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.18i Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Fri, Jun 29, 2001 at 11:08:03PM +0300, Giorgos Keramidas wrote: > If by 'better products' you mean Windows, then I'd have to be the > devil's advocate and suggest that Windows does have some good things > that Linux and/or FreeBSD don't have. For instance, they do have > support for more multimedia file formats. [snip] This is by design. They create a constant stream of new and different media formats, and refuse to disclose the details so that all platforms can easily use them. There is no reason for this other than your basic, predatory, monopolistic tactics. This doesn't make Windows better in any sense of the word, it only makes the overall plan that much more wrong. > I am also afraid of seeing something bad happen, such as the Justice > Department winning Microsoft in this case, and making a habit of stopping > companies that grow `large' in their opinion. Um... anti-trust has been in effect for nearly 100 years, and Microsoft isn't the first to be targeted. IMHO, not enough was done, and I just read in the paper that the breakup of Microsoft has been overruled. Microsoft is getting a slap on the wrist compared to other companies. So, it appears the trend is to be _easier_ on large companies, not harder. > Then as time passes, this `large' might begin to shrink in size, and that > would be most improper. The government would never do that, because then the sums of money thrown to the pigs in DC would also grow smaller. You need to think more like a CongressCritter(TM) sometimes... :) -- shannon@widomaker.com _________________________________________________ ______________________/ armchairrocketscientistgraffitiexistentialist "Consulting wouldn't be what it is today without Microsoft Windows" -- Chris Pinkham To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Fri Jun 29 22:32:47 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from mail.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com (mail.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com [206.29.169.15]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9C60C37B428 for ; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 22:32:38 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from tedm@toybox.placo.com) Received: from tedm.placo.com (nat-rtr.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com [206.29.168.154]) by mail.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com (8.11.1/8.11.1) with SMTP id f5U5WYl18684; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 22:32:35 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from tedm@toybox.placo.com) From: "Ted Mittelstaedt" To: "Shannon Hendrix" , Subject: RE: Lets not bash Windows or M$ at every opportunity {was: FreeBSD and Microsoft} Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2001 22:32:33 -0700 Message-ID: <000f01c10126$10525220$1401a8c0@tedm.placo.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2173.0 In-Reply-To: <20010629230718.C3383@widomaker.com> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3155.0 Importance: Normal Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG >-----Original Message----- >From: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG >[mailto:owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG]On Behalf Of Shannon Hendrix >Sent: Friday, June 29, 2001 8:07 PM >To: freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG >Subject: Re: Lets not bash Windows or M$ at every opportunity {was: >FreeBSD and Microsoft} > > >On Fri, Jun 29, 2001 at 11:08:03PM +0300, Giorgos Keramidas wrote: > >> If by 'better products' you mean Windows, then I'd have to be the >> devil's advocate and suggest that Windows does have some good things >> that Linux and/or FreeBSD don't have. For instance, they do have >> support for more multimedia file formats. >[snip] > >This is by design. They create a constant stream of new and different >media formats, and refuse to disclose the details so that all platforms >can easily use them. There is no reason for this other than your basic, >predatory, monopolistic tactics. > No, that's not it - the problem here is that every company in the Multimedia game thinks that creating a proprietary media format is their ticket to riches. If Microsoft had anything to say about it there would be only one media format - they are just being dragged along like the rest of the users. Frankly, I fail to see what is so exciting about Multimedia on a PC anyway. Sure, games are fun but gaming isn't multimedia, it's gaming. It seems to me that so far the only people that have ever built a sustainable business model with multimedia are the porno sites. Perhaps that is who is really secretly funding all of the development on the new streaming video formats because there's nobody else in the business that is making any money doing it. > >The government would never do that, because then the sums of money >thrown to the pigs in DC would also grow smaller. You need to think more >like a CongressCritter(TM) sometimes... :) > Actually the sums probably would get larger because if you bust up one big company you get several smaller ones all of whom are competing with each other and so they all now have to pay the congresspeople to lobby against each other. However, in the US anti-trust law, despite what people think, isn't intended to be used to bust up large companies. Instead it's intended to create a _threat_ that the large companies will be busted up, which gives the trust regulators in Washington power to force large companies to divest from particular markets. What has happened with Microsoft is that before the trial they wern't legally a monopoly, and so when the trust regulators attempted to tell them to divest from particular markets, Microsoft basically told them to "fuck off" This was most unusual because just about all other large companies in US history have quietly submitted to the trust regulators when it became obvious to a blind monkey that they were too big. Even Intel did this several years ago with the FTC - why do you think that AMD is still in existence? Since Microsoft refused to submit, it had most of the Beltway scratching their heads attempting to figure out what to do about it. It was up to Justice to take Mr. Gates out to the woodshed and give him a whipping, which they pretty much did. Note that Microsoft is now calling for government settlement, whereas before they claimed that the government had no authority over them. Now, from most of Washington's point of view, things are back to normal, Microsoft's fate is in the hands of the governmental regulators where it should have been from the beginning. It will be interesting to see what happens, because Bill Gates has had a history of weaseling out of agreements. This particular agreement is going to be a political nuclear bomb, and whatever bureaucrat in Washington attempts to negotiate it will be throwing their career away because nobody is going to like it. You are sure not going to see the Bush administration get involved with the Senate elections coming up. I think there will be tremendous pressure to have the courts do the dirty work. I don't think that anyone can quite imagine what will happen if in the next 5 years Microsoft is back in anti-trust court again, but I can say that nobody then will stick their necks out for them. Their fate is equivalent to the criminal who was about to be executed in the electric chair, and in the final hour the governor pardoned them. If they so much as step out of line again, they are dead. Ted Mittelstaedt tedm@toybox.placo.com Author of: The FreeBSD Corporate Networker's Guide Book website: http://www.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Fri Jun 29 23:11:15 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from softweyr.com (softweyr.com [208.247.99.111]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6143537B407 for ; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 23:11:11 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from wes@softweyr.com) Received: from localhost.softweyr.com ([127.0.0.1] helo=softweyr.com ident=ed2c1c2b0bbb5385013d50e0d5596c0c) by softweyr.com with esmtp (Exim 3.16 #1) id 15GE2k-0000Lo-00; Sat, 30 Jun 2001 00:15:46 -0600 Message-ID: <3B3D6E92.8C9D5DCD@softweyr.com> Date: Sat, 30 Jun 2001 00:15:46 -0600 From: Wes Peters Organization: Softweyr LLC X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12 i386) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Shannon Hendrix Cc: freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Lets not bash Windows or M$ at every opportunity {was: FreeBSD and Microsoft} References: <20010629230803.A18249@hades.hell.gr> <20010629230718.C3383@widomaker.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Shannon Hendrix wrote: > > On Fri, Jun 29, 2001 at 11:08:03PM +0300, Giorgos Keramidas wrote: > > > If by 'better products' you mean Windows, then I'd have to be the > > devil's advocate and suggest that Windows does have some good things > > that Linux and/or FreeBSD don't have. For instance, they do have > > support for more multimedia file formats. > [snip] > > This is by design. They create a constant stream of new and different > media formats, and refuse to disclose the details so that all platforms > can easily use them. There is no reason for this other than your basic, > predatory, monopolistic tactics. > > This doesn't make Windows better in any sense of the word, it only makes > the overall plan that much more wrong. > > > I am also afraid of seeing something bad happen, such as the Justice > > Department winning Microsoft in this case, and making a habit of stopping > > companies that grow `large' in their opinion. > > Um... anti-trust has been in effect for nearly 100 years, and Microsoft > isn't the first to be targeted. IMHO, not enough was done, and I just > read in the paper that the breakup of Microsoft has been overruled. The papers have all been saying that, but that isn't what happened. The ruling said the "findings of law", that Microsoft *is* a monoply and *is* guilty of predatory practices, were all upheld by the appeals court. What they said is that Judge Jackson made remarks that could be prejudicial to Microsoft during the penalty phase of the trial, so the penalty phase will have to be re-tried. > Microsoft is getting a slap on the wrist compared to other companies. No, IBM got a slap on the wrist. Standard Oil and Bell Telephone both got split up, and ultimately thrived because of it. Microsoft probably would, too; be careful what you wish for. > So, it appears the trend is to be _easier_ on large companies, not > harder. That's certainly what the talking heads are saying about the Bush administration. Time will tell. > > Then as time passes, this `large' might begin to shrink in size, and that > > would be most improper. > > The government would never do that, because then the sums of money > thrown to the pigs in DC would also grow smaller. You need to think more > like a CongressCritter(TM) sometimes... :) God no. -- "Where am I, and what am I doing in this handbasket?" Wes Peters Softweyr LLC wes@softweyr.com http://softweyr.com/ To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Sat Jun 30 1:33:51 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from mailsrv.otenet.gr (mailsrv.otenet.gr [195.170.0.5]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0398F37B403 for ; Sat, 30 Jun 2001 01:33:48 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from keramida@ceid.upatras.gr) Received: from hades.hell.gr (patr530-a155.otenet.gr [212.205.215.155]) by mailsrv.otenet.gr (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f5U8XcF20385; Sat, 30 Jun 2001 11:33:38 +0300 (EEST) Received: (from charon@localhost) by hades.hell.gr (8.11.4/8.11.3) id f5U8P4Q27100; Sat, 30 Jun 2001 11:25:04 +0300 (EEST) (envelope-from keramida@ceid.upatras.gr) Date: Sat, 30 Jun 2001 11:25:04 +0300 From: Giorgos Keramidas To: "Person, Roderick" Cc: "'Kenneth P. Stox'" , freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Is BSD the tortoise? Message-ID: <20010630112504.D26839@hades.hell.gr> References: <46AEB8C1B628D511969200508B6FE42A668463@1upmc-msx6.isdip.upmc.edu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i In-Reply-To: <46AEB8C1B628D511969200508B6FE42A668463@1upmc-msx6.isdip.upmc.edu>; from personrp@ccbh.com on Fri, Jun 29, 2001 at 12:44:09PM -0400 X-PGP-Fingerprint: 3A 75 52 EB F1 58 56 0D - C5 B8 21 B6 1B 5E 4A C2 X-URL: http://students.ceid.upatras.gr/~keramida/index.html Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Fri, Jun 29, 2001 at 12:44:09PM -0400, Person, Roderick wrote: > It says that Jordan announced his hiring by apple. I search the archives on > announce and I can find anything, or am i looking in the wrong place? Delivered-To: freebsd-announce@freebsd.org Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2001 16:08:52 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <200106252308.f5PN8qQ28753@winston.osd.bsdi.com> From: Jordan Hubbard To: announce@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: My new job That's what you're looking for. Probably hasn't hit the archives yet. -giorgos To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Sat Jun 30 1:33:54 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from mailsrv.otenet.gr (mailsrv.otenet.gr [195.170.0.5]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3432B37B405 for ; Sat, 30 Jun 2001 01:33:50 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from keramida@ceid.upatras.gr) Received: from hades.hell.gr (patr530-a155.otenet.gr [212.205.215.155]) by mailsrv.otenet.gr (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f5U8XlF20608; Sat, 30 Jun 2001 11:33:47 +0300 (EEST) Received: (from charon@localhost) by hades.hell.gr (8.11.4/8.11.3) id f5U8KnJ27033; Sat, 30 Jun 2001 11:20:49 +0300 (EEST) (envelope-from keramida@ceid.upatras.gr) Date: Sat, 30 Jun 2001 11:20:49 +0300 From: Giorgos Keramidas To: Shannon Hendrix Cc: freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Lets not bash Windows or M$ at every opportunity {was: FreeBSD and Microsoft} Message-ID: <20010630112049.C26839@hades.hell.gr> References: <20010629230803.A18249@hades.hell.gr> <20010629230718.C3383@widomaker.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i In-Reply-To: <20010629230718.C3383@widomaker.com>; from shannon@widomaker.com on Fri, Jun 29, 2001 at 11:07:19PM -0400 X-PGP-Fingerprint: 3A 75 52 EB F1 58 56 0D - C5 B8 21 B6 1B 5E 4A C2 X-URL: http://students.ceid.upatras.gr/~keramida/index.html Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Fri, Jun 29, 2001 at 11:07:19PM -0400, Shannon Hendrix wrote: > The government would never do that, because then the sums of money > thrown to the pigs in DC would also grow smaller. You need to think more > like a CongressCritter(TM) sometimes... :) Oh, please father, take away this bitter glass from me. I think I can probably afford the peril of making a few mistaken comments now and then, and still be happier than act or think like in this manner. Thank you! -giorgos To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Sat Jun 30 1:33:56 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from mailsrv.otenet.gr (mailsrv.otenet.gr [195.170.0.5]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1F48537B410 for ; Sat, 30 Jun 2001 01:33:53 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from keramida@ceid.upatras.gr) Received: from hades.hell.gr (patr530-a155.otenet.gr [212.205.215.155]) by mailsrv.otenet.gr (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f5U8XnF20691; Sat, 30 Jun 2001 11:33:50 +0300 (EEST) Received: (from charon@localhost) by hades.hell.gr (8.11.4/8.11.3) id f5U8Has27016; Sat, 30 Jun 2001 11:17:36 +0300 (EEST) (envelope-from keramida@ceid.upatras.gr) Date: Sat, 30 Jun 2001 11:17:35 +0300 From: Giorgos Keramidas To: Ted Mittelstaedt Cc: advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Lets not bash Windows or M$ at every opportunity {was: FreeBSD and Microsoft} Message-ID: <20010630111735.B26839@hades.hell.gr> References: <20010629230718.C3383@widomaker.com> <000f01c10126$10525220$1401a8c0@tedm.placo.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i In-Reply-To: <000f01c10126$10525220$1401a8c0@tedm.placo.com>; from tedm@toybox.placo.com on Fri, Jun 29, 2001 at 10:32:33PM -0700 X-PGP-Fingerprint: 3A 75 52 EB F1 58 56 0D - C5 B8 21 B6 1B 5E 4A C2 X-URL: http://students.ceid.upatras.gr/~keramida/index.html Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Fri, Jun 29, 2001 at 10:32:33PM -0700, Ted Mittelstaedt wrote: > It seems to me that so far the only people that have ever built a > sustainable business model with multimedia are the porno sites. > Perhaps that is who is really secretly funding all of the > development on the new streaming video formats because there's > nobody else in the business that is making any money doing it. Heh. I seem to recall at least once a message from Jordan that stated more or less the same thing. A quick search in the archives, and I failed to find it right now, but I think I can't agree more :) -giorgos To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Sat Jun 30 11:37:59 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from serenity.mcc.ac.uk (serenity.mcc.ac.uk [130.88.200.93]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5030E37B953 for ; Sat, 30 Jun 2001 09:47:45 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from jcm@freebsd-uk.eu.org) Received: from dogma.freebsd-uk.eu.org ([130.88.200.97] ident=root) by serenity.mcc.ac.uk with esmtp (Exim 2.05 #6) id 15GNuK-000Bil-00 for freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org; Sat, 30 Jun 2001 17:47:44 +0100 Received: (from jcm@localhost) by dogma.freebsd-uk.eu.org (8.11.3/8.11.1) id f5UGlhZ85362 for freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org; Sat, 30 Jun 2001 17:47:43 +0100 (BST) (envelope-from jcm) Date: Sat, 30 Jun 2001 17:47:43 +0100 From: j mckitrick To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Subject: BSD, .Net comments - any reponse to this reasoning? Message-ID: <20010630174743.A85268@dogma.freebsd-uk.eu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="1yeeQ81UyVL57Vl7" X-Mailer: Mutt 1.0.1i Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG --1yeeQ81UyVL57Vl7 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii I'm curious to get some thoughts on this. Just when i am convinced BSD is doing great, i get concerned by material like this. Is this just FUD? It seems the GPL became relevant more than ever with the advent of an everyman's Unix in the face of a dominant, evil software empire. A radical solution for an overwhelming problem. It is being contended that the BSD license is too altruistic, ignoring market motivations and expecting the best when we have seen that most companies do not operate that way. Please, someone give me some sound reasoning that can clear the air of this FUD. Jonathon -- Microsoft complaining about the source license used by Linux is like the event horizon calling the kettle black. --1yeeQ81UyVL57Vl7 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="netstuff.txt" Over and over again it is stated in LT and its readers' comments that Microsoft hates Linux because they cannot misappropriate code protected by the GPL, and they love BSD because they can steal the whole thing and not have to give anybody anything-- BSD is just there for the plucking, like fruit on a wild fruit tree in the forest. A comment was made in today's comments reaffirming the fairly commonly known fact (among the cognoscenti) that the miscreant Gates and friends lifted Basic intact from the public domain, made some changes to it, copyrighted it, started selling it for an outrageous price, and then wrote a disgusting letter to the world's computer hobbyists who shared the the Basic code, decrying the fact that they were stealing Micro Soft's "intellectual property" and must stop at once. Bill Gates was already on his way to becoming the single most disgusting person in the entire world, and now he has arrived, full blown and without shame. He is the personification of greed, and totally devoid of any slightest redeeming human quality. You can be sure-- absolutely sure-- that BSD's days are numbered now that Gates & Company have embraced it. If Microsoft absorbs BSD and releases it to the public as their "open source" product, you can be sure that development on it outside of Redmond will stop dead in its tracks, because no genuine open source developer, including those from BSD itself, who has any intelligence at all, or pride in his work, or sense of fairness, will continue to work on it, knowing that Microsoft's miscreants will steal the fruit of his labor without the slightest qualm of conscience. Once BSD belongs to Microsoft, it will be on a slippery slope to oblivion. Microsoft can take a perfectly good product and, with their onerous licensing schemes, proprietary extensions to the code, and generally evil intentions, ruin it and drive it to extinction. The same will happen to BSD under Microsoft. But such a thing cannot happen to code protected by the GPL, and this is driving Bill Gates and Steve Ballmer absolutely insane as attested to by their recent statements in the press! That is why Microsoft hates Linux: They can't buy it or steal it, and that fact is driving them nuts. They can see that Linux is on the path to making Microsoft redundant. And maybe all of this constitutes some of the reasons why BSD has not been embraced by the business community as widely as Linux. Leo - Subject: BSD license is weak for software commons ( Jun 30, 2001, 13:51:44 ) This has been said a million times before. I guess it's time to say it again. BSD license is great for proprietary companies. BSD license would also be good if, and only if, we could honestly say that 99% of all people are good and altruistic. However that is not the case. The reality is different. In the real world you have many companies and powerful individuals that only wait for an opportunity to use something without paying back. I don't think I need to give examples, do I? We all know many such examples. Some of them were mentioned in the talkbacks here. In light of this, the GPL is the *only* license that effectively protects a software commons. GPL license makes it very hard and cost inneficient to produce a proprietary version with locked-in features and customers. GPL license *encourages* developers to contribute to the commons, because they can be safe in the knowledge that their competitor is not easily going to use this against them, nor could a competitor create an incompatible and secret fork (other than for internal use). BSD is great for companies like M$ and Apple, because they can take what they want and give nothing back. They're free to produce proprietary and incompatible extensions. But tell me, WHAT IS THE ECONOMICAL INCENTIVE FOR THEM TO ACTUALLY *CONTRIBUTE* TO BSD, UNDER A BSD LICENSE??? None whatsoever. None at all. None. Nil. Nie, No, Net, Non! They gain *nothing* by releasing their own source code under a BSD license. They can't even use that for creating a de-facto standard, because the commons is not protected, thus the standard is not protected under a BSD license. Now, there are a few exceptions from this rule. One of them, for example, M$ might release some stuff under BSD for political reasons. Not because they actually benefit from this move directly, but because it may piss of GNU/Linux people or something like that. Or maybe just to say, "See, we really do support FreeBSD." But it would be nothing but a loss leader and not any kind of commitment. Nor would M$ really enjoy it, but rather do it out of political necessity, IF AT ALL. And as soon as the political necessity stops, they would stop immediately all BSD code releases, and quickly fork everything into a locked-in, secret, and incompatible version. None of this crap is possible with GPL. I've seen many BSD people post. They strike me as very bright and very altruistic. In fact, they're too altruistic. They're more altruistic and more naive than the GPL people. GPL people are more pragmatic. GPL person would say, "yea, I wanna share, but I am also going to cover my a**, thank you very much." BSD person says, "I share without any strings attached, even if this kills me or does harm in the marketplace...I don't care. I just share, and if someone uses this for ill gain, it's their own problem." I sympathize with BSD people, but I can't agree with their irresponsible sharing. They altruism and trust is misplaced. Just because a thing like apache did not get seriously forked is no indication that it cannot ever happen. Why take risk? Why use the economical lever, when the legal lever is much more direct and more powerful in this case? It beats me. I figure most developers will continue to prefer GPL, because it makes good sense to use it. The OS/app with the most developer mind share will win. The most open OS/app will win. GPL is more open than BSD. GPL code base does not spawn dark shadows and hidden corners around itself. It IS more open. Openness wins. --1yeeQ81UyVL57Vl7-- To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Sat Jun 30 11:56:34 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from probity.mcc.ac.uk (probity.mcc.ac.uk [130.88.200.94]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7FA5237B406 for ; Sat, 30 Jun 2001 11:56:31 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from jcm@freebsd-uk.eu.org) Received: from dogma.freebsd-uk.eu.org ([130.88.200.97] ident=root) by probity.mcc.ac.uk with esmtp (Exim 2.05 #7) id 15GPuw-0008Tc-00 for freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org; Sat, 30 Jun 2001 19:56:30 +0100 Received: (from jcm@localhost) by dogma.freebsd-uk.eu.org (8.11.3/8.11.1) id f5UIuTe86819 for freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org; Sat, 30 Jun 2001 19:56:29 +0100 (BST) (envelope-from jcm) Date: Sat, 30 Jun 2001 19:56:29 +0100 From: j mckitrick To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Subject: multimedia formats Message-ID: <20010630195629.A86721@dogma.freebsd-uk.eu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 1.0.1i Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Ted is right. Multimedia would have gone nowhere if it hadn't been for porn. Apparently, there was quite a scuffle when Quicktime and Windows Media Formats were duking it out. IIRC, Quicktime was better, but WMP won because... um... oh, yeah, because it was already installed on the machine and easier to use. Some time ago, I also saw an article on how so many porn sites use FreeBSD because it is cheap and excels in performance on networks. Maybe wccdrom wasn't the busiest website after all. ;-) Jonathon -- Microsoft complaining about the source license used by Linux is like the event horizon calling the kettle black. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Sat Jun 30 14:36:42 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from femail22.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail22.sdc1.sfba.home.com [24.0.95.147]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0C8FC37B405 for ; Sat, 30 Jun 2001 14:36:34 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from tech_info@threespace.com) Received: from Atlanta.threespace.com ([24.21.224.204]) by femail22.sdc1.sfba.home.com (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with ESMTP id <20010630213633.HOZM18266.femail22.sdc1.sfba.home.com@Atlanta.threespace.com> for ; Sat, 30 Jun 2001 14:36:33 -0700 Message-Id: <4.3.2.7.2.20010630172621.017bfb18@threespace.com> X-Sender: tech@threespace.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.2 Date: Sat, 30 Jun 2001 17:35:31 -0400 To: FreeBSD Advocacy From: Technical Information Subject: Re: BSD, .Net comments - any reponse to this reasoning? In-Reply-To: <20010630174743.A85268@dogma.freebsd-uk.eu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Sounds like somebody with a strong opinion came up with some "arguments" to support that opinion. First off, only time will tell who's licence is right, if anyone's. Frankly I think they're suitable for different purposes. Much as the author claims that BSD-license users believe that everyone plays fair and square, it sounds to me that this author believes everyone is out to screw him first chance they get. Both of those positions are extreme, and I don't think they really cover most of the GPL/Linux *or* BSD users. I can appreciate a developer wanting to maintain control of his homegrown project, his "baby" if you will. But I can also appreciate one who says "I did it and now I've done all that I care to with it, here you go" before turning it over and moving on to his next project. Some people truly don't care to try to regulate the morality of others using their code. But most importantly, what tends to get lost among all this rabble-rousing (and that's really all it is) is the fact that the end user typically doesn't give a rot about what license is used as long as the software does what he needs. The developers and even the corporations are a very small percentage of the user base, and you can be sure that if your product doesn't meet the needs of the users, it won't get used no matter how "free" it claims to be. Openness doesn't win. Marketing wins. Especially when it's coupled with a product that's excellent or even "good enough." --Chip Morton At 12:47 PM 6/30/2001, you wrote: >I'm curious to get some thoughts on this. Just when i am convinced BSD is >doing great, i get concerned by material like this. Is this just FUD? > >It seems the GPL became relevant more than ever with the advent of an >everyman's Unix in the face of a dominant, evil software empire. A radical >solution for an overwhelming problem. It is being contended that the BSD >license is too altruistic, ignoring market motivations and expecting the >best when we have seen that most companies do not operate that way. > >Please, someone give me some sound reasoning that can clear the air of this >FUD. > > > >Jonathon >-- >Microsoft complaining about the source license used by >Linux is like the event horizon calling the kettle black. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Sat Jun 30 14:54:54 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from out4.mx.nwbl.wi.voyager.net (out4.mx.nwbl.wi.voyager.net [169.207.1.77]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 578CA37B403 for ; Sat, 30 Jun 2001 14:54:49 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from fpawlak@execpc.com) Received: from pop3.nwbl.wi.voyager.net (pop3.nwbl.wi.voyager.net [169.207.1.83]) by out4.mx.nwbl.wi.voyager.net (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f5ULu0V91775; Sat, 30 Jun 2001 16:56:00 -0500 (CDT) Received: from john.execpc.com (d22.as6.nwbl0.wi.voyager.net [169.207.128.22]) by pop3.nwbl.wi.voyager.net (8.10.2/8.10.2) with ESMTP id f5ULrBS95752; Sat, 30 Jun 2001 16:53:11 -0500 (CDT) Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20010630160929.00a76388@127.0.0.1> X-Sender: fpawlak/mail.execpc.com@127.0.0.1 X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 Date: Sat, 30 Jun 2001 16:55:46 -0500 To: Giorgos Keramidas , freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG From: Frank Pawlak Subject: Re: Lets not bash Windows or M$ at every opportunity {was: FreeBSD and Microsoft} Cc: freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG In-Reply-To: <20010629230803.A18249@hades.hell.gr> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG At 11:08 PM 6/29/2001 +0300, Giorgos Keramidas wrote: >On Wed, Jun 27, 2001 at 03:48:54PM -0500, Frank Pawlak wrote: > > > Unfortunately, this comes at a very bad time because now there is a > > bit more than a glimmer of hope that open source can begin to > > effectively compete with them, and erode their market share. > > > It is really a sad state that better products like BSD and Linux > > have to fight with their hands tied behind their backs. > >What fight? Who ties their hands? Better products than ...? >Please do not start making generalizations like those above. They are not generalizations at all. Perhaps I am wrong, but there appears to be some confusions in your reading what I have written, mainly my use of metaphor. I am not referring to any physical fight or and condition of physical bondage. That said, what I am referring to is mind share and market share, which are two sides of the some coin. When a company has the power in the market place to dominate these through use of scare tactics, FUD, half-truths, out-right-lies and other nefarious means, they in effect eliminate the opportunity for any competitor to gain a foot hold in the market. Right now Linux, and open source software in general, is gaining some mind share and market share in commercial organizations. In other words users have a choice. Today M$ is hard at work to circumvent this. Again, in my opinion. >If by 'better products' you mean Windows, then I'd have to be the >devil's advocate and suggest that Windows does have some good things >that Linux and/or FreeBSD don't have. For instance, they do have >support for more multimedia file formats. I know that we are talking >about closed, proprietary formats now, but the support is there in >Windows, and it's not in Linux or FreeBSD. In this simple and small >part of the system (multimedia support) Windows seems to be `better' >than Linux or FreeBSD. Therefore, I'm still at a loss at how you >defined 'better'. Better is just what it means. What you say about Windows is true as far as it goes. If it is multi-media that you wish, I am told that BeOS is the platform of choice, though I am guarded in making this statement as I have not personally used it. Presently, the lack of desktop, easy to use apps, is an encumbrance to Linux becoming a viable competitor on the desktop. But, the desktop is only part of the picture. Servers are a whole different ball game. And it is in servers where Windows does a pratfall. In my opinion that is also true on the desktop, but -well. Now to the specifics as to whether or not Windows is a good operating system, my original opinion still stands. The general answer is no. Yes it does support a lot of stuff, but at what price? It remains an OS where the apps are integrated into it, it is resource hungry, performance and reliability are mediocre, and that is bad in general and specifically. Can that be argued with? Sure. Is Win 2K better than NT? You bet. Is WIndows 9.x an operating system -- well humh. Do I use any of these Windows products -- yes. Strictly because it is the only game in town. Will Windows in any incarnation displace big iron and high end UNIX boxes? Not in the foreseeable future. The reason is that it remains a single user OS regardless of how much stuff M$ hangs on it to make it appear ready for the big leagues. Where M$ is competing unfairly as outlined above is in the mid and lower tiers of commercial enterprise, precisely where Linux and open source is now gaining mind share. And therein lies the problem. In summary, can I be convinced that Windows is a good OS? Not in this life-time. ;-) Frank >Oh, and then, there's that `fight thing' and the tied hands. >Am not sure I got any point out of this, sorry... > > > It is my hope that Justice will win out and slap their ass and free > > the market for us. > >You had me agree there, up until 'Justice will win out'. >Yes, my hope is that Justice will win out too. > >I am also afraid of seeing something bad happen, such as the Justice >Department winning Microsoft in this case, and making a habit of >stopping companies that grow `large' in their opinion. Then as time >passes, this `large' might begin to shrink in size, and that would be >most improper. > >Some things are a bit tricky :/ > >-giorgos To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Sat Jun 30 15:23:43 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from out3.mx.nwbl.wi.voyager.net (out3.mx.nwbl.wi.voyager.net [169.207.3.79]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5E14037B403 for ; Sat, 30 Jun 2001 15:23:41 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from fpawlak@execpc.com) Received: from pop1.nwbl.wi.voyager.net (pop1.nwbl.wi.voyager.net [169.207.2.115]) by out3.mx.nwbl.wi.voyager.net (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f5ULq1616764; Sat, 30 Jun 2001 16:52:01 -0500 (CDT) Received: from john.execpc.com (d161.as6.nwbl0.wi.voyager.net [169.207.130.35]) by pop1.nwbl.wi.voyager.net (8.10.2/8.10.2) with ESMTP id f5UMK2K01282; Sat, 30 Jun 2001 17:20:02 -0500 (CDT) Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20010630171811.02696a70@127.0.0.1> X-Sender: fpawlak/mail.execpc.com@127.0.0.1 X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 Date: Sat, 30 Jun 2001 17:24:44 -0500 To: j mckitrick , freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org From: Frank Pawlak Subject: Re: BSD, .Net comments - any reponse to this reasoning? In-Reply-To: <20010630174743.A85268@dogma.freebsd-uk.eu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG The GPL vs BSD license issue has been debated almost to death on the various comp.unix *. lists and other places. For the interested do a search on John Dyson and you will find all sorts of material. John has engaged in many an argument on the license issue. As to Microsoft getting control of BSD, they would have to acquire all versions of BSD. As I understand it they have and do use BSD based code in their various OS offerings. As to their giving credit for it, I can say as I have never seen their code. Frank At 05:47 PM 6/30/2001 +0100, j mckitrick wrote: >I'm curious to get some thoughts on this. Just when i am convinced BSD is >doing great, i get concerned by material like this. Is this just FUD? > >It seems the GPL became relevant more than ever with the advent of an >everyman's Unix in the face of a dominant, evil software empire. A radical >solution for an overwhelming problem. It is being contended that the BSD >license is too altruistic, ignoring market motivations and expecting the >best when we have seen that most companies do not operate that way. > >Please, someone give me some sound reasoning that can clear the air of this >FUD. > > > >Jonathon >-- >Microsoft complaining about the source license used by >Linux is like the event horizon calling the kettle black. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Sat Jun 30 15:37:47 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from serenity.mcc.ac.uk (serenity.mcc.ac.uk [130.88.200.93]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 81DC737B401 for ; Sat, 30 Jun 2001 15:37:44 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from jcm@freebsd-uk.eu.org) Received: from dogma.freebsd-uk.eu.org ([130.88.200.97] ident=root) by serenity.mcc.ac.uk with esmtp (Exim 2.05 #6) id 15GTN1-000GuB-00 for freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org; Sat, 30 Jun 2001 23:37:43 +0100 Received: (from jcm@localhost) by dogma.freebsd-uk.eu.org (8.11.3/8.11.1) id f5UMbg289821 for freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org; Sat, 30 Jun 2001 23:37:42 +0100 (BST) (envelope-from jcm) Date: Sat, 30 Jun 2001 23:37:42 +0100 From: j mckitrick To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Subject: Windows desktop plus FreeBSD server? Message-ID: <20010630233741.A89741@dogma.freebsd-uk.eu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 1.0.1i Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Now *this* is interesting... I just read that another reason MS might have an interest in BSD for this reason: BSD is an outstanding server OS. The other side of the coin: Windows is the most popular desktop OS. BSD doesn't threaten the Windows desktop monopoly, and by pretending to be OS friendly, at least to one license, they could advance the .Net effort without detracting from *their* desktop market. Jonathon -- Microsoft complaining about the source license used by Linux is like the event horizon calling the kettle black. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Sat Jun 30 15:59:40 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from probity.mcc.ac.uk (probity.mcc.ac.uk [130.88.200.94]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 827FD37B401 for ; Sat, 30 Jun 2001 15:59:38 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from jcm@freebsd-uk.eu.org) Received: from dogma.freebsd-uk.eu.org ([130.88.200.97] ident=root) by probity.mcc.ac.uk with esmtp (Exim 2.05 #7) id 15GTiD-000B84-00; Sat, 30 Jun 2001 23:59:37 +0100 Received: (from jcm@localhost) by dogma.freebsd-uk.eu.org (8.11.3/8.11.1) id f5UMxat90205; Sat, 30 Jun 2001 23:59:36 +0100 (BST) (envelope-from jcm) Date: Sat, 30 Jun 2001 23:59:36 +0100 From: j mckitrick To: Frank Pawlak Cc: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Subject: Re: BSD, .Net comments - any reponse to this reasoning? Message-ID: <20010630235936.A90173@dogma.freebsd-uk.eu.org> References: <20010630174743.A85268@dogma.freebsd-uk.eu.org> <5.1.0.14.2.20010630171811.02696a70@127.0.0.1> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 1.0.1i In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20010630171811.02696a70@127.0.0.1>; from fpawlak@execpc.com on Sat, Jun 30, 2001 at 05:24:44PM -0500 Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Sat, Jun 30, 2001 at 05:24:44PM -0500, Frank Pawlak wrote: | The GPL vs BSD license issue has been debated almost to death on the | various comp.unix *. lists and other places. For the interested do a | search on John Dyson and you will find all sorts of material. John has | engaged in many an argument on the license issue. Ah, great. Just what i was looking for. Really. I'm sure the heavies on this list have tired of my naivete'. ;-) jcm To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Sat Jun 30 21:49: 6 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from out3.mx.nwbl.wi.voyager.net (out3.mx.nwbl.wi.voyager.net [169.207.3.79]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CFE5137B405 for ; Sat, 30 Jun 2001 21:49:03 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from fpawlak@execpc.com) Received: from pop1.nwbl.wi.voyager.net (pop1.nwbl.wi.voyager.net [169.207.2.115]) by out3.mx.nwbl.wi.voyager.net (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f614HG658257; Sat, 30 Jun 2001 23:17:16 -0500 (CDT) Received: from john.execpc.com (d89.as7.nwbl0.wi.voyager.net [169.207.128.217]) by pop1.nwbl.wi.voyager.net (8.10.2/8.10.2) with ESMTP id f614jIK84606; Sat, 30 Jun 2001 23:45:18 -0500 (CDT) Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20010630234846.00a765c8@127.0.0.1> X-Sender: fpawlak/mail.execpc.com@127.0.0.1 X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 Date: Sat, 30 Jun 2001 23:50:40 -0500 To: j mckitrick From: Frank Pawlak Subject: Re: BSD, .Net comments - any reponse to this reasoning? Cc: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org In-Reply-To: <20010630235936.A90173@dogma.freebsd-uk.eu.org> References: <5.1.0.14.2.20010630171811.02696a70@127.0.0.1> <20010630174743.A85268@dogma.freebsd-uk.eu.org> <5.1.0.14.2.20010630171811.02696a70@127.0.0.1> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG That's what some of us are here for. dejanews are its' most recent incarnation is a good place to start your search. BTW: John is a former member of the FreeBSD core team. Good luck Frank At 11:59 PM 6/30/2001 +0100, j mckitrick wrote: >On Sat, Jun 30, 2001 at 05:24:44PM -0500, Frank Pawlak wrote: >| The GPL vs BSD license issue has been debated almost to death on the >| various comp.unix *. lists and other places. For the interested do a >| search on John Dyson and you will find all sorts of material. John has >| engaged in many an argument on the license issue. > >Ah, great. Just what i was looking for. Really. > >I'm sure the heavies on this list have tired of my naivete'. ;-) > >jcm To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message