[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Full-Disclosure] Anti-MS drivel
- To: tobias@weisserth.de, dufresne@winternet.com
- Subject: Re: [Full-Disclosure] Anti-MS drivel
- From: "Michael T. Harding" <michael_t_harding@hotmail.com>
- Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2004 13:33:33 -0500
<html><div style='background-color:'><DIV class=RTE>
<P>WOW, I think that is the most informative, well thought out and intelligent
posting I have read on this thread. Cheers to both of you.</P>
<P>Points made, counterpoints presented, and no technospeak, OS specific drivel
mixed in.</P>
<P>Viva La Competitione<BR><BR></P></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>From: Tobias Weisserth <TOBIAS@WEISSERTH.DE>
<DIV></DIV>>Reply-To: tobias@weisserth.de
<DIV></DIV>>To: Ron DuFresne <DUFRESNE@WINTERNET.COM>
<DIV></DIV>>CC: Mary Landesman <MLANDE@BELLSOUTH.NET>,
full-disclosure@lists.netsys.com
<DIV></DIV>>Subject: Re: [Full-Disclosure] Anti-MS drivel
<DIV></DIV>>Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2004 18:34:13 +0100
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>>Hi Ron,
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>>Am Di, den 20.01.2004 schrieb Ron DuFresne um 23:03:
<DIV></DIV>> > > Up to now they rule the consumer OS market with more
than 90% market
<DIV></DIV>> > > share. Any error they make regarding default settings
in their OS
<DIV></DIV>> > > affects 90% of all end consumers. It is impossible to
require that many
<DIV></DIV>> > > customers to adapt. Rather the vendor has to adapt.
This is only
<DIV></DIV>> > > logical.
<DIV></DIV>> >
<DIV></DIV>> > What's the incentive to make the vendor
change? It's going to take one
<DIV></DIV>> > HUGE boycott to achieve that, HUGE becuase the market is
worlwide, and we
<DIV></DIV>> > can't get a few thousand users on this single FD list to
agree to much
<DIV></DIV>> > from one day to the next, let alone to get a large
international boycott
<DIV></DIV>> > up and running, despite the dependance of many gov's and
home users, and
<DIV></DIV>> > corps upon the M$ code. So far the feds and a
number of state in the US
<DIV></DIV>> > have not been up to forcing change in redmond, even with
million dollar a
<DIV></DIV>> > day fines once imposed.
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>>This isn't solved by just one incentive or pulling a single
lever.
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>>The ultimate solution to solve this problem would be a free
market with
<DIV></DIV>>free competition and no entry barriers for potential competitors
for
<DIV></DIV>>Microsoft. It's not about slicing MS in two parts as the US
prosecution
<DIV></DIV>>wanted to. That's the wrong side.
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>>Deregulate the market. Make competition possible again. Limit
the extend
<DIV></DIV>>software patents are applicable to. Why should a patent on a
technology
<DIV></DIV>>like software be valid for DECADES? After that, no possible
competitor
<DIV></DIV>>has a value for that technology. Software patents are legalised
<DIV></DIV>>monopolies. There's a VERY good reason most European software
vendors
<DIV></DIV>>are against software patents in Europe while the American,
<DIV></DIV>>MS/Oracle/Sun/etc. led BSA is propagating software patents in
Europe to
<DIV></DIV>>extend their monopoly on certain technologies that define access
to
<DIV></DIV>>markets.
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>>Apply liability laws to software and IT products in general.
When I buy
<DIV></DIV>>hardware, I have a legally guaranteed period of 6 months to 1
year in
<DIV></DIV>>Germany within which the vendor is liable 100%. Why doesn't such
a thing
<DIV></DIV>>exist with software? EULAs as MS is issuing them are contrasting
current
<DIV></DIV>>laws. In fact, a MS EULA in Germany isn't worth the paper it is
printed
<DIV></DIV>>on. The MS EULA in Germany isn't 100% valid since it doesn't
comply with
<DIV></DIV>>German law.
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>>Did I mention competition? Well, it's the most important lever
to assure
<DIV></DIV>>quality and low prices in products so repetition is not bad.
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>> > And let's face it, many of the folks on this and other
lists that buy a
<DIV></DIV>> > PC, wipe windows and install a *bsd or linux/*nix clone,
are still
<DIV></DIV>> > contributing to the redmond bottom line of
their big buck, cause most
<DIV></DIV>> > those PC's come pre-installed with a M$ OS underneath.
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>>Which PC vendors can't decide on their own since OEM contracts
issued by
<DIV></DIV>>MS are rather restrictive. Either you take it or you don't take
MS
<DIV></DIV>>products at all... This is a case where anti-trust laws should
permit
<DIV></DIV>>vendors to ignore the restrictive parts of such agreements
whenever this
<DIV></DIV>>excludes competition. Competition is capitalism. Capitalism is
living of
<DIV></DIV>>free markets with no entries. This MS situation is close to
living in
<DIV></DIV>>communist East-Germany before 1991 where people could buy one
sort of
<DIV></DIV>>car which was very expensive and sucked.
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>> > What do they care if that software license sits in a
drawer and remains unused after first
<DIV></DIV>> > turning on the system? They made their share
<SMILE>.
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>>That's absolutely true. But I guess real MS refuseniks don't buy
<DIV></DIV>>hardware with OEM software attached to it and invest the
additional time
<DIV></DIV>>to buy individual hardware components and build their own system
from
<DIV></DIV>>scratch. That's cheaper anyway since you really get what you
want and
<DIV></DIV>>the OEM software attached to new PCs isn't really free because
it's
<DIV></DIV>>somehow included in the price.
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>> > And most on these list should understand as well, I do not
disagree with
<DIV></DIV>> > the anti-M$ sentiments, I've posted many of my own over
the years, but, I
<DIV></DIV>> > do know better then to lie to myself and think that M$ on
the desktop or
<DIV></DIV>> > in the corporate world is faced with any major threat at
this time from
<DIV></DIV>> > redhat or suse.
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>>Not yet but the ball started to move. Once the critical mass is
reached
<DIV></DIV>>we'll actually be moving into a situation again where
competition is
<DIV></DIV>>part of the market. Look at Munich, Germany. They may be having
trouble
<DIV></DIV>>doing so but they decided to switch 14.000 desktop PCs to SuSE.
This is
<DIV></DIV>>a small start. But with initiatives rolling in Asia and South
America I
<DIV></DIV>>don't think MS can count on being the only desktop OS vendor in
the near
<DIV></DIV>>future.
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>> > Understand this is not going to be a simple boycott by a
few thousand or
<DIV></DIV>> > hundred thousand buyers of bannanas from say nicaragua...
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>>I'm not speaking about a boycott. I'm speaking about vendor
liability
<DIV></DIV>>and free choice (actually free markets, but it's nearly the
same).
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>>cheers,
<DIV></DIV>>Tobias
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>>_______________________________________________
<DIV></DIV>>Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
<DIV></DIV>>Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html
<DIV></DIV></div><br clear=all><hr> <a
href="http://g.msn.com/8HMBENUS/2734??PS=";>Scope out the new MSN Plus Internet
Software ? optimizes dial-up to the max! </a> </html>
_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html