Don't Fear Microsoft's FUD
I'm supposed to be polishing off my latest Free Agent column, but I can't resist the opportunity to pop up here and weigh in on Microsoft's latest assault on Linux--a new round of Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt unleashed this past weekend. The Linuxy corners of the blogosphere reacted with a predictable mix of outrage and derision, and smart folks almost immediately noticed that there really wasn't much new here. Yet somehow, the question was still left hanging in the air: "Will Microsoft send me a bill someday if I switch to Linux?" This is, of course, exactly the sort of question that Microsoft wants floating around. (We don't call it FUD for nothing.)
Let's be clear: The answer to the question is a big "Hell no." But don't take my word for it, take Microsoft's: The company says it has no intention of suing users, but rather aims to elicit new intellectual property partnerships, like the one it has with Novell.
Well, good luck with that. For one thing, Microsoft's patent claims may be more or less useless to begin with, even if the patent law landscape remains unchanged. But there could be earthquakes ahead. On the one hand, we've got a Supreme Court that, despite its conservative leanings, seems entirely open to altering the current state of U.S. patent law. We've got attempts at patent reform simmering in Congress. And always lurking in the background is the very serious (but as yet unresolved) legal argument that software should not be patentable in the first place.
I refuse to proclaim that 2007 is the long-awaited Year of Desktop Linux, but nobody can ignore the fact that today's Linuxes (especially the increasingly ubiquitous Ubuntu) are surprisingly friendly and hardware-compatible, and continue to improve substantially in both arenas with each passing year. How does Microsoft respond? You don't have to be brainwashed by the latest Apple commercials to understand that Windows Vista makes it harder to use your existing hardware and peripherals, not easier, and that a vanilla Vista installation makes computing a more complex experience, not a more natural one. (I have User Access Controls in mind here, mostly.)
Microsoft doesn't seem able to compete by improving its products, so it's no wonder to me that they're investing so heavily in lawyers and spokespeople.
PC World's Marketplace
PC World's Free Whitepapers
tech news tech blogs community & forums laptop prices software reviews downloads
What about ,what is without a doubt, the worst Recording Software ever! ROXIO EASY MEDIA CREATOR 9. This expensive software is a real DOG! Not compatable with any system and is a real pain to try to INSTALL, UNINSTALL, & USE. Has so many "BUGS" you need to call a professional exterminator!
What about ,what is without a doubt, the worst Recording Software ever! ROXIO EASY MEDIA CREATOR 9. This expensive software is a real DOG! Not compatable with any system and is a real pain to try to INSTALL, UNINSTALL, & USE. Has so many "BUGS" you need to call a professional exterminator!
Funny, when Microsoft is the target of patent infringement, mostly doubtful, everybody cheers for taking on the big bad bully, but when the shoe is on the other foot, you call it FUD. Personally I have a real problem with the idea of concepts being patented, because they are useless until the software that can making them useful is developed by someone else. But the open source community is not the answer either, name one product available to open source that did not show up as commercial venture first. OpenOffice ripped off Office, Corel and Lotus to exist. Yet the cost of the commercial systems has to rise, so that lawyers can be engaged to protect their products. Most users of Open Office do not save in its file system but in Microsoft's office formats. So I question whether someones right to use a piece of software supersedes that of someone trying to make money off their product. It is like questioning what comes first; the chicken or the egg. MS has to be accorded rights as well.
Sounds like "Rndmacts" has been brainwashed by Mr. Gates. Maybe you have Microsoft shares or work for the company. Anything Microsoft touches can be done better by someone else who's interests are more than the bottom line. I use Microsoft XP everyday but I will never consider Vista...it is a bloated power hungry OS that has no benefits to me. I do have one machine that runs Ubuntu that installed on an older machine flawlessly without all the hassles of a Microsoft install. To date I have never seen anything like one of Microsoft's blue screens of death that all Microsoft users take for granted as a necessary evil when using a computer. What a pleasure!!
Speaking of ripping off the commercial systems, where did MS get the idea for Internet Eplorer? seems to be there was a law suit over MS stealing from Mosaic. Not to mention that MS also got sued by SUN Systems for Patient infringement for stealing the JAVA code.
Wake up and look around before you point fingers, Since the day Bill Gates left his old college friends behind back in 1968 ( or whenever if was an official split) Microsoft as a company has had several questionable accusations of "patented" software. None of which were Orginal. Vista is a strong reminded that MS has not changes and does not intend to change, they basically ripped the UI from MAC and perverted it to their broken statndards.