The Windows to Linux Conversion
"Banning proprietary upgrades and new programs This is a must. Microsoft upgrades have two purposes. One is obvious -- cash flow. The other purpose is to cut off your avenues of escape. Every version breaks compatibility with other software to which you might transition. When UCITA passes in Washington State, it will be illegal to reverse Microsoft software for the purpose of importing its data files. If you ban proprietary upgrades right now, there's an excellent chance you'll have a clear conversion path when the time comes. A huge issue is brewing with copy protection. I've heard a vague and unsubstantiated rumor of the existence of some modern proprietary software that requires a new "key" from the vendor each and every time you reinstall. According to this rumor, they charge significant amounts (like $35.00) to read you that key over the phone. Every app, $35.00 (or whatever) Get a virus? $35.00. Disk crash? $35.00. Windows meltdown? $35.00. Motherboard dies? $35.00. Windows registry got too big? $35.00. And in 5 years, do you think the vendor will be willing to sell you the key? Or will they force you to upgrade all those apps you use just to get at ancient data? And of course, those new versions might convert your data to a format not importable into any other software. All this is rumor, but my reading of the text of the UCITA proposed legislation tells me that it's all perfectly legal and enforceable under UCITA. The software vendor wouldn't really do this to their customers, would they? I don't know -- how do you think Microsoft would handle such a situation? Would you bet your business on it? You can't switch all your apps at once. You must continue to use your Windows box as an appliance to run a few apps. You need to be able to install and reinstall that appliance and those apps over and over again in years to come. Stop upgrading and buying proprietary apps today!" http://www.troubleshooters.com/tpromag/200104/200104.htm -- -- ----/ / _ Fred A. Miller ---/ / (_)__ __ ____ __ Systems Administrator --/ /__/ / _ \/ // /\ \/ / Cornell Univ. Press Services -/____/_/_//_/\_,_/ /_/\_\ fm@cupserv.org
On Mon, 4 Jun 2001, Fred A. Miller wrote:
"Banning proprietary upgrades and new programs This is a must. Microsoft upgrades have two purposes. One is obvious -- cash flow. The other purpose is to cut off your avenues of escape. Every version breaks compatibility with other software to which you might transition. When UCITA passes in Washington State, it will be illegal to reverse Microsoft software for the purpose of importing its data files. If you ban proprietary upgrades right now, there's an excellent chance you'll have a clear conversion path when the time comes.
A huge issue is brewing with copy protection. I've heard a vague and unsubstantiated rumor of the existence of some modern proprietary software that requires a new "key" from the vendor each and every time you reinstall. According to this rumor, they charge significant amounts (like $35.00) to read you that key over the phone. Every app, $35.00 (or whatever) Get a virus? $35.00. Disk crash? $35.00. Windows meltdown? $35.00. Motherboard dies? $35.00. Windows registry got too big? $35.00. And in 5 years, do you think the vendor will be willing to sell you the key? Or will they force you to upgrade all those apps you use just to get at ancient data? And of course, those new versions might convert your data to a format not importable into any other software. All this is rumor, but my reading of the text of the UCITA proposed legislation tells me that it's all perfectly legal and enforceable under UCITA. The software vendor wouldn't really do this to their customers, would they? I don't know -- how do you think Microsoft would handle such a situation? Would you bet your business on it?
You can't switch all your apps at once. You must continue to use your Windows box as an appliance to run a few apps. You need to be able to install and reinstall that appliance and those apps over and over again in years to come.
Stop upgrading and buying proprietary apps today!"
http://www.troubleshooters.com/tpromag/200104/200104.htm
-- -- ----/ / _ Fred A. Miller ---/ / (_)__ __ ____ __ Systems Administrator --/ /__/ / _ \/ // /\ \/ / Cornell Univ. Press Services -/____/_/_//_/\_,_/ /_/\_\ fm@cupserv.org
You know what, I do not think MSFT really fears Linux that much...How else can they be so stupid with this policy? What they may fear more is people writing GPL apps for Windows, rather than Linux itself. This is good... Just my opinions, Matt
"Fred A. Miller" wrote:
Microsoft upgrades have two purposes. One is obvious -- cash flow. The other purpose is to cut off your avenues of escape. Every version breaks compatibility with other software to which you might transition. When UCITA passes in Washington State, it will be illegal to reverse Microsoft software for the purpose of importing its data files.
I wonder about that. I'd think that the prohibitions on reverse engineering would apply to the processing but not to the output. The case seems very strong that you can determine data formats merely by trying various input documents and seeing what output they produce without ever attempting to discover the design of the program itself. In any event, there's certainly a countercurrent to UCITA, and much of it comes from enterprises that have no particular interest in Linux. It might make it through in Washington State because Microsoft is to Washington as the auto industry is to Michigan. But as long as it isn't a Federal statute, there's nothing to stop someone from doing reverse engineering in Maine or New Mexico. Paul
In any event, there's certainly a countercurrent to UCITA, and much of it comes from enterprises that have no particular interest in Linux. It might make it through in Washington State because Microsoft is to Washington as the auto industry is to Michigan. But as long as it isn't a Federal statute, there's nothing to stop someone from doing reverse engineering in Maine or New Mexico.
Well, we all know the world starts in Florida and ends in LA, but I heard a rumour (tell NO-ONE!!) that there are some so-called "other countries" out there, and one or two of them have started down the path of "civilisation". Some of them even have toilet paper! One of them (so I am told) even has enough engineering skill to write the kernel of a free UNIX-like operating system... Hey, when you guys in the colonies make laws they generally don't back-propagate here! Keith
HEHE, Good point!!! As one of those colonists, we need to be reminded that all that glitters is not under a bald eagle and a red, white stripped piece of cloth with a blue field in the corner with all those stars. I like what Germany is doing - they at least have decided to look at an alternative (oops, there's that word again -"alternative"). Take care and cheers. Curtis Rey On Monday 04 June 2001 03:19 pm, Keith Edmunds wrote:
In any event, there's certainly a countercurrent to UCITA, and much of it comes from enterprises that have no particular interest in Linux. It might make it through in Washington State because Microsoft is to Washington as the auto industry is to Michigan. But as long as it isn't a Federal statute, there's nothing to stop someone from doing reverse engineering in Maine or New Mexico.
Well, we all know the world starts in Florida and ends in LA, but I heard a rumour (tell NO-ONE!!) that there are some so-called "other countries" out there, and one or two of them have started down the path of "civilisation". Some of them even have toilet paper! One of them (so I am told) even has enough engineering skill to write the kernel of a free UNIX-like operating system...
Hey, when you guys in the colonies make laws they generally don't back-propagate here!
Keith
If anyone's going to crack it - I'd lay money on the Russian/East Europe or somewhere in Asia. They could care less about Capital hill and U.S. copy rights. Cheers. Curtis On Monday 04 June 2001 03:19 pm, Keith Edmunds wrote:
In any event, there's certainly a countercurrent to UCITA, and much of it comes from enterprises that have no particular interest in Linux. It might make it through in Washington State because Microsoft is to Washington as the auto industry is to Michigan. But as long as it isn't a Federal statute, there's nothing to stop someone from doing reverse engineering in Maine or New Mexico.
Well, we all know the world starts in Florida and ends in LA, but I heard a rumour (tell NO-ONE!!) that there are some so-called "other countries" out there, and one or two of them have started down the path of "civilisation". Some of them even have toilet paper! One of them (so I am told) even has enough engineering skill to write the kernel of a free UNIX-like operating system...
Hey, when you guys in the colonies make laws they generally don't back-propagate here!
Keith
participants (5)
-
Curtis Rey -
Fred A. Miller -
Keith Edmunds -
matthew johnson -
Paul Abrahams