The Free Software Foundation has sent 499 letters to the top Fortune 500 companies (with Microsoft being the exception), trying to persuade the decision makers in the companies not to use Microsoft software, according to an article by Techspot. The FSF has made a list of claims against Microsoft, aiming to get big corporations to look at alternative software in order to reduce their dependency on Microsoft. The letter they sent is titled "Re: Important notice regarding impending lack of privacy, freedom and security from Microsoft Corporation," and can be found on the website they set up, Windows7sins.org. The FSF accuse Microsoft of the following: poisoning education, invading privacy, monopoly behavior, lock-in (in regards to removing support for older versions), abusing standards, enforcing DRM and threatening user security.
The site encourages users and organisations to look away from Microsoft for their software, and instead look at free software alternatives such as Linux and OpenOffice. Why Apple was not mentioned (seeing as they create proprietary software too) remains a mystery, but it appears that the FSF are targeting Windows 7 specifically while it launches.
The group intends to send even more letters as they receive more donations, with a $25 donation paying for 50 more letters, and a $100 donation paying for 200 letters to organisations and companies suggested by the community. How successful they will be remains to be seen, but you can have a look at the site yourself over here, where you can find the letter and the list of companies that have received the memo.
Oh and here's a link to their letter - its more emotional than factual: http://windows7sins.org/letter/
Oh and here's a link to their letter - its more emotional than factual: http://windows7sins.org/letter/
And has the FSF considered the amount of free and open-soirce software available for Windows (some of it, in fact, Windows-exclusive)? How many of the developers they are supporting (supposedly) would be crushed by an anti-7 initiative?
Consider ImgBurn as an example. It's not the only free ISO-burning software available for Windows 7 (which actually includes an ISO burning utility itself); however, it is one of the better ones. It's free, and it's open-source.
Also, has the FSF considered what *else* Microsoft does to advance free and open-source software besides opening up (and in some cases, actually sending) code? Consider the Visual Studio Express Editions - commercial-quality IDEs for all the languages that the FSF supports, and freely available and downloadable. (You generally don't have to worry about runtime distribution with your finished product, as Microsoft itself handles that.)
Talk about biting the hands that feed you.
Oh and here's a link to their letter - its more emotional than factual: http://windows7sins.org/letter/
What does Apple whine about exactly? Having their best non-holiday quarter ever while MS took another hit at the same time?
Oh and here's a link to their letter - its more emotional than factual: http://windows7sins.org/letter/
What does Apple whine about exactly? Having their best non-holiday quarter ever while MS took another hit at the same time?
So you don't watch the Apple commercials where they whine instead of prove they offer a superior product.
Oh and here's a link to their letter - its more emotional than factual: http://windows7sins.org/letter/
What does Apple whine about exactly? Having their best non-holiday quarter ever while MS took another hit at the same time?
So you don't watch the Apple commercials where they whine instead of prove they offer a superior product.
Not much to prove, Windows is more prone to failure and suffers from more virus problems, not whining when it's fact.
Don't you know, anybody who is against Microsoft is whining, and when Microsoft lobbies congress that is innovation. Our beloved Microsoft can do no wrong.
Can we round up ALL the fanboys, Apple and Microsoft, and get them on some island somewhere? i think the world would be a better place.
Can we round up ALL the fanboys, Apple and Microsoft, and get them on some island somewhere? i think the world would be a better place.
+1
Can we round up ALL the fanboys, Apple and Microsoft, and get them on some island somewhere? i think the world would be a better place.
So I take it you have your ticket for the boat trip to the island already then? Hope you're packed and everything.
And yet, they seem to want to prove it either way. If there's nothing to prove, that would be even more reason to focus on the qualities of their products instead of pointing out the (totally exaggerated and often false) flaws of your competitor's problems.
You kind of put yourself in that category right there.
Can we round up ALL the fanboys, Apple and Microsoft, and get them on some island somewhere? i think the world would be a better place.
So I take it you have your ticket for the boat trip to the island already then? Hope you're packed and everything.
So simply for not praising everything that Microsoft does, I am somehow a fanboy? Really? You know you can disagree with a lot of what Microsoft does, and a lot of sensible people do, and still not be an Apple fanboy?
Windows is only more prone to problems due to market share. If you're a hacker you want to target the greatest audience and that happens to be Windows. Apple is starting to be prone to more and more failures and virus attacks as their market share increases and will ultimately be in the same position as Microsoft if they ever overtake or get within the same level.
Can we round up ALL the fanboys, Apple and Microsoft, and get them on some island somewhere? i think the world would be a better place.
no linux users are whiney by nature. proven fact for anyone that goes to a linux forum or a linux theme site. I have used linux (gentoo) for a long time now and i use windows as well and by far the biggest trash talkers / whiney kids are on the linux side. You cant even say you like windows or make a theme that resembles windows without being called all sorts of words.
how many political prisoners are never going to see their families again, because of you Google?
how many political prisoners are never going to see their families again, because of you Google?
and sure those political prisoners have alot in common in choosing w7 as your operating system.
in that, their choice of operating environments and way they handle purchase-decisions does not actually impact either of those things.
LOL
both type of softwares are out there and available for all. The IT department of all those company will look at the cons and pros for each scenario. by keeping the cost factor in mind they make their final decision based on their needs, abilities, user friendly, support,....
I'm more than happy to pay for something that serves me great and satisfies all my needs within my budget.
This became the new "cool thing", to be against corps and specially Microsoft.
This is hilarious. I have worked at Microsoft shops who will only get Microsoft, not matter they don't have a tool for the job. Getting that heaping pile that is sourcesafe working, when a simple free open source wiki would do. Not even Microsoft use sourcesafe, but somehow these people think it is good.
Other places we make out decision, create a report, then because the CIO has been wined and dined, and heard all the new buzzwords, we have to use Linq and net 3.0. So we have to rewrite out application just because he is an idiot.
This is how big business is run, intelligent decisions have no place. Overwise everoyone would be running Apache a proven better server, postgresql good enough for most sites. What do you think google, ebay, craigslist, amazon all run on... not a windows server in site.
both type of softwares are out there and available for all. The IT department of all those company will look at the cons and pros for each scenario. by keeping the cost factor in mind they make their final decision based on their needs, abilities, user friendly, support,....
I'm more than happy to pay for something that serves me great and satisfies all my needs within my budget.
This became the new "cool thing", to be against corps and specially Microsoft
.
its not new. its always been the big companies are "the man" trying to take down the little guy. Only now in this society the losers get to sue and cry thier way up against the big dogs. Its almost a bad thing to work hard and be #1 because all it takes is a stupid lawsuit and you now have to include options for the crap products to be included into yours.
Nah, they'll just be laughing as they delete their e-mail being read in Outlook 2007, running on Windows Vista.
Nah, they'll just be laughing as they delete their e-mail being read in Outlook 2007, running on Windows Vista.
That is if they can read that email in Outlook 2007, to quote Microsoft themselves:
-- Xbox LIVE Newsletter
Nah, they'll just be laughing as they delete their e-mail being read in Outlook 2007, running on Windows Vista.
Hmm... I work for a FTSE100 company in the UK, so not in the US Fortune 500, but easily bigger than some of the names I see in the Fortune list. Our desktops run Windows XP Pro with Office 2000. Perfectly adequate for the task. Backend involves a lot of non-MS stuff, Oracle, SAP, Red Hat. Vista was briefly considered, right up until the time the IT drone mentioned the upgrading of every desktop computer to run it, since the current desktops, which run XP happily, had insufficient RAM to run Vista... there's the door, don't slam it on your way out. Corporate software decisions, especially nowadays, are largely made on the basis of cost, not "OMG it's got Aero", or "wow lookit that ribbon!".
The FSF letter is lobbying, no more, no less. It probably won't achieve much, because Microsoft genuinely do produce some software which is good in the corporate environment. Also, IT departments are top heavy with Windows-centric people, who aren't going to cut their own throats. I do think it will make some of those companies stop and think about their software costs.
If you go here; http://www.dailyfinance.com/2009/08/28/mic...eetings-in-d-c/ you will see another example of lobbying, but since this involves your favourite company trying to smear others I suppose that's acceptable.
Linux is great for servers, but is honestly horrible in a desktop/corporate environment.
Linux is great for servers, but is honestly horrible in a desktop/corporate environment.
Just to note -- Firefox is Open Source , though I don't feel FSF should be putting Win7 down -- even though I have not used it... Though things like this hinder the Open Source Comunity-- after all -- support for older systems is stopped after a time in Linux. (Just look at Ubuntu-- older ones support has stopped for them)
Though I hate to tell them that the open xml standard given some time will have support in Linux (I bet even MS if asked would even open up the vault and allow the source to be used to allow implementation in Linu
It is companies like this that actually hinder the open source community instead of helping them.
As long as Microsoft's software works and the corporate employees know how to use it, they will stick to it. The costs to train workers to use new software is incalculable.
Unrelated but similar datapoint:
I was in a local MicroCenter browsing when a local bureaucrat (likely FDA, as their HQ is practically across the street) was ****ing/moaning about not being able to save documents in Word (2007) as anything other than DOCX and rich-text format. Now I knew that Uncle frowns on DOCX (in fact, OMB issued an ultimatum back in the second Clinton Administration term forbidding any government agency from using DOCX for archival documents); however, every version of Word that supports DOCX *also* supports the old-fashioned Word 97 format (which is the preferred format, according to OMB), which I proceeded to demonstrate on one of the demo PCs in the shop (which was running Office 2007 Home and Student, by the by). "Flabbergasted" doesn't even begin to describe the expression on his face. (Oh; Word 2010 retains that option.)
Open mouth; insert foot (up to knee)!
Whoa... I'm picturing a bunch of people with foil hats sitting around a table folding letters...
I don't feel that proprietary software is always a bad thing. Why would a company invest all the time and money if they can't protect their investment? Sounds like a bunch of crazies to me...
Actually, now that I read the letter again, it sounds almost like a kid wrote it... It's very belabored and not only does it ramble, but it actually reads like a children's report... Pathetic...
It's way too long to send unsolicited to someone in business and expect them to read it either...
Last edited by M_Lyons10 on 28 Aug 2009 - 14:58
I don't feel that proprietary software is always a bad thing. Why would a company invest all the time and money if they can't protect their investment? Sounds like a bunch of crazies to me...
Actually, now that I read the letter again, it sounds almost like a kid wrote it... It's very belabored and not only does it ramble, but it actually reads like a children's report... Pathetic...
It's way too long to send unsolicited to someone in business and expect them to read it either...
Everything they said is true, so rather than actually argue some of the points, which noone here can do, you just talk a load of rubbish instead. You have actually not said anything in your post, relating to the issues they address.
You expect us to take THAT seriously ? Again less time on politics , More time making your software suck less .
Telling users that theyre a slave isnt going to make them switch when all they care about is the core functionality of the software .
And ATM most FOSS applications are barely above freeware (GIMP) and well below low end shareware (Paint Shop Pro) . Which is all that users like myself who reject Anti-Capitalism care about . As Richard Stallman said himself "If you give freedom low priority, then proprietary software may continue playing a role in your life."
I think that speaks volumes about the failure of FOSS.
If I received a letter which stated "Re: Important notice regarding impending lack of privacy, freedom and security from Microsoft Corporation" I would mark it as SPAM imemdiately and not insult my intelligence by reading it.
Maybe it is time for these people to look for real jobs? McDonald's is hiring.
good point,
Linux available for free to download all legit and ...
but many choose Windows, even tho they have to pirate it and go thro bypassing the activation (talking about those who does).
doesn't that show maybe windows offers something a bit more than linux to average user that convince them to do so. this advantage might not be technical, but in the most basic level it at UI level and the basic general knowledge of people about microsoft products.
FSF people instead of whining and bashing Microsoft, and help people be more familiar with open source programs.
Not only that, but what can you say about a product, when no one wants it even when you give it away freely? FSF is really lucky that Microsoft has been as passive about this as they are, and not come out with a campaign asking "If OSS is so great, why do people go to such great lengths to steal our product, instead of using something free?".
Every year for the past 10+ years has been the 'year of Linux'...still waiting. I'm posting this on a almost-fresh install of Ubuntu 9.04, and it feels like a tinker-toy hobby built mess. There have been improvements since I first tried it years ago, but I'd put this on about the level of a Windows ME.
So TRUE.
Rofl
I'm not a fan of Linux which is imo overrated as a workstation but comparing Ubuntu to Windows ME just prove you never used Ubuntu.
I'm not a fan of Linux which is imo overrated as a workstation but comparing Ubuntu to Windows ME just prove you never used Ubuntu.
Want me to post a screenshot? I can, although it looks stock right now, so I'd have to do something special. One diaper-mess brown-and-orange Ubuntu desktop looks the same as another. I think ME is actually being generous, as far as desktop usability goes. Given a choice, I'd be using slackware, but I just wanted to see how far this failboat has gotten from port. Sorry you got butt-hurt by my comment. =(
Seriously Windows ME ... you can't be serious.
Seriously Windows ME ... you can't be serious.
Well, considering I didn't have much of a problem with ME, that's not that horrible of a comment, really. It's definitely not as good as XP or anything past that. I just do not like Ubuntu. It tries too hard to be like Windows, and fails far too often. Linux needs to be unique, because it is, and accent that, not try to make it into a half-ass Windows clone for people that hate Windows. As it is, it looks free, and it looks cheap.
Last edited by Mega Goatlord on 28 Aug 2009 - 17:16
I'm not a fan of Linux which is imo overrated as a workstation but comparing Ubuntu to Windows ME just prove you never used Ubuntu.
Driver problems/reverse engineering required with some obscure devices
Innovative technologies, half-realized
Sounds like Windows ME to me.
I'm not a fan of Linux which is imo overrated as a workstation but comparing Ubuntu to Windows ME just prove you never used Ubuntu.
Driver problems/reverse engineering required with some obscure devices
Innovative technologies, half-realized
Sounds like Windows ME to me.
While Linux *has* gotten better about hardware support (specifically for the X-Fi, which now has native ALSA support built in to the latest kernels), it still has to catch up to Windows there (unfortunately for Linux, Windows 7 has raised the bar *yet again* as far as driver support goes).
Yes; Windows 7 (like Vista and XP) still requires you to download or dig out a CD to install drivers for the X-Fi (as I just pointed out, the latest kernels of most Linux distros don't, as those kernels now support it directly), it's all those other peripherals that help Windows 7 keep (and actually extend) Microsoft's lead over Linux distributions in terms of out-of-the-box desktop hardware support.
I have nit against Linux per se (as I run it as a secondary operating system); however, the key word is *secondary*, because day in and day out, it's *Windows* that helps me get things done easier (work-wise and play-wise), and that doesn't even consider closed-source or proprietary applications or games (I'm talking strictly about free/open-source software available for both Windows and Linux, such as Firefox and OpenOffice, or games such as Alien Arena).
Really? The author of this article thinks we need to wait and see how successful this childish attempt to patronise major companies will be?
Way to go guys, tell major corporations what an awful major corporation Microsoft is. That should do the trick. Halfwits...
M_Lyons10:
Whoa... I'm picturing a bunch of people with foil hats sitting around a table folding letters...
Same here... ahahahah!!!!!!!!!
M_Lyons10:
Whoa... I'm picturing a bunch of people with foil hats sitting around a table folding letters...
Same here... ahahahah!!!!!!!!!
Great products for the most part yeah. But worth the money not really. Vista was not worth 300$ CAD not even close to it. Office Standard is way too much expensive too.
M_Lyons10:
Whoa... I'm picturing a bunch of people with foil hats sitting around a table folding letters...
Same here... ahahahah!!!!!!!!!
Great products for the most part yeah. But worth the money not really. Vista was not worth 300$ CAD not even close to it. Office Standard is way too much expensive too.
What? Vista Ultimate OEM was $170 CAD when I bought it in December 2007 :| It's even cheaper now.
No thanks, I'm putting that towards my copy of Windows 7....
LOL +1
Telling users that theyre a slave isnt going to make them switch when all they care about is the core functionality of the software .
And ATM most FOSS applications are barely above freeware (GIMP) and well below low end shareware (Paint Shop Pro) . Which is all that users like myself who reject Anti-Capitalism care about . As Richard Stallman said himself "If you give freedom low priority, then proprietary software may continue playing a role in your life."
I think that speaks volumes about the failure of FOSS.
Actually people maybe should not buy the XBox as in most of the case it will break in less than one year.
If MS doesn't improve the reliabilty next generation it will quickly discover that the video game market is A LOT more competitive than the OS market. People wont keep buying 2-3 times the same console each generation because of hardware failure.
The flop that is the PS3 help MS a lot. But Sony aint FOSS they will get things right one day or another like they did with the PS1 and PS2 and MS better have realiable hardware when it happens.
I would honestly re-purchase the XBox 360 if I had to, simply because I can see how MS is committed to fixing their mistakes... They've proven to me they want my business, simply by providing such excellent support, and commitment to their customers and platform.
My only gripe is the fact that hard drive and WiFi adapters are expensive to the point of absurdity.
the more I read this site the more I think WTF is wrong with these people..
" Invading privacy: Microsoft uses software with backward names like Windows Genuine Advantage to inspect the contents of users' hard drives. The licensing agreement users are required to accept before using Windows warns that Microsoft claims the right to do this without warning."
inspect hard drive content? um please, prove to me it does this..... no go on I wont stop you... the only thing it does is read the cd key and validate its valid and check hardware id's to compute a hardware checksum to tie to that key.... nothing it touches is not part of windows
"6. Enforcing Digital Restrictions Management (DRM): With Windows Media Player, Microsoft works in collusion with the big media companies to build restrictions on copying and playing media into their operating system. For example, at the request of NBC, Microsoft was able to prevent Windows users from recording television shows that they have the legal right to record." I never saw windows media player with a record option, let alone the option to record from TV..... and windows media center if they ment that, supports record flags... which um SO DOES EVERY CABLE BOX OUT THERE THAT HAS A DVR IN IT!
and the whole poisioning education argument? um lots of schools are still Mac... heck remember in the 80's and 90's Apple was almost 100% of the school market? they GAVE! systems away to schools in the USA at least under a program called "Apples for Students"
Last edited by neufuse on 28 Aug 2009 - 15:14
Last edited by bob21 on 28 Aug 2009 - 15:57
Last edited by PowerPatrick on 29 Oct 2009 - 20:31
Also, the "Enforcing Digital Restrictions Management (DRM)" sin is pretty retarded. DRM files play in Windows, but not in Linux.
With Windows, you at least have the option of playing DRM. Not so in Linux. In this regard, Windows can do everything Linux can, but Linux can't do what Windows can.
It's not like using Windows suddenly means you're FORCED into using DRM.
How is giving me the freedom to choose what type of media I can enjoy a SIN?
Also, the "Enforcing Digital Restrictions Management (DRM)" sin is pretty retarded. DRM files play in Windows, but not in Linux.
With Windows, you at least have the option of playing DRM. Not so in Linux. In this regard, Windows can do everything Linux can, but Linux can't do what Windows can.
It's not like using Windows suddenly means you're FORCED into using DRM.
How is giving me the freedom to choose what type of media I can enjoy a SIN?
Isn't it obvious? MS is making them download torrents to be first to see it!
Unfortunately, I have to disagree with your comment. DRM, in any form, on any platform, is BAD.
It hurts consumers, hurts distributors, costs more money, and is overall a pain to deal with.
There are forms of DRM that play on Linux, mostly by being circumvented.
Saying you'd rather have Windows because it gives you the option of playing DRMed content is like saying you'd rather take an electric razor over a manual one, because it gives you the option of electrocuting yourself in the bathtub.
You missed the point of that "sin" entirely.
The site said "Enforcing Digital Rights Management". Enforcing being the key word here.
MS is basically supporting the use of DRM, where as Linux does not. There are cases (such as with protected media and HDCP) where MS is forcing you to use DRM.
Any side that supports DRM is bad in my books.
Unfortunately, I have to disagree with your comment. DRM, in any form, on any platform, is BAD.
It hurts consumers, hurts distributors, costs more money, and is overall a pain to deal with.
There are forms of DRM that play on Linux, mostly by being circumvented.
Saying you'd rather have Windows because it gives you the option of playing DRMed content is like saying you'd rather take an electric razor over a manual one, because it gives you the option of electrocuting yourself in the bathtub.
You missed the point of that "sin" entirely.
The site said "Enforcing Digital Rights Management". Enforcing being the key word here.
MS is basically supporting the use of DRM, where as Linux does not. There are cases (such as with protected media and HDCP) where MS is forcing you to use DRM.
Any side that supports DRM is bad in my books.
So you'd seriously rather lose the option to play DRM protected content altogether? Microsoft aren't supporting or going against anything, they are expanding the capability of Windows to suit their customer base. If the ability to play back DRM protected content was completely removed from Windows, there would be absolute uproar, and rightly so.
DRM technology may be a bit crappy, but as long as it remains in use, Microsoft are doing the right thing by providing support for it.
DRM technology may be a bit crappy, but as long as it remains in use, Microsoft are doing the right thing by providing support for it.
i think the point that these FSF guys are trying to make is that they want DRM gone altogether... well for one thing, based on what i use, i kind of agree with them, paying for a song that i cant play on a piece of hardware i also paid for is kind of frustrating...
I know about Linux/FOSS. I've tried Open Office, and numerous Linux distros...been trying them for years. When it comes down to the nitty-gritty...I'd rather *PAY* to use Windows and MS Office, than deal with the best the FSF can come up with. I'm using my FREEDOM to make a CHOICE.
So, their mission is complete. They've succeeded, I'm informed, and I still choose Microsoft. What now? Will they shut up if everyone stands up and says this? Or will they keep essentially spamming people until a few consent just to shut them up?
I know about Linux/FOSS. I've tried Open Office, and numerous Linux distros...been trying them for years. When it comes down to the nitty-gritty...I'd rather *PAY* to use Windows and MS Office, than deal with the best the FSF can come up with. I'm using my FREEDOM to make a CHOICE.
So, their mission is complete. They've succeeded, I'm informed, and I still choose Microsoft. What now? Will they shut up if everyone stands up and says this? Or will they keep essentially spamming people until a few consent just to shut them up?
i think what the FSF are trying to say is that by supporting microsoft, you are putting more and more power for them to do whatever they want, and there is a possibility that they would do something you dont like... by that point all you could possibly do is just sign petitions or something and hope that microsoft will listen
There is nothing bad about Linux or Apple or... but the time and expense to move an app to another platform just to save the money of the OS is but a small part of the cost.
I believe that in time more applications will move to the cloud, but it's going to take decades for all of this to change.
Peace,
James
There is nothing bad about Linux or Apple or... but the time and expense to move an app to another platform just to save the money of the OS is but a small part of the cost.
I believe that in time more applications will move to the cloud, but it's going to take decades for all of this to change.
Peace,
James
You are wrong.
Corporation can chance faster that you can imagine IF THEY HAVE A BETTER alternative. Remember, BETTER does not necesary means FREE.
And yeah, Linux is bad.
Corporation can chance faster that you can imagine IF THEY HAVE A BETTER alternative. Remember, BETTER does not necesary means FREE.
And yeah, Linux is bad.
Ok, well I've been a app developer for corp america for the past 20 years, and rarely do I see quick movement or change. But hey, that's only my perspective, not a complete picture.
I do know for a fact that rewriting an application can take months or years depending on the app and the team. So no matter what it takes some time. But again, if you've been involved in teams that migrate apps to the cloud or *nix quickly then I hope to be lucky enough to work with your teams (no sarcasm at all)
Peace,
James
Yep, in their world, freedom sure is conditional. Free to use OSS, but use anything else, we'll bug the crap out of you.
at least the worst that they do is bug you ... they arent in a position to really harm anyone... but when you have stuff like microsoft's licensing, standards manipulation, etc etc you have to start to watch out
You understand the consequences and nature of closed software AND
You make a reasonable attempt to find a free speech alternative AND
You fund or put time into a free project, whilst using the closed version OR
You put money into a bounty to start a replacement project whilst using the closed version.
On behalf of all users , Ill use whatever the hell i like. You wont force me or anyone else to use inferior open source software with garbage like this.
Free Speech would apply to those who produce locked content too....
And making a reasonable effort to find a 'free speech alternative'... Why the hell should I have to justify to anyone how and why I arrive at my software choices, that would be like having to go into McDonalds, and explain why I would rather eat in KFC.
I don't know who the hell these people are, but they need to have a long hard look at their own philosophies if that is what they really think.
Understanding FOSS (PDF file)
Closed source isn't immoral if�
Absolutely retarded. I have nothing against using open source software, but to tell people they are wrong to use closed software unless you follow the ideals listed is just plain stupid.
I use software like Firefox, GIMP, and ImgBurn, but I also use MS Visual Studio, Windows 7, Steam, etc. I use what works well for me, and if I find an alternative that suits my needs and is an improvement over my current software in my own opinion, I'll use it. Am I wrong for doing that? Is it wrong that I'm not looking for an open source alternative to all the games that I'm playing? Or that I use ATI drivers without looking for alternatives? bull**** it is.
FSF should use more of their time toward the OS instead of complaining
*cry*
I'm sick of those tools getting press time.
That happens in all fortune companies my friend.
I wonder also where did they send the mails.. haha.. guess office@....
I work for a Fortune 50 company (yes, top 50) and we are an alliance partner with Microsoft.
So there was a waste of paper, ink, etc.
And whole thing is the stupidest thing I've heard for awhile.
these people are getting attention, but bad attention...
"MS fanboys"? Haha... Linux got funboys, zealots, MS got users... judge for yourself
Seriously though, I didn't look through the entire website but do they not present any facts to their claims? I didn't see any anywhere. Especially on the front page where it lists all the "sins".
"Microsoft has a majority market share in the new desktop PC marketplace.
This is a bug, which Ubuntu is designed to fix."
You guys, first SHOW SOMETHING better before attacking Microsoft.
"Microsoft has a majority market share in the new desktop PC marketplace.
This is a bug, which Ubuntu is designed to fix."
You guys, first SHOW SOMETHING better before attacking Microsoft.
What's funnier, is that on most of the status columns, it shows each Ubuntu release as 'Wont Fix' .
At least they know their place.
Even then, most people here still use Windows.
I'm sure they are fully aware of free and open source software - they just don't care about it.
How can you promote freedom while enforcing the use of a given product (Linux ) and bashing another (Windows)?
The open source world has nothing to do with Windows or Linux, it exists for many operative systems, not only the free ones.
I also hate that when most people talk about free software or GNU liceses, they only refer to Linux and/or OpenOffice as with only that combination one can leave Windows behind. About 70% of the software I use is free.
I even wrote some programs and I offer them as freeware.
They talk about Microsoft ceasing to support older versions. Heck, even Ubuntu has a timetable for official support too. So you just have, like Windows, to migrate to a newer version.
At home, I choose (freely) Windows. At work, well, we depend on others sometime to make that choice. The FSF is way over its head here with this letter.
Last edited by ajua on 29 Aug 2009 - 00:08
There's a Windows port for nearly everything, often times the only version of the software.
I love Open Source software, and in fact pride myself as a developer of such, but when I need a solution to problem in a limited timeframe, do I really care whether I can see the source code of the program I'm using? NO.
So can I take this to mean they KNOW Windows7 is good?
So can I take this to mean they KNOW Windows7 is good?
No, you forgot about Badvista.org.
But despite of all the negative press Vista has and the sour taste the word leaves in people's mouths, Vista still has more market share than Linux does. If Linux had a chance, it was during the "I hate Vista" nonsense. Yet, Windows still retains 90% of the market, while Linux barely holds 1%...
EDIT: Sent a LONG e-mail to campaigns@fsf.org using Outlook 2010 running on Windows 7 outlining why THEY should switch to Windows 7 ....
Last edited by goldenlotus on 29 Aug 2009 - 06:44
EDIT: Sent a LONG e-mail to campaigns@fsf.org using Outlook 2010 running on Windows 7 outlining why THEY should switch to Windows 7 ....
Care to share?
They threaten to stop supporting older versions of Windows in the long-term, and because their system is proprietary (not free/libre), you are dependent on them to provide regular security updates and fixes. With the threat to withdraw their support, they try to strong-arm you into adopting new versions of their software even when you don't need them and may have a negative consequence to your ability to operate, once again abusing its monopoly position, explicitly inducing vendor lock-in.
I personally would adopt open source software but unfortunately it doesn't do it for me. Inconsistent app look, inconsistent app behavior, illogical way of doing things are some of the things that drive me off open source software. Until the Linux desktop starts behaving like the Windows desktop and this includes everything from taskbar behavior, dragging icons, consistent and unified operation, sleek performance (resizing a window produces no sluggish effect), elegance and ecstatic, equally aligned icons, equally aligned icon spaces etc....I will keep using Windows.
They threaten to stop supporting older versions of Windows in the long-term, and because their system is proprietary (not free/libre), you are dependent on them to provide regular security updates and fixes.
Considering that the "long term" for Microsoft is actually 13 years (2001 - 2014) of security support, and your Ubuntu long term support would expire nearly 3 times in that same period, I don't think that's a good point at all.
They threaten to stop supporting older versions of Windows in the long-term, and because their system is proprietary (not free/libre), you are dependent on them to provide regular security updates and fixes. With the threat to withdraw their support, they try to strong-arm you into adopting new versions of their software even when you don't need them and may have a negative consequence to your ability to operate, once again abusing its monopoly position, explicitly inducing vendor lock-in.
I personally would adopt open source software but unfortunately it doesn't do it for me. Inconsistent app look, inconsistent app behavior, illogical way of doing things are some of the things that drive me off open source software. Until the Linux desktop starts behaving like the Windows desktop and this includes everything from taskbar behavior, dragging icons, consistent and unified operation, sleek performance (resizing a window produces no sluggish effect), elegance and ecstatic, equally aligned icons, equally aligned icon spaces etc....I will keep using Windows.
So, how is supporting an OS for almost 13 years a bad thing? There are reasons why you should upgrade. The Vista/7 OS's have way better security standards and more stability. And doesn't Ubuntu have a set lifetime? Red Hat?
And there is no such thing as vendor lock-in. How many people have been switching to Mac or Linux? Something like that just doesn't happen over night... That takes time. Lots of time. And depending on your budget, might not even save you all that much money, so why bother making the switch?
They threaten to stop supporting older versions of Windows in the long-term, and because their system is proprietary (not free/libre), you are dependent on them to provide regular security updates and fixes.
Considering that the "long term" for Microsoft is actually 13 years (2001 - 2014) of security support, and your Ubuntu long term support would expire nearly 3 times in that same period, I don't think that's a good point at all.
I apologize I failed to get the picture but I agree with you. People have a choice and are free to leave the Windows world as they wish and go with something else. There is no vendor lock in. People can use whatever they desire. However based on the current choices open source software has, I would never 'seriously' consider anything else but Windows.
What this letter does however is asking people to use something else. If one isn't happy with what they have I am sure they'd go with something else. No need for letters. As a matter of fact I have been using Windows 7 and I would never go back to Windows XP. I would gladly purchase Windows 7 because it works better and it does the job better. I am happy with Windows 7 and I will pay for something that I like. Just because something is free it does not mean you have to settle with it (assuming you can afford a commercial product).
I have to stress though, if there was a free product that works as good as Windows, I'd choose the open source/free version over the commercial one.
This just in: "Ford stops selling older models, want you to buy their new car!"
The FSF doesn't have a problem with MS, they have a problem with the system/economic model.
Get a clue, FSF. You're going to get the analogy of being the Tom Cruise in the Scientology camp. Whoops. Too late.
What is wrong with paying for software? I have paid for every OS that Microsoft have brought out, oh apart from Windows Vista, I was given a complimentary copy for my part in beta testing Vista. Every other OS I paid for. Office applications I paid for as well. So what is the problem... An organisation has to make money to sustain stability and profit by selling the products they develope. Open Source get their money from donations from subscribers and subsuderies. Whereas Microsoft make theirs on the sales of their software. If you like LINUX then use it, it's free, if you like Open Office then use it instead of bitching about paying for an operating system and other applications, get a life and get real and stop moaning about Microsoft.
I'm sorry if I come across as being bombastic but the FSF really get on my nerves and hack me off. Grow up.
I can see it now....
9am: Linux becomes standard operating system world wide.
9:30am: Computer users around the world wonder how the hell they use their computers now
10:00am: Graphic design companies go out of business due to lack of requirement for good design anymore
10:30am: People realise linux really is for nerds only
11:00am: Windows is reinstalled onto all PC's. MacOSX onto Apples
11:30am: The world resumes
2. Invading privacy: Microsoft uses software such as Windows Genuine Advanced to try to make sure their software isn't pirated, due to the fact that unlike apple they do not have proprietary system to offset the cost and value of their operating systems.
3. Monopoly behaviour: Microsoft continues to offer people it's products, despite it's vigorous attempts to make itself go bankrupt. In other news, Apple Mac's come with all the software you could possible ever need. In addition, if you would like to use iTunes, which is now one of the #1 music distribution systems, you may now use; in addition to its already vast array of platforms; the Apple iPhone to get your music. Continuing their dedication to open systems.
4. Lock-in: Microsoft regally releases new version and updates to its operating system to try to give users a new and interesting way to use their personal computers. In addition, to fight the Linux based hackers attempting to breach their system, Microsoft releases security patches to lock them out. Thankfully for Apple, it has been seen that snow leopard is nothing but a service pack, and isn't a required updated.
5. Abusing standards: Microsoft has attempted to generate a business model, based on formats that it has spent money creating, researching and updating.
6. Enforcing Digital Restrictions Management (DRM): Microsoft works in collusion with the same big media companies apple does to build restrictions on copying and playing media into their music players. For example, you can only use i* products to Sync with iTunes. In addition both Microsoft and Apple enjoyed DRM formats, until they worked out people didn't like them.
7. Threatening user security: Windows has a long history of security vulnerabilities, enabling the spread of viruses and allowing remote users to take over people's computers for use in spam-sending botnets due to the lack of anything better to do. Microsoft remains the DOMENANT marketing leader in operating systems, therefore is targeting much more viciously than any other system on the market.
2. Invading privacy: Microsoft uses software such as Windows Genuine Advanced to try to make sure their software isn't pirated, due to the fact that unlike apple they do not have proprietary system to offset the cost and value of their operating systems.
3. Monopoly behaviour: Microsoft continues to offer people it's products, despite it's vigorous attempts to make itself go bankrupt. In other news, Apple Mac's come with all the software you could possible ever need. In addition, if you would like to use iTunes, which is now one of the #1 music distribution systems, you may now use; in addition to its already vast array of platforms; the Apple iPhone to get your music. Continuing their dedication to open systems.
4. Lock-in: Microsoft regally releases new version and updates to its operating system to try to give users a new and interesting way to use their personal computers. In addition, to fight the Linux based hackers attempting to breach their system, Microsoft releases security patches to lock them out. Thankfully for Apple, it has been seen that snow leopard is nothing but a service pack, and isn't a required updated.
5. Abusing standards: Microsoft has attempted to generate a business model, based on formats that it has spent money creating, researching and updating.
6. Enforcing Digital Restrictions Management (DRM): Microsoft works in collusion with the same big media companies apple does to build restrictions on copying and playing media into their music players. For example, you can only use i* products to Sync with iTunes. In addition both Microsoft and Apple enjoyed DRM formats, until they worked out people didn't like them.
7. Threatening user security: Windows has a long history of security vulnerabilities, enabling the spread of viruses and allowing remote users to take over people's computers for use in spam-sending botnets due to the lack of anything better to do. Microsoft remains the DOMENANT marketing leader in operating systems, therefore is targeting much more viciously than any other system on the market.
Um why are we talking about MAC's all of the sudden when the topic is not about Apple or MAC so why bring it up in the first place? So what if Microsoft has the markets by the ba*** who cares. I don't as long as thye keep producing an OS then it's fine with me I have not got a problem with it. What is wrong with people...
The Mac reference is simply to cover the lack of comments regarding Mac in the clearly biased letter by the FSF. You cannot come down on one company for certain practices and not mention another company for doing the exact same thing.
I do believe the perceived 'coolness' of apple with users has protected them, and the letter can give thanks to the general 'we hate Microsoft' sentiments for it's existence.
Unless Microsoft grows continually, then they can't continue to indefinitely support older versions. It's a waste of money. You can't expect that of a company. And if microsoft grows, these linux geeks will complain that it's getting too big.
They are plain childish, and the design of the website is horrible (perhaps they are using free software to do it)
They are plain childish, and the design of the website is horrible (perhaps they are using free software to do it)
Sorry, it doesn't have anything to do with the software at all. It's something to do with their bad taste
There is always going to be a battle between Windows/GNU/Apple. It is just the nature of the beast. IMO I think that we as a community need to stop fighting about which one system is best and continue to work toward better systems. There will probably never be one system to rule us all, but as it is now a few major systems that do specific things well. For example if I was going to run a web server I'd go Apache, if I was going to setup a business network I'd probably go Windows Server/Client, if I was a casual home user I'd go Apple, if I was looking to put a system together for minimal cost I'd go GNU/Linux. Or, like I do now, run both Windows and GNU/Linux together.
To me in the end it is what the FSF and all the hardworking people who brought us FSF and GNU hold as a philosophy that really brings me to support them. Freeing users to work, modify and use software and hardware as they need and desire.
I'm not surpised people don't like this - this site is full of retards who are so inept that they pay extra money for software that allows them to use their computer. They also pay for anti-virus and anti-spyware protection. Some of them own Macs and have no problem forking hundreds of dollars for useless software either. Windows idiots usually chant the same **** "well if people actually used linux it would see more viruses". Go to netcraft.com and see where Linux has been handing microsoft it's ass for years. What? They own over HALF the market? Pwned. No viruses? Yeah. Two reasons: 1) People hate Microsoft, thats why they are a target. 2) 12 year olds can get Visual Basic or C# Express for Free and it takes 5 minutes to write a virus with those products in windows. Anti-virus will not detect these until they are in the wild. That subscription covers only viruses dear Symantec knows about.
90% of the PC desktop market is windows. Isn't it odd that also - 90% of the world is stupid? (all those long lines ppl wait through at the grocery store are caused by this). Surprising how well those numbers fit. I have no issues with Microsoft making a product for stupid people. I just don't want that system forced upon me through the use of DRM to make sure nothing works in Linux.
Also about the DRM comments. People wouldn't be ****ed if Microsoft removed DRM. The companies that use DRM would be forced to reissue non drm products to their customers (who cant use them now). If Microsoft never let DRM in to begin with what would these evil media companies have to stand on? People would have their DRM free media.
Note: half of the people who read this comment are still confused in thinking free software means it doesn't cost anything when it just means freedom of code.
Commenting has either been disabled on this article or you are not logged in. Click here to login or register, its free!
Note: Anonymous commenting is disabled in order to keep the quality of responses to a high standard.