Truth Behind the ClearType/OpenSUSE FUD 123
Kennon writes "Steven J. Vaughan-Nichols over at Linux Watch clears up the FUD around Tuesday's Slashdot discussion concerning OpenSUSE, ClearType, and patent deals with Microsoft."
Any circuit design must contain at least one part which is obsolete, two parts which are unobtainable, and three parts which are still under development.
What a novel idea (Score:3, Insightful)
Changed Before the Microvell Deal (Score:5, Insightful)
MS' plan to fragment the community is only effective if Novell has customers and developers supporting them, otherwise the covenant is irrelevant. Boycott Novell, the rest takes care of itself.
Re:Changed Before the Microvell Deal (Score:5, Insightful)
You reap what you sow. Novell exposed themself to any FUD by going to bed with MS. Now everything they do (whatever it will be FOSS friendly or commercial) will be taken into MS deal context. It will just get harder and harder to wash off mud thrown by others.
Not that I think FUD is a weapon FOSS supporters should use. But a bit of paranoia is healthy. :-P
One good invention in the past decade (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Wonderful Practice (Score:5, Insightful)
Software Patents outside the US (Score:4, Insightful)
Why do we force software patents on people who live in non-software patent countries ?
Re:Wonderful Practice (Score:5, Insightful)
Petty politics or genuine concern that Microsoft and Novell are preparing to give the FLOSS community a good shafting? It's all in the semantics.
No. That agreement is tantamount to Novell saying: 'yes, GNU/Linux does infringe upon Microsoft patents.' It gives Ballmer evidence to extort money [slashdot.org] from GNU/Linux users, will probably be used in future lawsuits by Microsoft and has been the basis of much anti-GNU/Linux FUD.
What is particularly bad for the community is the indemnity stops with the Novell customers, the development community is very much left out in the cold. I'm scared of releasing my code under a FLOSS license because of patent FUD. It might be an indemnity agreement, but it's a thinly veiled threat too.
You speak of choice, yet the Microsoft/Novell deal has taken customers away from other distros [infoworld.com] (for all the wrong reasons). The whole point of the deal is to eliminate choice and leave Microsoft with just one competitor to deal with: Novell.
If a company kills babies, I'm not going to buy their products. In fact I'll actively make others aware of their actions, this is not petty, I would consider it my moral duty. As a geek Novell and Microsoft have done something far worse: gone against the spirit (if not the letter) of the GPL. It is therefore my moral duty to boycott their products and advise everyone (who would know what I'm talking about) to do the same.