[ Date Index ][
Thread Index ]
[ <= Previous by date /
[ Next by date /
thread => ]
Re: [LUG] Micro$oft
On Saturday 20 April 2002 13:10, you wrote:
i'm puzzled - i thought SMB was an open protocol - there's an article
about it in this month LXF. it's an interview with the guy who runs
But MS are doing their usual thing, changing some detail of the protocol, so
that it doesn't work with other systems. A sort of reverse of "good
engineering by good neighbours cooperating for the common good " which is
what we should by now be seeing.
They are of course wholly unreformed, indeed I would not rule out some courts
deciding that such conduct while in the midst of their lawsuits amounted to
demonstrating contempt for the court, as well as the rest of the world.
Now software copyright is a sensible idea, but software patents, as applied
in the US and to an alarming extent in the EU now, are a really bad idea.
They do not fulfill the purpose of the patent, but also tend to be granted
for things that are obvious, and things that were worked out long ago by
people other than those who produce them.
But if MS can change SMB by adding a patented "extension" to it then they can
seek to sell licences and obviously are not inclined to sell licences to
anyone other than large firms.
Gates declared himself many years ago, to be an enemy of open source and free
software, and as the MS model of business begins to falter (it is) the frenzy
to make any other model impossible is growing. I think we are heading toward
Personally, I like NT4, and see no need to go beyond it.
From one of the Linux desktops of Dr Adrian Midgley
The Mailing List for the Devon & Cornwall LUG
Mail majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxx with "unsubscribe list" in the
message body to unsubscribe.