:Rant Mode Equals One: The Linux Reality Versus the Microsoft Dream
Rant Mode Equals One: The Linux Reality Versus the Microsoft Dream
Feb 16, 2001, 09 :08 UTC (145 Talkback[s]) (39726 reads) (Other stories by Paul Ferris)
Well, we're finally getting down to brass tacks with Microsoft.
Jim Allchin, in an interview with
CNET.com
comes right out and proclaims that "Open source is an intellectual-property
destroyer." He then goes on to equate Linux-like operations with
Napster-like operations. The two things aren't the same and Allchin knows
it. But possibly a lot of people looking in will think the two are
inseparable. Possibly the witch hunt can begin if you throw enough mud at
the competition.
The threats are not comical anymore. I was laughing at Steve Ballmers'
characterization of Linux as "crummy".
I have to admit that when I read that I thought "If that's the best he can
do, then we're in the home stretch." What was baffling was why he didn't
go all out and say it was "Ugly", or "Butt-ugly"? I don't know --
but crummy? Well!
These sound-bites from Allchin, however, aren't so funny.
You get the feeling that possibly he wants to begin legislating
something in Microsoft's favor (like UCITA wasn't already
enough). This from a company that has been screaming mighty loud
about preventing the government from meddling in their affairs.
It's different, I guess, when it comes to Linux and Open Source, eh? The
government might begin supporting Linux more, I guess is the worry. The
government should support Microsoft more -- why? Because Allchin hints that
Microsoft is where the real innovation is taking place.
When has Microsoft been innovative? It's no secret that the single most
innovative thing in recent years (the Internet) is running mostly non-Microsoft
products. Some of us will even go so far as to say that the Internet wouldn't
have happened had it not been for Open Source. Why?
Because that's where the real innovation is happening.
Anywhere but Microsoft
Microsoft has been a close follower, picking up technologies developed
elsewhere and rolling them into their own. That's not innovation.
Jim, I understand that you want to innovate -- please start sometime soon,
and maybe we'll all listen closer to your demands. In the mean time, what
about my right to innovate? Where is my right to innovation when you
have the rights to the source code locked up tight in a safe in the
Redmond castle?
Where is all this talk about "The American Way" when the rights of the people
who use a product are compromised -- when there is taxation without
representation? When you charge for something that many (inside and
outside of the United States) believe should be the property of the people
who use it?
Microsoft did not invent the operating system. Microsoft came along and
packaged it, branded it and made it as proprietary as they could while
at the same time yanking as many ideas from competitors as possible.
Jim -- that's not innovation. That's integration. That's marketing.
You are now and always will be free to do that.
And Linux isn't a threat to Microsoft's ability to innovate either.
Not only do you now have a cool source of new ideas to patch into
Windows -- you have the source code to go along with it as an example
(Not that Microsoft would ever use Open Source code in any Windows
product, mind you).
Linux is a threat, however, to Microsoft operating system revenue.
Possibly the same way that the American revolution was a threat to Englands'
tax revenue. For the same reasons, the Linux and Open Source revolution is
going to continue to happen.
So Jim, what do you suggest? Legislate usage of Windows? Look around -- Linux
is a global phenomenon. The global revolution is going to happen,
regardless of the legislation passed in America. You want to import more
programmers from around the globe, but at the same time you don't think
that their ideas will make it in too? You want to import talent from
around the globe, but you think you will keep out something like Linux?
It's amazing the way that Microsoft plays the game. The rules only apply when
things happen in their favor.
Taxation without representation? Only if it helps Microsoft.
Legislation? Only if it helps Microsoft maintain their monopoly.
Innovation? Only if it can happen in one place -- Redmond Washington.
It's time for Microsoft to give up the
FUD -- and start innovating like
they claim they want to.
The cat is out of the bag. The GNU
General Public License is no more anti-American than the United States
Constitution. True, honest to God innovation is happening with Linux right
now, and the party is open to everyone -- including Microsoft if they want
to get in on it. It's a growing phenomena that is creating
intellectual property and true new innovations. The only thing that can
possibly upset Jim Allchin is that Microsoft can't own that intellectual
property. They aren't free to repackage it and drive out competitors with
the same tricks they've always depended upon in the past.
What a sham. It's un-American all of a sudden if Microsoft can't own it.
Go ahead, squeeze harder. Lobby like crazy. That's the American way, right?
Get the government to help support the Microsoft-Party line. Get that threat
of competition extinguished right away. Go on importing programmers from
around the globe so that you can maintain your precious locked-in intellectual
property and tax the whole world for items that are available otherwise for
free from a user-supported code base.
Keep the American dream alive, Jim.
Yours, that is. In the mean time, I'll live with my Linux realities.
