 | | Re: Microsoft spreads Linux FUD —Matthew Miller
|
| | | (...) Or, from (URL) "It's the business model around free software that concerns us, where people get sucked in to not paying for software." --Doug Miller, group product manager for the Windows Server Group (24 years ago, 18-Feb-01, to lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
| | | |
| | | | | Re: Microsoft spreads Linux FUD —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | (...) Well, this part IS true, as far as it goes. That's the idea, after all!!! If you read the GNU Manifesto, it comes through loud and clear. MS has a simple answer to it though, make stuff that's so much *better* than what you can get for free (...) (24 years ago, 18-Feb-01, to lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Microsoft spreads Linux FUD —Matthew Miller
|
| | | | (...) I think that the point that they are inarticulately trying to make is: "The system of proprietary intellectual property rights provides an incentive to put money into research. The principles of openness and sharing demonstrated in the (...) (24 years ago, 19-Feb-01, to lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Microsoft spreads Linux FUD —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | (...) We had some of this debate before... I'm not sure what I think, exactly. Open Source clearly works and delivers good things but there has to be an incentive of some sort to cause clever people to do clever things. Whether IP is the best way, I (...) (24 years ago, 19-Feb-01, to lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Microsoft spreads Linux FUD —Matthew Miller
|
| | | | (...) I'm more concerned about things going the other way -- IP laws, especially software patents, but also bans on reverse engineering (as with DeCSS), being extended to the point where open source can't reasonably compete. The situation with DeCSS (...) (24 years ago, 19-Feb-01, to lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
| | | | |
