okay - i don't care about MS, i don't poke around MS boards and i only use thier crappy software at work. well folks i am gonna come out more against them here is why:

http://news.com.com/2010-1075-882846.html

those GPL hating freaks..

Yep. Ran across taht one last nite. Just another marketing lock-up disguise as legal manouvreing.

I don't know how M$ can get away with things like this while the open-source community is in some ways supporting Micro$oft (while supporting other platforms of course).

BTW: If they ban samba, Well, I'll just use ftp to transfer files and cups for print serving (as along those printer manufacters hurry up support linux even more).

mwohohahahahaha

that is funny as hell
you see, i dont think they will get rid of GPL that easily. they are the ones under fire from the US government. not GPL. besides, the government wanted a competition that can take some power from m$. now there is one that could _destroy_ the empire. but you see, linux is passive competition meaning, only the users are advertising/fighting for it.

but thats just my $0.02....

"crownless again shall be the king" ~Nightwish(Wishmaster::Crownless)

I have a feeling this may actually shoot themselves in the foot rather than help them.

Think about it... how many companies do you think are going to change their plans about deploying Linux on their systems because of this?

And with so many alternatives and the cost of M$ software and lets not forget their licensing, I think this will encourage companies to look at Linux even more so.

I haven't read the whole of it, but maybe it's a solution to create a new license (compatibile with GPL, but not called GPL) and use it instead?

why not get a patent while your at it...if m$ were to try this shit if it had a patent, they would be screwed....

You know what - FSCK THEM !!! And it makes me believe that they are very afraid. Be afraid Bill, be very afraid.

you know it.... they are very afraid. linux is the only competition that they have had in a long time that threatens them. and it is gaining on them at an explosive rate. id give it three years, and they wont be the most popular operating system anymore.
<sweet voice>
here billy billy billy, here billy billy billy, i have a present for you. Its Tux, the linux monster. it wants to eat you. aw, but its so cute....look for yourself. *crunch*.
</sweet voice>

According to http://news.com.com/2100-1001-860328.html MS admits it has borrowed some code from zlib library (Open Source project), even though the article first seems to be about a security flaw found in zlib, it states that MS borrowed the code from zlib (IE, Messenger, and six other MS programms use zlib). So then why IE for instance is not Open Source?
I think they won't last long, I think MS software is going to be the only solution for lazy, fat, overpriced interprises, but there is not so many of them, even the company where I work is using SAMBA to provide file sharing between Windows and UNIX machines. As I said fsck them, and as far as the GPL and Open Source projects live, I'd love to see an option -bill in fsck command, that will check windows partitions as if they were native linux, and after the windows cold reboot instead of scandisk there would be fsck -bill.

I wonder how much they have "borrowed"...

I think
#include <zlib.h> + all dependecies

they use OpenGL too, which is a graphics library that is open source. you see, they keep takeing from the GPL, yet they are trying to get rid of it. their stuff that barely works when it does would never work if they didn't borrow from it.
/me does a little fsck -bill to his computer, and his computer fscks the impossible: bill's brain. his brain is so corrupt, even fsck cant fix it. /me then tries fsck -steve, and his computer then tries to fsck steve ballmer's brain...it fails. /me does a fsck -TeRG and it works perfectly....

strange how that works....mabye because i run Unix in the brain. and they both run windows.

Damn! I was gonna post the same. I haven't read the actual licence in depth, but I think it does mention the GPL and LGPL by name, so I can't see how MS could possible complain if the good men+women at Samba decided to release Samba under 'The Samba Licence', which just happens to be exactly the same as their current choice of PL but with a different name.

I can't see how MS have really got a foot to stand on. They can't ban all open licences, because seriously large chunks of XP are based quite heavily on BSD licenced stuff. Hmm, how they gonna get round this one?

Personally I think it's purely to 'scare' those that don't read things in depth.

This sort of thing really cheeses me off but I think that we all need to relax, M$ make all sorts of rubbish proposals - qv. the 'donation to schools' thing. It's yet to be seen what happens to them over all this business.

I dont think that MS will be able to get away with their (cicra) evil practices for ever.

MS have been in the alternate OS community bad books for a long time. I remember buying OS2 2.0 because a mate told me that it's %1000 better than win3.1. He told me the story of MS backstabbing IBM over the whole OS2 development. I could not believe that MS would do that if the OS was better. Now it's common knowledge that quality does not count with MS. Marketing and sales is whats counts with Bill Gates.

I think that the general public IS comming around to our point of view. The more society becomes involved with computers the more that MS will be seen for what it is.

I say we chill a little, dont get hostile when MS pull another one out of the bag, just spread the word! And tell people what we know.



It'll come good in the end.