Gates Tries to Explain .Net 613
AdamBa writes "Speaking to financial analysts and reporters, Bill Gates admitted that .NET hadn't caught on as quickly
as he had hoped. The headline ('Gates admits .NET a "misstep"') is a bit misleading; he doesn't think all of .NET was a misstep, just the My Services part (aka Hailstorm). He also said that labelling the current generation of enterprise products as .NET might have been 'premature.' Summary: Microsoft got too excited about locking in users via Hailstorm and botched the overall .NET message." There's also a Reuters report and a NYTimes story on the same subject, which includes the interesting line: "Microsoft also warned today that the era of "open computing," the free exchange of digital information that has defined the personal computer industry, is ending." It isn't clear if Microsoft is talking about something happening beyond their control, or if they're boasting about ending it.
Gates doesn't do mistakes. (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Gates doesn't do mistakes. (Score:4, Funny)
End of open source... (Score:2, Interesting)
Also,
.NET (Score:5, Insightful)
When the general public thinks about
I don't think I'd pay Microsoft for a subscription to Word.NET when I can just keep using MS Word 2000 or OpenOffice 1.0, or AbiWord. I don't want to store my credit card info in my Passport (or liberty alliance or any other online identity service) account. Heck, I want the people in the checkout lane to ASK to see my ID when I hand them a credit card, I certainly don't want to hand over all the info that a thief needs to charge things to my credit card.
Web sites converting? (Score:2)
Why I am seeing everyone is converting to Java? (Score:3, Insightful)
I know lots of developers who shifted to Java from MS platforms though.
etc. etc.
Re:Why I am seeing everyone is converting to Java? (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Why I am seeing everyone is converting to Java? (Score:3, Insightful)
However with the release of 1.4, there have been vast improvements made on the client side (read GUI) that makes it much more viable as an option. The company I am currently with is designing an entire GUI with Swing and so far things have been very positive.
On the server side, however, Java is king. There are very few "single" technologies that can do as much as smoothly as Java does. Yes you can do everything that Java does with other technologies, but using a single technology, Java owns this arena currently.
Give .net a couple more years. It will either get a foothold or die. Personally, I hope it dies.
Re:.NET my BUTT (Score:5, Funny)
Java is cool but . . . (Score:3, Insightful)
I read somewhere that PHP is the fastest growing scripting language on the web, and has already surpassed the popularity of the more mature ASP.
Exellent development tools available for Java make it a good choice for some bigger web projects, but the downside is that the cost of setting up a server. Not too many people offer virtual hosting for java. You pretty much need your own server with root access to set things up.
For smaller projects you can get a domain name, virtual host with PHP, and mySQL for about $20 US per month.
Of course you can design and test both technologies on your free OS, with your free web server, with your free database.
So why is anybody switching to
Re:Dumb question (Score:4, Informative)
Of course, there are some browser-specific features, but the code for those is not written to the client if the browser doesn't support it. The best example is something called Smart Navigation, which reduces flicker on pages between trips to the server. If you're not running IE, or older IE, you get the flicker, but it doesn't prevent you from working with the page. HTH.
Re:End of open source... (Score:3, Insightful)
Where in the article did it mention him indicating the end of Open Source? The warning statement was about the end of "Open Computing," and I believe he was referring to Digital Rights Management and other cryptographic technologies being built into the hardware and operating system. Personally, I find this concept MORE frightening than ending Open Source, but he's doing nothing more here than repeating what all of the big corporate conglomerates (RIAA, etc) have been trying to convince us of. Sad really. As much as I don't like Mr. Gates, I would have hoped that the geek in him wouldn't have caved so quickly.
Open computing ending? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Open computing ending? (Score:2, Interesting)
Example:
My parents are on vacation in france. They have web based email accounts. One of the hotels they stayed at happened to have internet access. So they sent me (and my grandparents) and email stating that they were having a good time. They did this a few times, until they went on to the next hotel that had no internet access.
My grandmother, who just learned how to use email, has decided that something HORRIBLE has happened to them because they havent sent an email report in 3 days. She is now convinced they are dead, or something stupid.
If I dont have my cell phone with me one day (or god forbid I TURN IT OFF when I go to a movie), I am assumed to be dead by my family because they cant contact me.
I would seriously consider dropping my cell phone plan - except it DOES have its uses. I think it would do the world a bit of good to drop the "Information Revolution" back a few notches. Dropping all the way back to pre-information age technology wouldnt be good. But I think people are taking some of this stuff too far.
Re:Open computing ending? (Score:2)
There's a difference between free sharing of information and unwanted information being shoved at you or your information that you DON'T share being taken.
Controlling the information age (Score:2)
The beeper died, and for about the same price (up-front and monthly, both) we got a pay-by-the minute cellphone. Nobody knows the number but the kids, and occasionally it's just plain handy.
But it is so constrained as to not be an annoyance. Choose the technology you accept, and think about the uses you make of it.
Re:Open computing ending? (Score:5, Insightful)
Don't we hear this story every few years, but with a different product's name? Before that it was Windows XP, and before that it was "Chicago/Windows 4.0/Win95" and before that it was DOS 6 and before that it was ...
According to MSFT, the 'Promised Land of Computing' has always been waiting for us in their home just over the next ridge.
MS real message of open computing ending... (Score:3, Interesting)
Aside from a cutesy cultural reference,
It really annoys me how one can see a black lining to ANYTHING Microsoft does. It annoys me even more that historically, this attitude seems to be justified.
Open Computing is Ending? (Score:2, Insightful)
Sounds like FUD aimed at open source software -- particularly because he uses the term "open computing"
On another note, my personal experience of
Re:Open Computing is Ending? (Score:2)
What you've just said is "It's all a bunch of hype, but it would have been nice if it weren't". Well, duh.
But then again, apparently it's not all hype, else what would Ximian have to interact with? No... poorly implemented good ideas, that's .NET
Hmm. (Score:3, Funny)
It's ending because they're ending it. (Score:4, Insightful)
You bet your ass it's ending because they're ending it. If the universal pushing of Passport,
I am genuinely afraid of what personal computing will look like in ten years if Microsoft has their way, and I have never been too concerned in the past, so I am hardly an alarmist Microsoft conspiracy nut either.
Re:It's ending because they're ending it. (Score:5, Interesting)
> I am genuinely afraid of what personal computing
> will look like in ten years if Microsoft has
> their way, and I have never been too concerned
> in the past, so I am hardly an alarmist
> Microsoft conspiracy nut either.
You can see what it will look like now. Check out a Microsoft research project from the late 1990's called "Millennium":
http://research.microsoft.com/research/sn/Mille
(Especially "What would such a system be like?")
http://research.microsoft.com/research/sn/
(Look under "Previous Projects".)
Everything that Microsoft has revealed so far moves toward Millennium:
There are two things in the way of Microsoft's thousand year rule:
A heroic penguin keeping them from a server monopoly.
A jaguar in an Apple tree looking at their vaporware (Longhorn) like it found its lunch.
And a third:
An angry god who isn't into being embraced or extended (gee, Toho gets ideas for these movies from the strangest places):
Godzilla 2000, the Dreaded God! The battle for Earth's future has begun!
The future Millenium threatens.
Godzilla cannot be assimilated, by Millenium who would embrace, extend!
(From my lyrics to Godzilla's theme from "Godzilla 2000 Millenium")
Re:It's ending because they're ending it. (Score:4, Insightful)
People want open computing, otherwise we would all run Macs now.
In the last 2 weeks I've installed Linux for 2 friends and yesterday I was called by another one who is no longer able to rip DVD-movies with Windows XP after he did an online-update. (Yes, he wants to try Linux, too after this "experience".)
Pirated music, movies and software is what keeps the whole computer-thing going at home. Or do you really think that granny is going to shell out 400$ for MS Office to write 2 letter/month?
If you take that away, you immediately lock out the vast majority of home users which will accept great pain and suffering to escape (and switching over to Linux is not as hard as it used to be. But even if it was, that would not matter because a DRM-computer would be useless for most home users.)
Palladium and universal DRM are just not going to happen in a free market.
Of course semi-democracies like the US might force it by law, but just like Alcohol-prohibition, it won't last very long and nobody would care about it anyway. (Actually alcohol-prohibition reduced alcohol consumption only in the first 2 years while the market adapted. Then because of harder drinks (= easier to smuggle) and more aggressive distribution (no more youth protection) the alcohol consumption per head was much higher at the end of prohibition than at the start.)
Millions of users currently don't care about copyright, why should they care wether DRM is mandatory or not?
Re:It's ending because they're ending it. (Score:3, Informative)
"All Your Hardware Designs are Belong To Bill's DRM Strategy and
The whole idea of software copyrights went over really will in China (cough).
"The era of open computing is ending"
And who has the power to end it? MS + RIAA + US Govt? ROFL.
Try again Billy Boy!
All MS is doing is pushing people to OS alternatives. If all the linux minds could just get together and follow a unified Desktop strategy, the alternative would be crystal clear.
Re:It's ending because they're ending it. (Score:2, Insightful)
Open source is of course, freely available source code. Open computing is the basic interoperability and data exchange upon which we all rely to make things 'just work' together. Try just for a minute to tell me that MS wouldn't foreclose on any interoperability standard they could if it would result in increased sales of their products.
Open source isn't ending, and it never will. It's currently our best hope for keeping MS as honest as possible.
Gates give company a "C" (Score:4, Interesting)
According to the CNN article, Gates has gone with a report card scheme to give his company a "C" rating (for non-americans, grades can be A,B,C,D, or F (no E), and C is "average").
I guess it is nice to see a top Microsoft exec give a realistic review of the company. I wonder if the corperate scandles of late have anything to do with this unusual honesty? Perhaps Gates feared if he gave too rosey a picture, stock holders would be skeptical.
I think if we were really honest with ourselves, we would rate Linux at around the same score (perhaps C+). It is good to see our main competitor admit that we are on a level playing field
Re:Gates give company a "C" (Score:2)
Re:Gates give company a "C" (Score:2)
Huh? (Score:2)
You're comparing an operating system to a company?
Re:Gates give company a "C" (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Gates give company a "C" (Score:2)
I wasn't thinking about the quality of linux per se, but rather how we are doing in market penetration. We are growing, but we have a long way to go.
Re:Gates give company a "C" (Score:2)
OK Einstein, perhaps you can explain how the SEC is going to improve consumer confidence in the stock market by taking a company to task for under-reporting its profits in this climate?
With the President and Vice President facing enquiries into corrupt accounting schemes that made them rich the last thing they are about to do is to make an enemy of a guy who controls a news station (MSNBC) and who can buy a network out of petty cash if it chooses (NBC is hardly a core asset in NBC's current strategy).
The 'vast right wing conspiracy' that Hilary talked about was in reality a handfull of right wing loons bankrolled by a single far right tycoon. Gates has the money and the connections to ensure that all we hear from morning to night in the mainstream media is Harken, the Rangers stadium deal and the accounting at Haliburton.
In other words the SEC is no more likely to investigate Microsoft than it is likely to re-open the enquiry into Bush's insider trading and corrupt accounting at Harken.
Another reason is that the player with the most credibility in this market at the moment is Warren Buffet who is a very good friend of Gates. If Buffet passes Microsofts accounts nobody else is going to gainsay him.
Why SEC should look at Microsoft (Score:4, Informative)
1: They're manipulating their balance sheets. Under-reporting is as bad as over-reporting, neither is "transparent". (the new accounting buzzword) Besides, last I heard, and I admit I can't currently substantiate this, they were "revenue smoothing", under-reporting on very good quarters, and holding that around to over-report on lean quarters. The net effect was to always meet/beat projections, which helps the stock keep going up. And isn't this where it all started, with "opaque" accounting practices being used to inflate stock value.
2: Stock options counted as a business expense for tax purposes, but not counted against revenue. Though recently S&P and TIAA-CREF have called for this to change market-wide.
Cheap office labor! (Score:3, Funny)
One dollar an hour per consultant? I guess I know how much a MCSE certificate is worth nowadays. Hell, cheaper than temps, though.
Re:Cheap office labor! (Score:2)
heh (Score:4, Funny)
uh-huh
I'm warezing
M$=0wn3r1z3d
Re:heh (Score:3)
Grab it, d000dz! [microsoft.com]
Yeesh.
Marketing to blame (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Marketing to blame (Score:2, Troll)
That said
Re:Marketing to blame (Score:2)
In my experience, the answer to this is _performance_ and _reliability_ wich you don't get winth 2k/asp.
Re:Marketing to blame (Score:3, Insightful)
This is a bit trollish. Oracle on Sun offers tremendous flexibility, it can be extemely reliable, and it is much simpler to administer well. Conversely, I've seen Oracle on Windows NT, and it was an embarassing travesty.
I really wish people who see only up-front costs would take off their blinders and have just a little insight into the future. UNIX, believe it or not, is still cheaper in the long-term than Windows, and going with non-Microsoft applications may actually reduce risk. Perhaps this is a good thing for the taxpayers?
Microsoft has been very successful at making people put all their eggs in one basket and at providing an operating system that requires what seems to be a one-to-one ratio between administrators and computers. Is this really what you want?
Re:Marketing to blame (Score:5, Interesting)
During the beta I thought this might be just a smoke screen to keep the DOJ from looking at it too closely. After all, proper exploitation of the CLR should allow them to eventually run Windows on other hardware, or maybe even as a full replacement GUI/pseudo-OS layer on other OSes. However, this stupid murky message has persisted, so now I think it's just marketing incompetence.
Recall that MS marketing almost tanked the previous generation of MS technology with that stupid DNA bullshit. I remember YEARS went by before even many developers understood what DNA actually was -- a set of useful discrete but interoperable products which were related but were not "one big thing".
I just hope BillG gets his heads out of the clouds long enough to pinpoint the problem, execute the market droids responsible for the mess, and make a cleaner, more digestible push to the people who really need to understand it -- the development community.
Oh yes, and one other point -- the size of the framework may prove to be a sticking point. It's pretty big, so unless you're selling CD-based traditional software, it'll be a hard sell for quite some time. But even the typical /. anti-MS flame-belching troll should at least recognize that MS is smart enough to have accomodated that in their planning.
Re:Marketing to blame (Score:5, Insightful)
A. Promise the moon, to be delivered within two years
B. Spend 6 months talking about the Moon, but never really getting into details beyond buzzwords.
B2. If new and interesting technology comes along within those 6 months claim the Moon will contain it as well
C. Come out with alpha software (Moon v.1 Preview) that has little functionality built in but looks nice
D. Slip schedule ('We're adding new and exciting features')
E..Y Wait
Z. Deliver something that could quite possibly be useful and innovative, but deliveres about 1/10th of the orig. promise.
Re:Marketing to blame (Score:3, Informative)
What's interesting is that it's not just PHB's that don't understand this issue, many developers don't either - especially those in the Java camp. They see headlines like this and say, "MS's java copy failed LOL!".
The seed of the .NET idea (Score:2, Funny)
-- Paraphrased from Clay Shirkey
CNN has a story (Score:4, Funny)
I wonder how he grades the Xbox, with its horrific launch in Japan (still haven't sold through their initial 250,000 shipment), terrible software sales rate (less than 2 per console sold), and overall terrible showing at E3. He'd probably give it a 'C+', or maybe a 'C#'.
Re:CNN has a story (Score:2)
MS has said from the beginning that their plan for the X-box is very long-term... I doubt they were expecting initial results other than what they have now.
Re:CNN has a story (Score:3, Informative)
They are very persistent and have lots of money. Do not understimate them.
Re:CNN has a story (Score:3, Informative)
-- US --
XBox has managed to take to number 2 slot in this market, although closely followed by the GameCube.
-- Europe --
Recent figures show XBox has only managed to sell 500,000 units throughout the entire EU.
GameCube has managed 800,000 in a much shorter time period.
-- Japan --
In the most recent weekly sales period, XBox sold 2,400 units, PS2 90,000, GC 27,000.
With the Japanese developers quickly jumping ship on the XBox, its future is bleak at best.
Of course it's ending... (Score:3, Interesting)
Not a MS bash (really) (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Not a MS bash (really) (Score:2)
Modern business doesn't wait for the customer to come to them - it goes to the customer and pushes it's products. This action is the product of competition. You absolutely have to outdo your competition in order to survive and grow.
Modern business can't play nice because nice guys finish second, if not last.
Re:Not a MS bash (really) (Score:3, Interesting)
Or a better analogy: if a fine furniture manufacturer decided to get into the piping and plumbing business then they better not rest their fortunes on selling piping and plumbing to all of their furniture clients. You may get a few, but if you go into the piping and plumbing business then you're better off selling to plumbers than going around to everyone who bought an chest-of-drawers trying to get them excited about U bends.
nail on the head (Score:5, Insightful)
Some columnist recently pointed out that Apple achieved in one stroke everything MS is trying to achieve with
In other words, while Microsoft spent two years talking about Web services and technologies, Apple quietly went about actually building them into a program its users will want to use. MS has been announcing and releasing software for other people to build these Web applications, but Apple decided to lead by example instead.
No doubt the next release of Windows will include similar features, and of course they'll be more widely used than Apple's. But just think what might be happening right now if Microsoft had spent as much time creating Web applications for Windows XP as they did promoting them.
If a person could synchronize their PocketPC to their MSN account and Outlook at the same time, then reconcile with all their coworkers' calendars and documents, without having to do anything more than press a button, Microsoft wouldn't need subscriptions to sell the next version of Office or Windows. Instead they settled for getting halfway there so that they could sell more copies of Exchange Server and keep PocketPCs as expensive as humanly possible.
What _IS_ .NET? (Score:2)
what?
What is
Why should we care about it?
MS's original intention. (Score:5, Funny)
Re:MS's original intention. (Score:2)
Worldcom.
Re:MS's original intention. (Score:2)
Then, when the bubble burst and it all collapsed, I can imagine a hurried meeting in Gates's or Ballmer's office, and someone shouting out, "I know! Let's just change the name to dot NET!"
And the rest, as they say, is history.
Oh really...? No. I don't think so. (Score:3, Insightful)
That will happen when they pry the webserver out of my dead hands.
Seriously, what is going to happen? MSN will supply all the content for the world? I doubt it.
http://www.rahga.com forever, and I suggest you do the same.
Re:Oh really...? No. I don't think so. (Score:2, Troll)
It's all about making your security holes work for you.
Money, Money, Money (Score:2)
free exchange? (Score:3, Insightful)
Big companies may be able to undercut the competition at first, but the total cost of ownership will hurt you in the end.
At least he admits it. (Score:2)
Re:At least he admits it. (Score:2)
I am tired of every time any MS related news comes out the posts turn into a Bill Gates Lynch Mob. I do not like everything microsoft does. I am an avid linux user. I support open software (through use, as well as through funds). This being said, Microsoft and bill gates are not the Anti-Christ.. It is possible to support linux and not hate MS. I agree with Penya in saying that in a time when company after company is going under and facing prosecution for hiding this type information, Bill had the huevos to stand up and admit a mistake. I hope more companies see this example and take this approach.
Thank goodness Gates told the world... (Score:2)
They understand one problem... (Score:5, Insightful)
- Gates also acknowledged that confusion still reigns about
.NET's very definition.
Good -- they understand one problem. People can perhaps point to the CLR and assoicated libraries, but- On Wednesday, he hammered home a new definition: "software to connect information, people, systems and services."
Unfortunately, this definition doesn't help at all. Pretty much all internet-based software does this.Definition? (Score:2)
Microsoft, I mock in your general direction. With all that money, you can't find higher-calibre copywriting talent than that?! (Actually, having seen some of their press releases and other "marketing collateral," I now know that software isn't all Microsoft does badly.)
Re:They understand one problem... (Score:4, Funny)
Re:They understand one problem... (Score:3)
Unfortunately, this definition doesn't help at all. Pretty much all internet-based software does this.
Pretty much all software does this. He could have said "Software that fetches, decodes, and executes." and been just as helpful.
Open computing may end, somewhere (Score:4, Insightful)
The United States is in a position to maintain cultural hegemony over the whole world - if we don't kill the free exchange of culture in order to make a quick buck.
If we do, I predict, within a couple of generations, that other parts of the world will have outpaced us. Killing open computing will destroy our best way-out of the recent doldrums in popular movies and music.
The end of the Free exchange of info! (Score:5, Interesting)
1. You can not take away our freedoms.
2. we do not gives a rats ass about the Record companies.
3. We do give a rats ass about us.
The software compaines do not want DRM. Get talking to your reps.
The end of "Open Computing" (Score:3, Funny)
Oh thank god... (Score:3, Interesting)
As long as M$ puts out crap.... (Score:2)
"Microsoft also warned today that the era of "open computing," the free exchange of digital information that has defined the personal computer industry, is ending."
Please....
This is Microsoft wishful thinking. M$ is full of shit and always has been.
The system, the superior one, will always reign supreme. (except for maybe beta).
Re:As long as M$ puts out crap.... (Score:3, Insightful)
Well, that sounds good until a couple years from now where your video card is getting really doggy, and the CPU's that are available are 4 times faster than what you've got, and no one is using CD-r's anymore, and the 27GB blue disc DVD's are looking nice and cheap.
If Palladium passes and they enforced making the sale of non-Palladium hardware illegal... then all the companies will start making Palladium compliant hard ware. Sure, you can find hardware form the pre-Palladium days, but every year, those will seem so slow, it won't be worth it.
Bought my first Mac with OS X yesterday. (Score:2, Interesting)
Now if Apple could only figure out that they need to lower the prices to decent levels. Just like DELL you can make as much profit on volume as gouging your customer-base.
There's a large adoption issue surrounding .NET (Score:5, Insightful)
1. Companies who have not yet started to deploy solutions using J2EE or Java and are trying to decide which to use: Java or
2. Companies who have a need for some software that is only as a
I won't address issues involving getting companies to deploy the
a1. If you already have a substantial investment in software written in anything but a
a1. Regardless of how you view
a1. Regardless of all the claims Microsoft makes about C#/.NET maturity, nobody in their right mind is going to bet the company on a new MS platform just because the pay-for-plundits say it's sexy.
a2. There is little imperative to adopt something for which there are no major none-Microsoft commercial offerings.
a2. Either way, I suspect difficult part of the sell for
Personally, I find it hard to get excited about something from a company whose major call to fame these days is the latest way it is reaming its customers.
Re:There's a large adoption issue surrounding .NET (Score:5, Interesting)
a1. If you already have a substantial investment in software written in anything but a
This could be said with J2EE as well. We had a ton of Cold Fusion, PHP, and ASP/COM that we wanted to consolidate into one platform so we could reuse code accross applications. J2EE and
I have yet to meet a serious java developer who has any interest in
Again, this can be said for any set of competing languages. I could also say, "I have yet to meet a serious VB developer who does not have a huge interest in
Regardless of all the claims Microsoft makes about C#/.NET maturity, nobody in their right mind is going to bet the company on a new MS platform...
This is pure speculation. Sure, it sounds nice to say on
There is little imperative to adopt something for which there are no major none-Microsoft commercial offerings.
Unless you have no problems running on a Microsoft platoform, which many do not. Again, look at all of the ".asp" sites out there. The vast majority are NOT running on Chillisoft, and are probably looking to migrate to
The wait-and-see approach is a tried and true paradigm with respect to version 1.0 software from Microsoft.
For larger and less technically ambitious companies I'd have to agree. However, for smaller companies who need to get away from ASP/COM, Cold Fusion, or even PHP,
Re:There's a large adoption issue surrounding .NET (Score:3, Informative)
I *have* researched
In essence, the major conclusion I drew is that much of our existing code and designs were not useable in
It is apparent to me that
More details: Existing code written as a COM object interacts through essentially yet another marshalling layer to talk to managed code. Plain win32 native code does this too, even though the visual studio IDE hides much of this. The only native code I've seen that works well when ported to managed environments are Microsoft code samples.
You mention VB programmers; this is appropriate. This is because they are the only ones who have an advantage to switching right now as VB in it's current state is a waste land of OCX controls of exponential flavors and versions that seem to only ever be good at leaking memory.
So your company is going to toss away all its PHP, Cold Fusion, ASP/COM code... interesting setup they must have
Re:There's a large adoption issue surrounding .NET (Score:3, Insightful)
Well that's pretty rich. I guess I was imagining all those GUIDs.
"Yes, just as you can't use a PHP function in Java. I'm not sure what your point is."
Not having to reinvent the wheel for a new paradigm was the point... you know.. reusing existing code... anyways..
"We had code in Beta2 that runs flawlessly on the 1.0 CLR less one minor exception (minor syntax change)."
I'm glad to hear Microsoft didn't redesign the CLR between beta2 and version 1.0
Working for a company that has the budget to redesign and re-code everything must be nice though. I'm glad not everyone is hurting in this economy.
Oh, (Score:2)
It seems clear to me... (Score:5, Insightful)
It seems clear enough to me. Microsoft and the entertainment industry are in bed together. Both have something to gain from DRM.
The entertainment industry can stop music and movie pirating, take away our fair use rights and set the stage for a future market. That market being the sale of digital video and music which will be streamed directly to hardware. It is important to the entertainment industry that we are not allowed to record the digital data because once recorded we, as individuals, could illegally swap the files with others. Obviously, that would greatly reduce the incentive to pay again and again for the privilege of having the entertainment industry stream it to us. So say good-by to your fair use rights.
Microsoft has a lot to gain here also, on an entirely different front. They are fighting for their Corporate lives against a foe unlike any they have had to deal with before. Linux can not be made to go bankrupt, it cannot be sued into oblivion and it is steadily gaining popularity. How can Microsoft deal with this specter of doom? They must use any weapon available to them.
1. FUD. Yep, good ol' fear, uncertainty and doubt has always helped Microsoft in the past. It hasn't worked very well against Linux because their FUD has been too transparent. People just weren't buying it. They need a more complex strategy.
2. The Law. Make open source illegal. Hmmm... I'm sure they thought about that one... but how?
How about using FUD, a grain of truth to paint open source users as pirates, thieves and other assorted forms of lower life. Then join together with the entertainment industry to buy a senator like say.... SENATOR HOLLINGS FROM SC. And have him draft legislation that will ram DRM down our throats.
One all hardware is DRM enabled, only the entertainment industries bed partner will be allowed to receive digital data that will be streamed by this industry. Microsoft will do it's part to ensure that as few applications as possible will be allowed to run on Linux and have access to this new market. Definitely not open source. Thus they prevent competition. Typical strategy for Microsoft. Being afraid of competition they don't go head to head unless they can ensure themselves an advantage.
Re:It seems clear to me... (Score:3, Funny)
And they're making the ugliest kid I've ever seen
Re:It seems clear to me... (Score:3, Insightful)
by sheldon on Thursday July 25, @02:05PM (#3952551)
(User #2322 Info | http://www.sodablue.org/)
It seems clear enough to me. Microsoft and the entertainment industry are in bed together. Both have something to gain from DRM.
Microsoft's position on this is quite understandable. They aren't in bed together, but Microsoft feels that if they do not incorporate DRM into their applications and utilities someone else will and that application will become supplant Windows as a desired choice."
I'm not buying it. With all of the applications out there and over 90% of computers in the entire world running a Microsoft OS there is no OS poised to "supplant Windows as a desired choice."
In their recent FUD they claimed that the reason for their Palladium strategy is to protect customer's from evil hackers and "un-trusted" code. Yet it will not do a thing to prevent the majority of attacks. This initiative is mostly about hurting open source for Microsoft and about curtailing future P2P file swapping for the entertainment industry.
You bet Microsoft is in bed the entertainment industry.
One more partner that I didn't mention in my previous post was the hardware manufacturers. To pull this off they have to play along as well. All of them need to exclusively sell DRM enabled hardware because if any of them are not on board with this scheme then people will have a choice. Given the choice of hardware that the entertainment industry and Microsoft controls or uncrippled hardware, you can guess what people will choose. So we must not be allowed a choice.
And just in case some of the hardware companies are reluctant to play along Microsoft and the entertainment industry have bought and paid for SENATOR HOLLINGS FROM SC. This is one corrupt SOB that needs to be removed from the equation. If you are from SC I would suggest voting the bastard out.
As far as my opinion being FUD, I think not. It is by far more based on fact then fear, uncertainty and doubt.
Full of Holes... (Score:5, Funny)
What is .NET?????? (Score:3, Interesting)
Before .NET was released, no-one knew what it was. After its release, we still didn't know. Maybe I'm just stupid...But what kind of software connects information? This definition is all-encompassing, vague, and one of the more impressive examples of burble that I've seen. I guess MS just doesn't want us to *ever* know what they're doing.
Re:What is .NET?????? (Score:3, Funny)
.NET as a Data Utility (Score:4, Informative)
My understanding of
I believe that the vision is that computing devices would mostly allow you to dip into that data stream, and lose almost all of the autonomy that they now possess--while historically useful, it means that I can't have my fridge interoperate with the grocery store and compare my cupboards with what's on special today, and then alert me with a pop-up ad while I'm watching TV. All of these devices would be manufactured independantly, but MSFT would provide the means and the infrastructure to connect their data streams.
If said data was regulated by an open protocol, you could probably achieve much the same kind of thing; however, MSFT is a demonstrated monopoly, and as such can dictate a data-transfer protocol and make it a defacto standard. MSFT then gains the ability to charge on the basis of each transaction, or rent your data transmission method to you or to the device manufacturers.
Will it work? I dunno. I suppose anyone can install solar panels and resume their autonomy from the infrastructure. However, there's lots of good reasons to still be connected to the grid, even though it costs you more in the long run. Took a long time for this infrastructure to be implemented, though, and I'm not sure MSFT has the patience.
This is really all just speculation and conjecture--I would love to hear what others think of these assumptions. Am I right?
Re:.NET as a Data Utility (Score:4, Funny)
I really really don't want to see my toilet have a Brown Screen of Death someday.
Gates is responding to the '.Mac' threat? (Score:3, Interesting)
I think in hindsight, .Net will be taught not in Computer Science courses but in Business Marketing courses as a failure of Public Relations.
How Gates planned to secure .NET (Score:5, Interesting)
One of the people at the White House Office of Cybersecurity told me an interesting story once.
About 2 years ago he was at a briefing of high mucky-mucks where Gates was pitching all of the Good Things (TM) that .NET was going to be.
My friend was in one of the front rows, not twenty feet from Gates. He knew that if he raised his hand, Gates couldn't ignore him. So he waited for a few reporters to ask their usual lame questions and then made his move: "Bill, how in the hell are you going to secure all of this?"
He says that Gates's eyes glassed over and his knuckles, where he'd been gripping the edges of the podium, turned white. He spent the next several minutes rambling about QOS -- yes, QOS was going to secure .NET!
There is more to this story that I wish I could tell. Suffice it to say that the White House cybersecurity people (including Howard Schmidt, who was recently vilified here) are not as stupid as slashdotters think they are. These men will never reveal in public their true opinion of Micro$oft, but they have spoken to me in private about it. They're not as far away from our opinions as you think.
Re:How Gates planned to secure .NET (Score:3, Insightful)
I don't know Mr. Gates personally so I can only guess based on what I was told, by someone who does know him, in a conversation that occurred last winter.
My friend said that Gates finally "got it" about two years ago as far as realizing that security is actually important, but still did not realize that security is something that must be designed in to a technology from the very beginning. He described Mr. Gates as a visionary who likes to dream up new stuff and believed that security was something that could be added on to a technology later -- by low-level underlings. Kind of like believing that you could make the Corvair safe by simply adding air bags.
He also mentioned that BillG considered security to be more of a PR issue than a real one.
The "Trusted Computing" letter to which you refer is consistent with that view. Most of the letter is pure PR and most of the rest is consistent with a viewpoint that security can be obtained by simply having coders go back through source code looking for bugs.
I don't think Gates realized until just recently that he has literally built Windows on a very dangerous foundation (ActiveX, for one example) that CANNOT be made secure. I think that's what Palladium is about: yet another add-on by underlings (hardware designers, in this case) so that he does not have to admit that he made some very fatal errors several years ago when he designed the Win32 architecture.
Gates is a betting man -- he played a LOT of poker in his college days and usually won -- and it shows in the way he keeps "betting the farm" on his company's products and technologies. If the world ever figures out what he's done, he's going to lose it all.
So to answer your question, I THINK that he believes that he really is on the track to better security. I think he's starting to realize that it ain't really true, but I think he also believes that he can bluff his way out of this one just as he has no doubt done in countless poker games in the past.
It will be interesting to see whether that actually happens.
What is .NET? (Score:3, Funny)
Gates: No one can tell you what
Reporter 2: But I have sources telling me that
How to end confusion over .NET (Score:5, Interesting)
You know, to be honest, I think they kept it vague on purpose, so that they could sell a whole bunch of products and tout each one as an essential component of
To be honest, I think if we weren't in the middle of the a Linux revolution right now, nobody would be asking the questions that needed to get asked about
Good article: ".NET Signals an Industry Shift" (Score:4, Insightful)
".NET Signals an Industry Shift"
also referenced as the article about "Moore's Triple Crisis".
The author of the article (David Bau, who made the popular "Dave's Google Quicksearch Bar") writes about a three-way Moore's law crisis: crisis in systems, apps and development.
Systems: "the exponentially rising power of PC technology has started to overshoot the needs of the ordinary customer. This means people are starting to shop for cheaper computers instead of more powerful ones."
Development: "Moore's law crisis affects development costs just as dramatically as it affects hardware costs. As computing power gets cheaper and software becomes more ephemeral, it makes sense to save software development hours by wasting CPU cycles." The Garbage collectors and Intermediate Languages of
Applications: "Microsoft is facing the problem of saturation. The widely recognied issue here is that almost everybody who wants to do something with their computer software can already do it. Why would you buy a new version of Microsoft Word or Excel?" "Microsoft is facing competitors like America Online that are using a new model for software applications."
That's why Microsoft introduced his
Services - an idea whose time has passed (Score:5, Insightful)
There are successes in that business, but Microsoft isn't one of them. PeopleSoft, Oracle, SAP, EDS, and Automatic Data Processing are the successful players. They're big, vertically integrated companies that build and service what they sell. They're not value-added resellers, and they don't usually work through value-added resellers.
Microsoft's model, that you download something, pay for it forever, and don't bother them much, isn't how it's done. The big service providers provide real service; they are in the business of outsourcing corporate support functions, not pushing software.
History repeating itself... (Score:5, Insightful)
Nothing new. Bill Redux: I remember hearing of an episode from back when GEM and Windows were still battling it out - at a conference panel where Bill and Gary Kildall were members, and Gary was going on about OSs, and how there'd be plenty of ways to run your computer. Bill grabbed a microphone and interrupted, with a clarification to the effect that "No, there will be one way to operate your computers. One. (uncomforatble silence) You may continue."
More awful puns... (Score:3, Funny)
(There go my karma points...)
How to kill .NET (Score:3, Interesting)