China Banning Win2k 407
Several people have submitted links to several stories about China banning the use of Win2k in government to encourage indigenous software. Here is a story from The San Jose Mercury, and one from
South China Ministry. They will instead be required to use Red Flag Linux, which is being developed by Chinese Researchers.
Do YOU really think? (Score:1)
Cheers everyone
It's true then... (Score:1)
Another Geographical Clueless Dumbo!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! (Score:1)
China has 1.1-1.2 billion people!
That's 1/6 of the world's 6 billion people!
BTW A very small fraction of people in China will
use computers. Most of their infrastructure is still based on paper for government agencies.
China is a very poor country were over 80% makes
$200 US per month, hardly enough to live on,
forget about buying a computer, etc...
Most of the Chinese market is in cities like
Beijing, Shangai, and Guangzhu. Total population
50 million. Less than 40% of these city citizens can afford computers.
The chinese market is not 3 billion, not a billion
but a mere 50 million (at most).
Remember things are not always as they seem.
Don't let the cool skyscrapers in big chinese cities fool you, they were designed, financed, and owned by foreigners, for their use, and the use of communist officials, not for the use of the people. Just like with those 5* hotels in Cuba where Cubans are not allowed to enter.
Good point (Score:1)
But the more I think about it, the less happy I am.
First, I have doubts that the Chinese gov't will actually pay attention to the GPL. Which would be a problem, since it would tend to weaken the GPL (and thus Linux) more generally. After all, if China gets away with it, other people will be thinking that they can get away with it too.
Second, having the gov't impose their choice on everybody undermines the concept of Open Source. It's one thing for the Chinese gov't to support Linux in the hope of supporting indigenous software development -- it's quite another thing to have them requiring that Linux be used.
Of course, this could all turn out to be a misunderstanding. Nothing in China is actually True until some major official gets quoted -- minor officials and "ministry sources" seem to spout off regularly and nothing happens . . .
perception becomes reality / drug pushers (Score:1)
i think using free software encourages self reliance and some form of independance (you can come up with your own solution, you can fix it, you dont have to wait for someone else) for some, even a responsibility to report bugs or not complain. this is something MS dont like since they want china to give them lots of money and dependence, thus leading to more money. alot like a drug pusher. is this close to the perception of MS in china?
Re:Indigenous or...? (Score:1)
Security may be a factor, but maybe not the way you think. The NSA's record in human rights, believe it or not, is much better than that of the Communist Party in China, or the Army there. If the NSA announced that it was creating its own version of Linux to be mandated for people in the US to use, we'd all go crazy looking for the back door, which may be hard if their version doesn't have source available. (I guess we'll have to wait and see about that).
Granted, they probably wouldn't be interested in eavesdropping on the average US college student, but they are targeting this distribution at people whose rights they respect a lot less than the US government agencies, with all their faults, respect ours.
Re:A Billion new Linux Users? (Score:1)
When you get right down to it, this argument sounds like you're saying that the persecution the American Indians received in the old days justifies what China is doing today, or that we shouldn't criticize it. I wonder, have you actually gone out and started asking any American Indians how they felt about that argument?
Re:Not only W2K is banned (Score:1)
Hold on a second; didn't Bruce Schneier look at the alleged NSA_Key stuff and conclude that it wasn't a back door, but merely a way to substitute your own system for windows if one wanted to?
Wouldn't that make Windows slightly more secure than it was, too?
The faults of Windows are many; there's no need to invent phony ones, and it makes us look bad.
Re:Not only W2K is banned (Score:1)
I think you're confusing the 40 bit key length with a back door; a short key length does not constitute a "back door" in and of itself. And AFAIK Microsoft does not rely on export subsidies to sell Windows. Finally, the NSA can't stop compliant-with-regulations software from being exported just because it doesn't have a secret back door. The regulations are a lot more specific than that.
Re:most used language (Score:1)
Chinese is not as hard to learn as most non-Chinese seem to think. I'm learning it. It rocks.
And for those Chinese who are obviously reading this (I've seen your comments) please don't get offended too much at the ignorant Americans who want to blast your country for kicks. It's a compliment to get criticized by idiots.
Shades of Komar and Melamid (Score:1)
Raise the Red Banner, and let a thousand open source projects bloom!
US Government Issue Linux (Score:1)
contains closed source kernel modules:
cryptography (with backdoor), web censorship.
Displays anti-drug mesage on login.
Confusing Words (Score:1)
The private sector is free to continue pirating^H^H^H^H^H^H purchasing Windows for its use.
Your use of the word pirate in this context is confusing. Consider alternatives such as "making unauthorized copies of" or "sharing". See http://www.fsf.org/philoso phy/words-to-avoid.html#Piracy [fsf.org] for details.
Re:Confusing Words (Score:1)
The word "pirating" has a colorful folkloric flavor to it that blurs the real truth. The word 'theft' or 'stealing' is more accurate.
Copying information or art is very different from stealing physical goods. If I steal your bong, you can't use it to smoke anymore. But if I make a photocopy of few pages in a book you own a copy of - or a MP3 of a song you own a copy of, you can still read that book and listen to that song. Using the words theft and steal is almost as confusing as using the word piracy to talk about copyright infringement. If you mean copyright infringement, say copyright infringement. See http://www.fsf.org/philosophy/wor ds-to-avoid.html [fsf.org]
Read some damn psuedo-intellectual website run by tenured do-nothings for the counter arguement to mine.
Pseudo-intellectuals don't get MacArthur fellowships. Richard M. Stallman does.
Re: (Score:1)
Re:This is good and bad (Score:1)
Re:Red Flag? (Score:1)
was the worst imaginable entity to trust to
write my operating system, but you proved me
wrong. If the U.S. gov't made an OS, you KNOW
they'd find a way to make it closed source.
For national security reasons, of course.
corrections (Score:1)
0.1 billion is a big number of people to estimate wrongly.
in any case, don't underestimate the buying power of the Chinese. They own a BIG HEAP of US T-bonds. Also, while most of them still can't afford the proverbial piss pot, at the rate that their economy is growing, give them 20 years and extrapolate the shrinking cost of computers and a sizeable proportion of them *will* have computers.
Great Idea (Score:1)
Re:Chinese code? OMG!!! (Score:1)
Nope, there are only 30 or so keywords in C. Of course, the libraries have more functions, but how much does a knowledge of English really help you remember what malloc or ioctl means?
I doubt it, but Perl supports this.
Government Software Bans == Bad Thing (Score:1)
TomG
Re:Government Software Bans == Bad Thing (Score:1)
TomG
Europeans efforts to restrict some software.... (Score:1)
Of course this doesn't apply to just Windows, rather all software. It would be important to note that these tariffs would probably impact copies of Linux sold in boxes.
Re:Gimme a break... (Score:1)
Stole nuclear weapons? In my physics lab right now among all graduate and post-doctoral RAs there are two Russians, on Brasilian, one Dutch, one Spaniard, one Chinese, one Japanese and ONE (ONE) American student. It's a government lab. And that's rather typical.
Who stole what? My brains have been bought, that's for sure (not that I complain), but cut the arrogant shit about stealing...
Re:Red Flag Linux? (Score:2)
In order to understand this announcement, you have to understand that the PRC is a very corrupt society with an economy run by a set of closely interlocked companies. These companies are largely run by the government, often through the armed forces. The country's economy is essentially a national oligopoly, run by a small clique of insiders.
The members of the G7 have been pushing the Chinese to free up their economy for quite a while. This effort has been led by the US. To much of the world, for better and for worse, one of the standards of the US multinational dominance is Microsoft (along with MacDonald's, Disney, and Coke).
So a thumb in Microsoft's eye is a thumb in the eye of the much-envied US. It is a blow for "independence" from the dominant foreign power. More than that, under the cover of open source, it's a chance to look like your protecting "freedom" while doing this. It's good propaganda. It is just plain good domestic politics.
This is all compounded by the on-going battle by the chinese oligarchs to get into the WTO. China isn't happy that its domestic policies regarding abuses in Taiwan and in Tienamin Square are considered relevant issues in the West. What's the best solution: first, accuse a foreign government of the same tactics (remember Kosovo and the "intentional" bombing of the Chinese embassy?) and, failing that, go after a foreign corporate icon. Bet's on whether MacDonald's, or Disney is next?
Oh, shit. Disney already got it over that awful Richard Gere film about Tibet. Never mind -- Boeing maybe.
Red Flag Linux (Score:2)
Many of the articles say that development's being done at the Chinese Academy of Sciences, and that Compaq's China branch is assisting in development. Maybe one of the more journalistic minded people here might want to contact these organizations for confirmation and information about the distribution?
----
Re:This is bad for the Chinese people (Score:2)
--
Re:A Bold Step Backwards... (Score:2)
Re:This is called Totalitarianism (Score:2)
Re:Not only W2K is banned (Score:2)
In the case of the export version of Lotus Notes, encrypted messages expose 24 of the 64 bit key to the NSA [heise.de] enabling easier brute force attacks. You may agree or disagree with this, but it seems wrong to sell your customers a 64 bit encryption subsystem and not tell them about the back door. Of course the existence of a back door for one party generally means that any party has an easier time breaking the encryption.
--
Re:Site License (Score:2)
Cut their pipe? Who are you to censor a nation? The internet treats censorship as damage and routes around it. Technology is very diverse and IP packets can be sent in many ways and there will always be those who will connect (unless its spam, and no one lives for that.) It would take many bigots with a great many nuclear weapons to censor a large nation such as China.
the commie turds.
Why don't you start with censoring yourself and learn from it. Better yet, get an education.
Re:Site License (Score:2)
Re:Jesux (Score:2)
Here is your source [geocities.com] for the Jesux Distro. Download and enjoy!
Re:Second time around (Score:2)
character support? (Score:2)
#!/bin/sh
# give me gedit in Traditional Chinese
LANG=zh_TW.Big5 gedit &
# give me gedit in Simplified Chinese
LANG=zh_CN.GB2312-1980 gedit &
----------
This works on my system (Debian potato), totally untested on others.
As for Unicode, well... it doesn't yet include all the characters in Traditional Chinese and Simplified Chinese, therefore it can't yet totally replace character sets like Big5 yet.
A ploy? (Score:2)
--G
Re:Chinese Government doesn't necessarily agree (Score:2)
I think the best way to describe the Chinese media is the fact that the Weekly World News gets a lot of it's more bizarre articles verbatim from Chinese press.
Chinese code? OMG!!! (Score:2)
Re:"Let him without sin..." = Conspiracy of Silenc (Score:2)
1) My ancester's actions are not my actions. My hands are not dirty simply because theirs were. In fact, I repudiate the actions of my culture then, as well as those now which perpetuate such injustices. That being said, I will not be silent when I see injustice, either here or abroad. If that offends someones sensibilities or their national pride, tough shit.
2) In mentioning (as an aside) the atrocities on Tiannamin Square and Tibet, I did not in any way seek to downplay or "hide" the dark past of my own culture, or to imply we hadn't wronged numerous people, including Native Americans, early Asian settlers, and black folk. Our ancestors did, it was evil, wrong, repugnant, and as far as I'm concerned has been woefully underaddressed by our current society. However, the subject was China's alleged embracing of Linux, not America's past, be it savory or otherwise.
3) My problem with comments such as Wah's isn't the airing of our dirty laundry at all. Quite the opposite, I think it of critical importance to speak openly, publicly, and loudly of our culture's past crimes, lest they be repeated. My problem is that, nearly every "he who is without sin" argument that is put forward, with some example from the dark past of the orignal commenter's culture, is done in order to silence the criticism itself, or in some way dilute it, by implying that a historical wrong by one country somehow makes it inappropriate for any citizen of that country, however personally innocent they may be, from speaking out against ongoing, contemporary injustice elsewhere in the world, or that somehow their criticism counts for less because of what someone's ancestors did. It also implies that historical injustice which no one can do anything about (short of inventing time travel), is equivelent to onging injustice which can be stopped. The result of such reasoning, if taken at all seriously, is obvious: no one has the moral authority to speak out against anything and injustice can run rampent without opposition, spoken or otherwise. This is why I fundamentally and vehemently reject such reasoning, as well as such trite "your granddaddy was bad so you shut up!" arguments.
I think your suggestion on visiting a local tribal meeting is brilliant. I had no idea such were open to non-Indians. Could you post some links or additional info on this? I'm in Illinois and don't have any local reservation I can stop by (that I'm aware of), but I'm a pilot with a small airplane, so flying a few hundred miles to take you up on your suggestion is something I'm very open to doing. My range for an evening is probably about 3-4 hours one way, or about 500 miles.
Sources? (Score:2)
It is also interesting to note Reuter's reference to the Microsoft Big Brother Feature as a "coding mistake" which was later fixed, rather than a policy Microsoft only backed away from in the face of public outrage. This is contrary to known fact, and implies a suspicious bias of the article as a whole.
Finally, it is obvious from both articles that the Chinese government is moving away from MS as a platform toward independent, home-grown solutions, and that the government is hardly unanimous in its direction as to how to do this, or whether to do it at all.
Both articles appear equally biased, from diametrically opposed points of view. The reality appears to be somewhere in the middle, probably along the lines of some ministries or departments having mandated the use of Red Flag Linux, while others (probably most) have not. Apparently all are being quietly encouraged to look at alternatives, of which I suspect Red Flag Linux is just one. The lack of named sources for information on both sides is highly irritating, however, and precludes forming any hard and fast opinion about exactly what policies are being followed.
Re:A Billion new Linux Users? (Score:2)
I will be very, very interested to see if the Chinese government adheres to an open source approach, as it is in many ways antithetical to how they have operated in the past. On the other hand, perhaps this is the beginning of a Great Thaw?
Re:"Let him without sin..." = Conspiracy of Silenc (Score:2)
No, I am not. You are making unwarrented and absurd extrapolations (which are not in the least bit logically defensible) from my comments. I am arguing againt ongoing repression and murder in China. In fact, my initial comments to which you responded didn't even argue that
However, I would assume that you would like to see China become more like the U.S politically (at least from a human rights perspective), yet how can they get there without pulling the same B.S. that our forefathers did to gain the raw materials and power necessary to accomplish that goal?
As to your absurd notion that social progress requires injustice, I respectfully disagree. Not repressing minorities does not require a history of repressing minorities, nor does it require might, power, or wealth. It merely requires that you not repress others. Democracy does not require power.might, or wealth (whether gained honorably or by repressing others), it merely requires adherence to democratic principles. Nor does respect for human rights require might, power, or material wealth. For that matter, even if material wealth were a consideration, obtaining such wealth does not require the violation of human rights or the various other myrid injustices to which you allude.
Your logic is flawed, your arguments are flawed, and IMHO your entire stance on the issue is flawed. What China did at Tiannamin Square was criminal. What the American Army did at Wounded Knee was criminal. Whatever "moral authority" I have is no less than that any other individual has irrespective of where they come from or what the country whos government claims authority over me has done in the past. My moral authority comes from the fact that I have never taken a human life and that I will speak out against against injustice anywhere I see it, at home or abroad, as is my constitutional right and IMHO my moral obligation. As an aside, I and anyone else of good conscience, would have that same moral obligation even if my past were sullied through personal wrongdoing -- one is hardly excused from opposing wrong today simply because one has done wrong in the past.
Injustice must be opposed, however imperfect those opposing it may be, and however sullied a nation's (people's, or world's) past may be. The alternative is a future even more rife with abuses and injustice than the past we all so laboriously bemoan.
"Let him without sin..." = Conspiracy of Silence (Score:2)
You are absolutely right. Our forfather's treatment of Native Americans, not to mention blacks and early Asian settlers, was beyond reprehensible. That Indians still live on reservations to this day is appalling, to say the least. Nevertheless
Let he who is without sin, shoot the first missile.
This is foolish. Christ was referring to physical stones killing a woman for adultery, not words of criticism against an injustice. We are all with sin, so to speak. There isn't a culture on the planet that hasn't wronged another at one time or another. If we are all therefor precluded from speaking out against injustice when we see it, all we end up with is a world locked into a conspiracy of silence, with injustice even more rampent than it is today, with not a word spoken in opposition.
Most Favored Nation (Score:2)
Most Favored Nation status was renamed year or two ago, to Normal Trade Relations. Most countries already had MFN, so the name change was appropriate. So, I'm sure Australia has it.
I personally agree that countries which violate basic rights flagrantly, and often, should be reprimanded. Americans, a majority of whom I'm sure, deplore the actions taken by the "Communist" government of the PRC. It's time the US government, on this issue, acted in a way that represents the people, and not the idea of a "free market", as mis-represented by various GM, Microsoft, and other lobbyists.
To those who submit that tariffs are government interference, I reply that tariffs are probably the least intrusive tax, as they tax foreign goods. I don't care if some US-based multinational owns it; a Coppermine processor manufactured in Malaysia is not a domestic product.
To those who submit that tariffs tax domestic companies indirectly, because other countries respond with tariffs of their own, I give the reminder that I'm only suggesting that the PRC not be granted NTR. And, according to 1996 numbers provided by the PRC embassy [china-embassy.org], the US ran a 33 billion dollar trade deficit (with 16 billion on Chinese imports). Compared with the total production of the US economy, a potential reduction of that 16 billion, due to retaliatory tariffs, is peanuts. The PRC would be hurt by a trade war far more than US would.
To the Chinese trade ministers: The US economy is the largest national economy in the world, whose potential for imports can keep entire regions afloat during a crisis. The libertarian Republican/human rights Democratic coalition in Congress would be more than happy to blow your head clean off. Do you feel lucky, punk?
Re:Chinese code? OMG!!! (Score:2)
You don't see all the Linux kernel comments in Swedish, do you? (I sure hope that's the right language for the point I'm making)
Of course, there will be some brilliant coders that can't write functional english in comments, but most will I should think, simply because most of the existing knowledge base of code, documentation, and discussion, is already primarily in english.
Besides, it'd probably be hard to keep straight all the various C keywords without speaking english, I bet. Oh yes, and does anyone know whether gcc is capable of handling chinese variable names and function names, regardless of which encoding scheme used?
Re:Chinese code? OMG!!! (Score:2)
I actually thought this through about a week ago, for some reason, and came to that conclusion: libraries are killer, for programming without knowledge of english. Maybe some future version of ELF might fix that.
Honestly, though, I wouldn't be surprised if Windows 2003 had multinational DLL exports. Microsoft is good about language support.
Re:What makes you think they'll _release_ their co (Score:2)
Why would they arrest people for worshiping in small groups, privately?
Why would they forcibly control places like Tibet?
Why would they hold military exercises to influence ROC elections?
Re:BoneFlower, did you read the Moderator Guidelin (Score:2)
The intent of the moderation system is not to evaluate the factual correctness of posts (given that most posters can't do this for themselves, and moderators are posters, ...). The purpose of moderation is to rank posts via scores so that the more interesting, useful, funny, and informative posts have high scores, while the crap, flames, trolls, etc., have lower scores. A post [ such as the one to which I am currently replying ] can be factually WRONG and deserve a high score on the basis of these criteria (not that your post deserves a high score, but it does not deserve to be down-moderated, because it is "interesting" although completely boneheaded). If the post is off-topic then it should be moderated so. If the post is factually incorrect (or correct for that matter) but interesting or insightful it should be moderated so. How many times do people have to tell you to read the moderator guidelines before you click the friggin link [slashdot.org]?
Re:This is called Totalitarianism (Score:2)
It reads:
"China to ban government use of Windows 2000" [ emphasis mine ]
How is this forcing the people to use it? The government of china has every right to dictate what computer systems and operating systems can be used within it. The US does the same thing.
Next time try reading the article before posting.
Re:Not only W2K is banned (Score:2)
Why is China using a Free OS? (Score:2)
No we don't... (Score:2)
1) Define "widely used". Sure, Windows dominates the world numerically, but as a local phenomena Linux is just as viable. If every Chinese person were using Linux and no non-Chinese were it would still make sense. Who do Chinese developers develop for? Chinese users!
2) In any case, W2k is not "widely used" by any definition. It hasn't even shipped yet. And before there's a bunch of shouting about "migration paths", let's just cast our minds back to all the articles we've read about retraining admins and programmers for the "whole new paradigm" of W2k.
MS made a bad move in dropping a lot of backward compatibility. Now purchasers think to themselves (assuming they think at all): "Well, I could buy W2k, but if I'm going to have to relearn a bunch of stuff, why not try out this Linux thing?"
---
Re:Site License (Score:2)
And just how the hell would you that? do you think all Pipes are controlled by the US government? or perhaps by you?
Most arn't even controled by US companies we could no more cut there pipe then they could cut ours.
"Suble Mind control? why do html buttons say submit?",
simplified chinese (Score:2)
To bad I can't figure out how to enter Traditional into my computer...
"Suble Mind control? why do html buttons say submit?",
chinese programers speak english (Score:2)
Linus's native language is finish, but linux is in english. I suspect the situation in china will be the same.
"Suble Mind control? why do html buttons say submit?",
no it isn't? (Score:2)
Incase you hadn't noticed, this only applies to the chinese government not the chinese people
"Suble Mind control? why do html buttons say submit?",
Star Spangled Linux? (Score:2)
NT uptime > 4 years (Score:2)
MS-Windows easier to use? (Score:2)
It's easy to use whatever you have already learned. A pop bottle is hard to use if you've only used bottles with corks, as the corkscrew keeps dropping bits of aluminum into the pop.
Re:Assuming that this is real (Score:2)
Re:"Let him without sin..." = Conspiracy of Silenc (Score:2)
2) same as 1
3) As for this , you have admitted that the U.S. is not blameless and has a dirty past, and are (justifiably) condemning China for recent actions. However, I would assume that you would like to see China become more like the U.S politically (at least from a human rights perspective), yet how can they get there without pulling the same B.S. that our forefathers did to gain the raw materials and power necessary to accomplish that goal?
You are arguing against a means that has created what you believe to be a justifiable ends. This is a loaded discusssion and way-off topic of what has now been exposed as a hoax story.
Re:A Billion new Linux Users? (Score:2)
*cough*American Indians*cough*
Let he who is without sin, shoot the first missile. (oh, wait, we did that too)
Not a defense of China, merely an attempt to keep bashing of cultures most of us don't understand, or actively participate in, to a minimum.
And to keep this post moderately on-topic, I think it's great that a large government has the ABILITY to roll their own NOS if need be.
Re:"Let him without sin..." = Conspiracy of Silenc (Score:2)
it was the tone of the initial post that grabbed my attention. You have defended this by comparing your personal moral standards with those of the government that controls 1/4-1/5 of the world's population. To condemn a country's actions (in any concrete sense) you must come from an entire country's perspective, not an individuals. This was the descrepancy I was pointing out.
As to your absurd notion that social progress requires injustice, I respectfully disagree.
In the limited universe of examples I chose (the U.S.) it would appear to be fact that social progress (Imperial Wealth and Power would be more accurate) requires injustice. Theoretically and philosophically, I agree with you, and wish it wasn't the case. If you can give some other examples, (English, nope, French, nope) I'd love to see them. All's fair in Love and War, and the Winners write the history books.
Nor does respect for human rights require might, power, or material wealth.
I will very much disagree here. Don't eat for about a week (and watch your children starve) and tell me how much you would rather be nice than have a thick steak.
My moral authority comes from the fact that I have never taken a human life and that I will speak out against against injustice anywhere I see it, at home or abroad, as is my constitutional right and IMHO my moral obligation.
That makes it easy. Close your eyes and your moral obligation disappears. Funny, but I would respect your position more if you HAD taken a life (not talking about homicide here folks). People in the U.S. have been fat and happy for so long they are starting to think it's a right (yes, I am a tad bit overweight and have a positive outlook on life).
I for one hope the world can balance our progress such that our animal natures can forever be dormant, accessed only as a means to get your attention for advertising or entertainment. But we can't forget where we came from, or how we got here.
BTW: thanks for a coherent argument (even if you don't think mine is), this is why I read
Re:Not only W2K is banned (Score:2)
Re:Do you really think... (Score:2)
By the ideal of communism, China should keep their Linux open sourced. By the ideal of central governmental control, China should keep their Linux closed source. Which ideal do you expect China to hold more closely?
Re:Do you really think... (Score:2)
Per current law, most "strong" (not easily crackable) crypto cannot be exported from the US. It can be imported from anywhere. Other countries don't particularly have this policy. As a result, people who really want to write crypto software have reason to move overseas. Moreover, remember that most of the mathematical types who do crypto don't live in this country.
Where a piece of software needs to have crypto built in, foriegn developers have a natural advantage because they can ship a secure product anywhere.
What it comes down to is that crypto export regulations insure that the best crypto, and the best crypto-enabled software, come from places other than the US. And this is exactly how you fail to deny strong crypto to your enemies.
Re:Well well well what have we here... (Score:2)
Apparently just the government. That's not the same as banning it everywhere. Private enterprises presumably can shell out for Windows.
What this begs the question is, why is our government still buying Windows, when Linux is certainly usable for probably 90% of what Windows is used for?
Re:Red Flag Linux? (Score:2)
Re:A Bold Step Backwards... (Score:2)
It's not SCMP... (Score:2)
The decision to ban W2K was reported by the Yangcheng Evening News. And they don't need to be lying, as another Coward suggested; they only need to be misinformed.
Re:I can't believe my eyes! (Score:2)
Many western governments have had a de-facto ban on non-Microsoft products for a long time. These come in subtle forms: purchasing agreements with vendors who only supply Windows boxes, mandated file formats and applications for some tasks and so on.
So in one sense I don't see this (alleged) move on behalf of the Chinese government as any worse than what western governments have done.
The question which arises is, how should governments chose their software? We might suggest fitness for the job, but if every office of every department does their own comparative study, they will probably spend more than if they bought MS in the first place.
Governments have two reponsibilities to balence: get the job done and not waste the tax payers money. Linux certainly has advantages in the second task, but there are still application holes where the former is a serious problems in the former. So the issue is not cut-and-dried.
Good luck on the GPL (Score:2)
I'll point out one fact: Microsoft tried to enforce their trademark in China and not only lost, but created a firestorm by the very attempt.
How much luck do you think you're going to have enforcing GPL in a Chinese court?
Red Flag Linux is going to be as open or closed as the Chinese government wants it to be, and nothing any of the GPL fans say or do is going to matter one bit. China conforms to international trade law when it suits them, and it suits them when their trading partners have the economic clout to enforce it.
The open-source movement does not have that clout.
Indigenous or...? (Score:2)
Security concerns? Sure, we all know GPL software is a hell of a lot more secure than closed-source software.
User concerns? Maybe, while Windows may be easier to use at a glance, Linux can be just as easy with 2-4 weeks of practice.
Anyone agree with me here?
Tyler
Re:This is called Totalitarianism (Score:2)
Re:This is called Totalitarianism (Score:2)
> [US,Canada,Europe,Australia,YourCountry]...
> imagine the law requires Windows
Um you mean there isn't?
So you are saying that a person working at any
government office has complete discretionary
control over what OS they run? military too?
You are missing something. This is INTERNAL
GOVERNMENT POLICY. It ONLY applies to
government offices. It is the basic equivalent
of the head of The DMV saying "We are dumping
windows and moving to linux on all our servers
and workstations" except on a larger scale.
This has no effect on personal workstations or
private companies (bizzare...private companies
in a "Communist COuntry"? what kind of communists
do they claim to be?)
-Steve
I can't believe my eyes! (Score:2)
Protectionist policies have no place in the modern world economy, and serve only to put up barriers between people/countries. No matter what your feeling for a particular OS is, you should not promote the exclusion of all others. Isn't this the exact stuff you are pissed about microsoft doing in the US? Great, you are doing it yourselves. If you truly believe in the Linux operating system, then it will flourish without the banishment of all other operating systems.
-Chris
Not too bright... (Score:2)
Windows is often a more realistic choice in the corporate (or in this case governmental) community for the shear fact that it is easy to use and EVERYBODY knows something about it. It is (like it or not) a fairly intuitive OS.
Now, don't get me wrong...I dispise Micro$oft as much as the next guy. I am simply willing to admit that Windows is useful for some tasks. The Chinese government would be making a mistake by taking this sort of action. It will result in (at the least) a significant period of decreased productivity...
Not only W2K is banned (Score:3)
Some time ago, Windows 95 has been banned in China, too, because it is too insecure (I can't argue with that)
Assuming that this is real (Score:3)
1) Better support for 2 byte char systems.
2) A lot of people in China will be using linux. Some of them will be writing new code. With luck we will see some cool software originating in China. Both in terms of totaly new software and
in terms of improvments to existing code.
Red Flag Linux does exist, yes ... (Score:3)
Now that I've got the "Informative" part of this comment out of the way, I'll add the "Flamebait": For the Chinese government to use a Linux-based OS does not demean Linux. There are millions of people in the world who use Linux-based systems already. Some number of these people are assholes; this does not make Linux an assholes' operating system. Some number of them beat their spouses or children; this does not make Linux a domestically violent operating system. By now there's probably been a serial killer or two who's used Linux
It is true that by using a more efficient, less crash-prone operating system, the Chinese government may become more efficient itself. In theory, this could be bad for the Chinese people: an efficient tyranny is likely worse than an inefficient one. However, I suspect that this would be more than balanced by the fact that involvement with Linux has the potential to lead to greater integration of China with the Net: how are they to keep up with new software developments if they don't have connectivity? And greater integration with the Net might very well lead to the spread of democratic ideals in the Chinese population, especially in the technologically adept population sectors who are most likely to come in direct contact with Linux-based systems.
Finally, I must add the following: China (says the Guide) is big. Really really big. You may have thought Texas was the epitome of big-itude, but that's just peanuts to China. China has big history, big culture, and lots of other big things too. The Chinese civilization has survived other bogus and tyrannical dynasties, and it will survive the "Mao Dynasty" as well. Right now things are obviously getting a bit shaky over there -- the Falun Gong crackdown indicates to me that the regime is scared of imminent popular uprising. In some sense, wouldn't adoption of Linux (and all that it entails) throw that much more Blessed Chaos into the mixture?
Hmmmm. (Score:3)
Red Flag Linux character support (Score:3)
Remember, Windows 2000 supports both Chinese character sets through Unicode, the international standard for foreign character sets. Unicode supports Latin, Cyrillic, both Chinese sets, Japanese, Hindi, Arabic, Hebrew, Thai and other character sets I don't remember offhand without having to do complicated changes to the OS just to change character displays.
Anyone actually seen Red Flag Linux? (Score:3)
I guess I feel like being a troublemaker today
A Billion new Linux Users? (Score:3)
I suspect if the used FreeBSD or Linux, they would quickly develop a remarkable level of local talent and expertise, having the source to hack on and improve. It would be truly ironic if a government like China's were to become an outspoken advocate of Open Source software. Not the spokesman I would choose, certainly, but a billion new Linux users in Asia wouldn't be all bad, either.
Alas, I suspect some home-grown, proprietary system will be what is standardized on, rather than an international collaborative project like Linux and FreeBSD.
What they are doing is entirely appropriate! (Score:3)
It is entirely appropriate for a body to mandate what its internal software standards are. Our government does this all the time, as does any large corporation. In fact, our government has been known to mandate to contractors and subcontractors what products they may, or may not use, on more than one occasion, which is far more intrusive into the "free" market than what China is presently doing.
It is nice to see, for once, that such a mandate actually has a grain of intelligence and thoughtfulness behind it, something that is all too often lacking. It is very, very ironic indeed that a government as draconian and reactionary as that of China would be one of the first to be open minded enough to evaluate and then embrace Open software (if, in fact, that is actually what they are doing).
Government bans on operating systems (Score:3)
Now comes this story. Even though it's a hoax, imagine if it were true. Only Red Star Linux may be used. Debian, Redhat, SuSE, Slackware may NOT be used. This would be a government deciding not what *kind* of software it would use, but what *specific* piece of software to use. Although every other government seems to be predominantly Microsoft based, none has ever mandated a specific operating system nationwide.
This is not freedom in *ANY* sense of the word. And any here who would be in favor of such a policy don't want the freedom they claim they do, but instead just want their pet OS to win, fair or foul.
Site License (Score:3)
Pretty big Site if you ask me. I think the reason for this was that chine had been using pirated copies and the Copyright laws there are not very tight. And like all Western companies MS saw a huge future market in China.
Hopefully they are seeing the light and dropping Windows. I believe the Chineese are smart people.
This is good and bad (Score:3)
On the downside, China is going to have problems developing an "entrepeneur economy" if the government dictates technology. "Use Linux not W2K" is OK, but what if they come down next and say "use MySQL not Oracle" or "use GTK not Qt"?
Smart - China wants to trump RedHat (Score:3)
So, as China industrializes, why should China let non-Chinese owned RedHat or TurboLinux own their HUGE market for new OS installs?
realistically, China needs a free OS. There are just too many people who will need low cost access, and too many government organizations that can't afford to license all of their illegal copies of Commercial software and apps.
It all fits. China will support linux, but only the version that is developed, branded, and offically supported by the CHinese government.
What happened to freedom? (Score:3)
Re:Red Flag Linux character support (Score:3)
Someone more qualified than I would have to give an assessment of where Unicode support currently stands in the various distributions.
--
Re:Red Flag Linux? (Score:3)
http://ccurrents.com/newstoday/99/09/01/news4.h
and then it confirms the story (Score:3)
Microsoft and Chinese officials on Thursday denied the report, which appeared in Wednesday's edition of the Yangcheng Evening News.
But a Ministry of Information Industry official, who declined to be identified, said the government was advocating that users bought domestic software.
Microsoft is reeling from a stream of negative publicity in China, fuelled by a vitriolic book written by its former Chinese general manager, Wu Shihong, who accuses her former employer of arrogance and insensitivity to China's needs.
A piracy lawsuit by Microsoft against a small local firm unleashed a nationalist backlash against the U.S. software giant. The suit was thrown out by a Chinese judge last month.
The state-run think tank developing Red Flag-Linux said government offices had expressed strong interest in scrapping Windows for Red Flag, citing security concerns as a chief reason. It's hard to tell which end is up in a autocracy that lacks a free press, but we can see that segments of the Chineese government look down on Windows for all the obvious reasons. See my other article, "low expectations from a command economy," for why I don't think China's 7.1 million internet users will make too big a difference anytime soon.
Bad for hardware manufacturers. (Score:3)
A wise move, for they will be able to keep lots of 486's in business. I think Bill Gates himself advised people not to upgrade to W2K until their next computer purchase. The thing ought to be bloated!
The interesting aspect is that this Red Flag distro will certainly not be kept within the gov't . As the chinese seem not to be very fond of purchasing software, we may well have a nation of 1 billion using mostly Linux in the near future.
Maybe there won't be a LinuxOne IPO at all!
-------------------------
BoneFlower, did you read the Moderator Guidelines? (Score:4)
1/6th of the world's population. Right. Who's figures? You gone out and counted them, right? Or are you depending on some published figure for China from a decade ago, then comparing it to the world population of today? Sorry, but that ain't worth a damn. Like with like, or don't bother.
Then, there's this "Government-only" stuff. Yeah. The Government supplies the general public with online documents in Klyx format, or KWord format, and the public -aren't- forced to use Linux. Right. Pull the other one. It's got bells on. That'd be like saying that the French don't -require- you to speak French in their country. They just make sure all official documents and published material is in French, making it impossible for people who don't speak the language to function. You don't have to demand at gunpoint to force someone to do something. You can simply make it impossible to function at anything more than at a very basic level, depending on others at every turn, any other way.
As for the moderators, why should they necessarily understand the "facts"? The Moderator's Guidelines are very clear on the matter. Moderating is NOT about whether you agree or disagree, but about whether the post might be of interest to others.
I've moderated up dozens of posts I personally thought were factually screwy. Why? Because they were still interesting, or still informative, and I believed them worth the effort of reading. My personal opinion on the facts contained therein were irrelevent, as they damn well should be.
I've also moderated down posts that I've personally agreed 100% with, for the same reason. Under the guidelines, they were the sorts of posts that merited the title of "flamebait", "troll", or "overrated". That I agreed, though, doesn't matter. That's not how moderation works here. RTFM! It's all there, -if- you read it.
The same is true of meta-moderation. Meta-moderation isn't about making your voice heard, or any other such nonsense. That's what posting is for! It's about deciding if the moderation is an accurate reflection on the value of the post to other reader. Whether you agree with the contents of the post or not DOESN'T MATTER.
Well well well what have we here... (Score:4)
Its the biggest communist country in the world, now before you moderate me down as flamebate, just hear me out... so there is unlikely to be much in the way of backlash from their citizens. (I mean nothing like if the US decided to ban an Operating system (ANY Operating system)). And now they will have the medias eye.
Esentially this could be bad for linux, for all the negative conitations China brings with it. (Ah, before we go any further, I am speaking generally. That particular view isn't one I share. I don't have anything against ANY culture or country (well, except Microsoft ;))).
However, it could be good, it definatly gives us some public relations stunts we can play with.
The largest country in the world runs on Linux, shouldn't you?
Linux doesn't scale well? ha! It serves 3 billion people well
Entire countries are adopting linux, is your business is being left behind?
The Chinese government doesn't trust Windows 2000. Why should you?
etc... etc... etc... (I realize some of these are half-truths, or worse, but what advertising isn't?. These are just examples)..
This could have negative sideeffects in respect to DOJ vs MS. MS has a bit more fodder now.
I think the best thing that will come out of this entire deal is better support for Chinese in Linux. You gotta admit, nothing like 3 billion customers to get you moving :) I can't think of a better OS to support foriegn large alphabets, with complete access to the source code, theres nothing you can't change.
Anyway, don't take this thing to extremes, its just news :)
Second time around (Score:5)
This time, Windows 2000 is to be banned, and "Red Flag Linux" is to be given to every computer user in China. (This would make Linux the number #2 OS in the world, by dint of China having more than 50% of the world's population.)
However, I can see a number of key problems with this story. "Red Flag" seems suspiciously similar to "Red Hat", and looks more like a student's play on words than a real product.
Then, there's the "banning" of Windows 2000. Why ban one Microsoft OS and no other? That doesn't make sense. If Linux is to be mandatory, it would make more sense to ban -ALL- other OS', at least those which could seriously threaten Linux' use. But, no, it's only a product which isn't even available yet which is being "banned".
I'm going to put this in the "I'll believe it if I see it" file, also known as the "Z" file. (It's at least two orders of magnitude less probable than "X" files, and you can fall asleep waiting for anything to happen.)
Reports are False! (Score:5)
It basically says that both Microsoft and the Govt of China both deny the story and that the newspaper (in China) that originally reported it has no evidence for the policy.
Chinese Government doesn't necessarily agree (Score:5)
For those of you who are posting kneejerk reactions without reading the article:
The story is posted by a Chinese newspaper, and we all know how informed our own media is... Maybe it's true; I'll believe it when I see it, that's all.
Do you really think... (Score:5)