[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       kde
Subject:    RE: How about a IE clone for Linux?
From:       "Timothy R. Butler" <kde () uninetsolutions ! com>
Date:       2000-03-20 1:17:56
[Download RAW message or body]

Frank,
  I've been in the industry for years, so I understand how these things
work. I disagree with you below, were you write just like any open source
zealot (I mean this in the nicest way, because many times I'm an open source
zealot too).

> >   I must disagree with you. (1) Microsoft, nor Apple, nor most reputable
>
> The US federal government and I believe it is 19 state governments very
> strongly disagree with your usage of the word reputable.

  Reputable and completely honest are different in my book. Microsoft is
reputable because they are (1) large and well known, (2) you know Microsoft
(or Apple) won't have Trojan Horses, Viruses, etc. in their software, (3)
stand behind their product with a 60-day money back guarantee. And, by the
way, I'm a proud resident of a state who isn't in the suite (Missouri, the
Show-me state). If you like what the government is doing, read J. Jackson's
analysis of the Linux OS.


> I word process a file on a later machine that had a later version of Win
> Word I can not take that file back to the old laptop unless I save it in
> an old format.  This is a process that is easily done but being a pain
> in the butt is many times overlooked.

  That is just necessary evil, you might say. I don't like fooling with
legacy X programs (rather use KDE apps, of course), but I just have to. I'd
rather not have to save stuff for WordPerfect, but I have to. I bet KWord
will do the same thing 5 years from now.

>
> I agree with you in your assessment of what people want and that MS is
> catering to their desires. Where I disagree with you is not in what MS

  And, IMO, that is more important than anything else. If there was an open
source tractor trailer or a car with an EULA, most people would by the car
just because they don't want to fool with the 16 wheeler.

> does in that direction but in their capacity as a agent of thought
> control. That is MS along with all other shrink wrapped software
> manufactures owners all software that has ever been produced. You only
> rent it. This was a non issue before the internet. Now it is a major

  That isn't completely true. You don't rent it, you license it. If the
license says you have the right to use it for as long as you want, you can
use it for as long as you want, etc. When Dell licenses hard drive
technologies from IBM, they can use it under the terms of the license, it's
no different with software.

> issue. If the software manufacture owns the software they have the right
> to change it at will. Just as if you went to a rental car agent and
> rented a car. The rental car company would have the right to change the
> car you rent for another if and when they desire without your
> permission. In short the rental car company owners the car and they can
> do what they damn well please with it. This is not like a book where

   Once again it's like I said above. Shrink wrap software is kinda like a
condo, you own the right to the condo, you can paint the inside, they can't
move it or change the inside, but you still have to follow some rules.
Unless you agree to let Microsoft do what ever they want in the license
agreement, doing so would be an offence on their part. The licensee and the
licensor each have responsibilities, and that is just the way it is.

> when you buy it you own the book and can do what you want wit it
> provided you do not publish additional copies. You can write in the
> margins. You can tare pages out. You can burn it if you want. It is your
> book to do with as you please. Not so with shrink wrapped software. A
> good question with shrink wrapped software is if the software
> manufacture owns the software who owns the data entered in to the
> software? You you own it or does the software manufacture? Since the
> software manufacture has the right to change it at will do they have the
> right to copy your data at will? Do not be complacent about this item of
> ownership. Just because they do not do anything with you and your system
> that does not diminish their rights to do such if they are actively
> doing it to others.

  Like I said, above they can't just intrude, unless it is something I
agreed to. I could sue the pants off of 'em if they intrude without that
being something they are allowed to do under the EULA.

> This issue of ownership is what amazes me about the people who want to
> use Netscape and IE as browser. Observe the word want which implies a
> desire to do such. This does not imply need where you may not have a
> choice. One major positives about the GPU license is it takes away the
> software companies rights to do with your computer whatever the software
> company damn well pleases whenever they decide to do such and gives you
> a recourse to stop such action and demand retribution if they do such.

  Don't think I don't like the GPL. I conversed with RMS himself until every
last detail met his idea of GPL compliance (and it was different than my
idea), that is how committed my company is to open source. However, I'm not
naive either, I won't stand to work with a sub-par browser just to say I'm
only using open source. I want what works best, and for me (as long as I
don't become a conspiracy theorist) is going to be MSIE for web browsing.

> This means that Netscape and IE can be changed, modified, up dated ,
> and/or your usage denied at any point in time and three is nothing -
> repeat nothing you can do about it.  This is rented software. It is not
> your property.

  Vote with your usage. I guarantee that probably 50-75% of knowledgeable IT
people would quit using MSIE if it updated itself. Look at the uproar Real
Networks caused with RealJukebox. So much that the changed their act in
_one_week_.

  -Tim

-----------------------------------------------------------------
Timothy R. Butler                              Universal Networks
Information Tech. Consultant    Christian Web Services Since 1996
ICQ #12495932 AIM: Uninettm       An Authorized IPSwitch Reseller
tbutler@uninetsolutions.com        http://www.uninetsolutions.com
===================== "Solutions that Work" =====================




>
> Hope this helps further clarify the issue.
> Frank
> --  Send posts to:  kde@lists.netcentral.net  Send all commands
> to:  kde-request@lists.netcentral.net   Put your command in the
> SUBJECT of the message:    "subscribe", "unsubscribe", "set
> digest on", or "set digest off" PLEASE READ THE ARCHIVED MESSAGES
> AT http://lists.kde.org/ BEFORE POSTING
> **********************************************************************
> This list is from your pals at NetCentral <http://www.netcentral.net/>
>

-- 
Send posts to:  kde@lists.netcentral.net
 Send all commands to:  kde-request@lists.netcentral.net
  Put your command in the SUBJECT of the message:
   "subscribe", "unsubscribe", "set digest on", or "set digest off"
PLEASE READ THE ARCHIVED MESSAGES AT http://lists.kde.org/ BEFORE POSTING
**********************************************************************
This list is from your pals at NetCentral <http://www.netcentral.net/>

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]