2019/06/29: Things aren’t too rosy at the ‘Linux’ Foundation where Linus Torvalds is increasingly being marginalised (thanks in part to Microsoft-friendly media) and propped up to replace him are those who worked on Hyper-V (proprietary software for Windows) and similar Microsoft-centric projects at the Microsoft-occupied Novell
2018/10/24: Microsoft has always been a company by, of, and for developers. At this point in history, developers love open source."
Walli knows some people are worried that Steve Ballmer will return with his "Linux is cancer" rhetoric. But Ballmer's not coming back. Walli even quoted Microsoft's current CEO, Satya Nadella, "'Judge us by the action we have taken in the recent past, our actions today, and in the future.'"
And that includes how Microsoft is dealing with patents.
What we're seeing now is "a new world order with smart, creative people creating innovation at Microsoft with open source," Bergelt said.
What's happening now, Bergelt explained, is that legal development and collaboration are catching up with technical development and collaboration. They're now happening in parallel.
OIN's mission, Bergelt said, is to enable freedom of action and operation for vendors and users of Linux open-source technology. It does this through a patent non-aggression pact and licensing around the Linux system.
That's not to say you can run out and build an exFAT-based file system for your USB-drive tomorrow with no consequences. Only OIN members have a non-aggression pact with Microsoft. If you're not a member of the OIN, you still must license exFAT from Microsoft.
But there's nothing special about exFAT. The same is true of any Microsoft patented technology. If you're not an OIN member, you're not covered by its patent-protection pool.
Some people may ask, "Why is it so hard to say this patent is OK for this program?" But that's based on a fundamental misunderstanding of how software patents work. They describe a high-level view of how a program does a task.
"There is no one to one match between code and patent," Boehm explained.
2018-09-24: Google parent Alphabet and the other four dominant U.S. technology companies -- Apple, Amazon, Microsoft, and Facebook -- are fast becoming industrial giants. They spent a combined $80 billion in the last year on big-ticket physical assets, including manufacturing equipment and specialized tools for assembling iPhones and the powerful computers and undersea internet cables Facebook needs to fire up Instagram videos in a flash.
Thanks to this surge in spending -- up from $40 billion in 2015 -- they've joined the ranks of automakers, telephone companies, and oil drillers as the country's biggest spenders on capital goods, items including factories, heavy equipment, and real estate that are considered long-term investments.
Their combined outlay is about 10 times what GM spends annually on its plants, vehicle-assembly robots, and other materials. The splurge by tech companies is behind an upswing in capital-goods spending among big U.S. companies, which is seeing its fastest growth in years, according to a Credit Suisse analysis. The $80 billion tab also is a snapshot of why it's tough to unseat the tech giants.
How can a company hope to compete with Google's driverless cars when it spends $20 billion a year to ensure it has the best laser-guided sensors and computer chips? There are a lot of physical assets behind all those internet clouds.
Like the oil barons at the turn of the 20th century, the data barons are determined to extract as much as possible of a resource that's central to the economy of their time. The more information they can get to feed the algorithms that power their ad-targeting machines and product-recommendation engines, the better. In the absence of serious competition or (until Europe's recently introduced General Data Protection Regulation) serious legal constraints on the handling of personal data, they are going to keep undermining privacy in their push to know as much about their users as they possibly canrnrnTheir dominance is allowing them to play a dangerous and outsize role in our politics and culture. The web giants have helped undermine confidence in democracy by underestimating the threat posed by Russian trolls, Macedonian fake-news farms, and other purveyors of propaganda. Zuckerberg at first dismissed claims that disinformation on Facebook had influenced the 2016 election as "pretty crazy." But Facebook itself now says that between June 2015 and August 2017, as many as 126 million people may have seen content on the network that was created by a Russian troll farm.rnrnrnWhy haven't antitrust regulators blocked deals to promote competition? It's mainly because of a change in US antitrust philosophy in the 1980s, inspired by neoclassical economists and legal scholars at the University of Chicago. Before the shift, antitrust enforcers were wary of any deals that reinforced a company's dominant position. After it, they became more tolerant of such combinations, as long as prices for consumers didn't rise. This was just fine with internet companies, since most of their services were free anyway. Critics say trustbusters exercised too little scrutiny. "Just because the web companies offer products for free doesn't mean they should get a free pass," says Jonathan Kanter, an antitrust lawyer at Paul Weiss.rnrnthanks to their vast wealth, fining them for any transgressions won't diminish their power.rnrnOne radical solution would be to break them up, just as the US government splintered the dominant Standard Oil monopoly in the early 1900s. Some progressive advocacy groups in the US have been running online campaigns with slogans like "Facebook has too much power over our lives and democracy. It's time for us to take that power back," and calling on the FTC to force the social network to sell Instagram, WhatsApp, and Messenger to create competition.rnrnSo how to curb the power of the data barons? Rather than waiting for legal battles that may or may not foster more competition, we urgently need to find ways to bolster rivals. That means reducing the vast chasm between the amounts of information held by the web giants and the rest. Regulation can help here: Europe's new data privacy regime requires companies to hold people's data in machine-readable form and let them move it easily to other businesses if they want to. This "data portability" rule will allow startups to get hold of more data quickly.rnrnrnSome argue that we need to think much more boldly-and not just with the big internet companies in mind. Viktor Mayer-Sch195182nberger, a professor at the University of Oxford, has proposed what he calls a "progressive data-sharing mandate" that would apply to all businesses. This would require a company that has passed a certain level of market share (say, 10 percent) to share some data with other firms in its industry that ask for it. The data would be chosen at random and stripped of all personal identifiers. Intuitively, the idea makes sense: the closer a company gets to dominating its market, the more data it would have to share, making it easier for rivals to compete by building a better product.
Italian proponents of the use of free and open source software by public administrations are protesting a decision by the town of Pesaro to switch from using OpenOffice to a proprietary cloud-based office solution. They say the city has garbled the cost calculations and omitted a required software assessment study.
La notizia (anche con più dettagli) è che il Comune di Pesaro ha deciso di adottare Office365 di Microsoft, abbando...
2009/05/03: Microsoft Office 2007 SP2 claims support for ODF 1.1. With hard work and careful thinking, they have successfully achieved technical compliance but zero interoperability! MSO 2007sp2 won't read ODF 1.1 from any other existing application, and its ODF is only readable by..
When we get a resume, in Word, from job applicants, we put it in the hex editor and go right to the end to see what else they've been writing.
2018/7/20: Today, Google, Facebook, Microsoft, and Twitter joined to announce a new standards initiative called the Data Transfer Project, designed as a new way to move data between platforms. In a blog post, Google described the project as letting users "transfer data directly from one service to another, without needing to download and re-upload it."
The current version of the system supports data transfer for photos, mail, contacts, calendars, and tasks, drawing from publicly available APIs from Google, Microsoft, Twitter, Flickr, Instagram, Remember the Milk, and SmugMug. Many of those transfers could already be accomplished through other means, but participants hope the project will grow into a more robust and flexible alternative to conventional APIs.
In its own blog post, Microsoft called for more companies to sign onto the effort, adding that "portability and interoperability are central to cloud innovation and competition."
""The future of portability will need to be more inclusive, flexible, and open.""
The existing code for the project is available open-source on GitHub, along with a white paper describing its scope.
Much of the codebase consists of "adapters" that can translate proprietary APIs into an interoperable transfer, making Instagram data workable for Flickr and vice versa. Between those adapters, engineers have also built a system to encrypt the data in transit, issuing forward-secret keys for each transaction.
Notably, that system is focused on one-time transfers rather than the continuous interoperability enabled by many APIs.
"The future of portability will need to be more inclusive, flexible, and open," reads the white paper. "Our hope for this project is that it will enable a connection between any two public-facing product interfaces for importing and exporting data directly."
More than the software used in India is pirated. This is perfect context for large software product companies to strong-arm users to boost revenues
Facebook and Google are building an 8,000 mile fiber optic cable across the Pacific Ocean.
And how it could leapfrog Apple as the dev platform of choice.
Open Source is dominant on the desktop. But is that a consolation prize for missing what matters?
Financial documents, allegedly from car-share start-up Uber, suggest the firm is running at losses of several million dollars each quarter.
What role, if any, did science minister David Willetts take in helping Microsoft try to overturn government IT policy?
Have you ever tried hunting and pecking on a miniature keyboard that's been crammed onto a smartwatch's tiny display? Unless the tips of your fingers somehow resemble that of a stylus, you're in for a challenge. Interestingly enough, it's Microsoft that might have the most logical solution for...
La Cassazione d224 torto al colosso Hewlett-Packard. Ma il diritto al rimborso del sistema operativo c'232 solo se non si accetta (cliccando) la licenza d'uso
The news that Microsoft would be laying off up to 18,000 people this year - enough to populate a small town - came painfully swiftly.