What is Digg?76 Comments
- RyeBrye, on 10/12/2007, -8/+75Would have been funnier if it was in a .doc format.
- Phocion55, on 10/12/2007, -4/+33FUD = Fear, Uncertainty, Doubt
This is clearly none of the three, seeing how it's a tangible piece of evidence. - VhaidraU, on 10/12/2007, -4/+31It's not FUD if it's both documented and true.
- Phocion55, on 10/12/2007, -5/+31I would love to know how court evidence gets classified as "FUD". Please.....enlighten.
- redmaxx, on 10/12/2007, -6/+32@stirk
Nothing, just people that don't know about alternatives or don't know how to configure Acrobat not to be a pig. - Stirk, on 10/12/2007, -7/+31Forgive me for my ignorance, but what's wrong with pdf?
- duzytata, on 10/12/2007, -9/+33Just use foxit. You'll never want to use Adobe for a PDF file ever again.
http://www.foxitsoftware.com/pdf/rd_intro.php - Philluminati, on 10/12/2007, -21/+40***** PDF
- deadbaby, on 10/12/2007, -6/+23Actually these documents weren't previously accessible. I'm sure they were in the court record but the average person couldn't read them until they were recently leaked onto the Internet (along with many other court documents)
Now about your claim of FUD I am puzzled by your statement. This data is 100% from Microsoft. No one disputes that. It was admitted into court as evidence. FUD implies some negative spin being put on innocent data but in fact this data is raw, un-edited, evidence straight from Microsoft. If you don't like what it says, blame Microsoft, not the guy who posted the story. - schestowitz, on 10/12/2007, -6/+21To clarify, when Microsoft settled the case (Microsoft explicitly said it was afraid of all that stuff), the site was immediately shut down, without prior notice. The terms of the settlement are still undisclosed. The stubbornly domain denied access. Luckily, mirrors were grabbed and torrents went live, thanks to the Groklaw community. These memos were not meant to be public, but Conlin wanted to pressure Microsoft. Are they new? Yes. These are some of the latest documents which appeared before the site went ka-boom. The press therefore overlooked these. It is a PDF because it's the original source which wasn't covered anywhere else, yet.
FUD? No. Knowledge is power. And we deserve to know the truth.
Some weeks ago I submitted an item about Microsoft's stance on Office for Mac. The press then published items about the intent to shut down Office for Mac in 1997, and the use of Mac users for testing. It all started in Digg, which had a link to the PDF, with a summary. - fantasticFlan, on 10/12/2007, -3/+14Tangible email, when did this happen?
- Phocion55, on 10/12/2007, -3/+13Asking that question leads me to believe that you didn't even bother opening the document.
No one said with 100% certainty that it was "illegal"....but just read the first two lines of the document. "...without making it look like that we are doing anything bad." - baalzebub, on 10/12/2007, -7/+16use xpdf and run pdftotext on it...
i would post the article text but it is 9 pages long... - Wrathernaut, on 10/12/2007, -7/+16Linux + Evince
PDF just as fast as anything else. - coredump0x01, on 10/12/2007, -4/+13RedLion is just an MS apologist asshat, have a look at his submissions. http://digg.com/users/RedLion/news/submitted Not one of them lacks the word "Vista" Just block him, MS has billions of dollars to spend on advertising, We don't need it on Digg.
- deadbaby, on 10/12/2007, -8/+16Because Microsoft's "choke hold" on OEM's directly impacts Linux. If Microsoft, a convicted monopolist, is pressuring OEM's to ice out Linux they are subject to fines or further legal penalties. That being said, these documents are quite old and from what I can tell pre-date the anti-trust trial by at least 5-10 years. What I really want to see are new documents that shed some light on Microsoft's post-conviction OEM deals.
- lowerlogic, on 10/12/2007, -6/+14Why is this under News » Technology » Linux/Unix and not under News » Technology » Microsoft?
Could somebody show exactly where in the agreement the OEM gets penalised if it sells anything other than Windows? I can't see anything of the sort after quickly reading through it, I'm not good at understanding legal stuff. - fatdog789, on 10/12/2007, -2/+10Court documents are publicly accessible. You just have to go to a court house to access them.
The internet does not define accessibility. For sensitive documents in family law cases and some contract disputes, "publicly accessible" will never include internet access to those documents. There are safety reasons, legal reasons, public policy reasons, etc. - Phocion55, on 10/12/2007, -8/+16I'm sure Microsoft would find a way to say that anything short of exclusively selling Windows is a breach in contract.
@RedLion: Did you READ the document? The "truth" can be found in a REAL, TANGIBLE email. - williamdyer, on 10/12/2007, -7/+14Really? Got an url to where it's been for years?
- VhaidraU, on 10/12/2007, -6/+13RedLion, so we've figured out that the Red in your name is short for Redmond, but what is the LIon for? Maybe the battery type to give us the hint that you are powered by Redmond a.k.a. Microsoft?
- TheLoneWolf071, on 10/12/2007, -9/+16Raise your hand if this surprised you...
- radiofrequency, on 10/12/2007, -3/+9FUD=fear, uncertainy, doubt.
There's no uncertainty or doubt that Microsoft violated the law and continues to do so. The fear is that there are people willing to excuse a company who violates the law to curb choices in Operating Systems. - schestowitz, on 10/12/2007, -4/+10@ hackwrench:
The press does not care about Digg, but there's a hierarchy. From Digg it has immediately percolated onto several mid-tier Web sites such as various Mac news sites and blogs. Only later this was picked up by the press. And I didn't take credit for it. It's a friend who pointed this out and the lawyers at Iowa that did all the digging and put it on the Web. - sirhomer, on 10/12/2007, -3/+9PDF files is one of the major things Linux just gets right ;)
- schestowitz, on 10/12/2007, -3/+8To quote coredump0x01:
"RedLion is just an MS apologist asshat, have a look at his submissions. http://digg.com/users/RedLion/news/submitted Not one of them lacks the word "Vista" Just block him, MS has billions of dollars to spend on advertising, We don't need it on Digg." - Hardcase, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5@Pyite, you're wrong. Microsoft requireed that a particular computer line's part number include the Microsoft product to qualify for the discount. If the manufacturer created an identical computer with a different part number, then it could be excluded from the OEM licensing plan. Microsoft was clear, though, that this couldn't just be done by creating an internal part number that was different - the actual part number on the computer had to be different.
Thus, model 12345 would ship with Windows under an OEM license, but model 12346 would not. How hard is that? Actually, I can tell you how hard because I was involved in just this sort of planning at a large computer manufacturer in the mid 1990s and that's exactly what we did in order to ship computers with no operating system (many of our volume customers had their own licensing agreements with other companies) without having to pay for an unnecessary license. - jetsetgo, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5Seems microsoft has themselves quite the mole as of late.
- leha, on 10/12/2007, -7/+11Have you ever heard term "monopoly'? Do you know why it is bad for a free market and consumers? If not, please read some basic books on economy. It might be a surprise for you but "free market" does not mean that you can do whatever the hell you like, there are quite a few rules and limitations. Otherwise it would be an anarchy market that rips off an average Joe.
- bseay, on 10/12/2007, -2/+6by the way, I'm running several linux boxes; I'm no fanboy.
- bseay, on 10/12/2007, -4/+7Looks like this guy was just doing his job ... I've got no problem with that.
- scabbers, on 10/12/2007, -3/+6His website made my eyeballs burst.
- DelMonte, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3Are you being sarcastic? Email existed in 1965, and was already in use on the Arpanet (the internet ancestor) in 1969.
- fatdog789, on 10/12/2007, -6/+7I agree. I see nothing suggesting that the practice was illegal. Accusing a company of illegal activity can be construed as libel, so a claim like that needs solid evidence to back it up.
Note: Just wanting it to be true isn't enough. - elmofrosti, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1These aren't free choices. The problem isn't monopolies. It is monopolization. There's a difference. A monopoly can exist naturally in an economy. Monopolization is an intent to take over a market through anticompetitive practices. This is what is bad for the consumer and the economy. Many of the Antitrust cases may seem counterintuitive but they are generally well reasoned and most countries that initially laughed at the US for the Sherman and Clayton Acts have enacted similar and even tougher Antitrust laws. The fact of the matter is that the OEM's were being forced by Microsoft into doing something that was not necessarily in their best interest out of fear of reprisal. That is anticompetitive behavior.
- michelrose, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Wow! Seems the server is down.
- generalloy, on 10/12/2007, -3/+4Yes, they are real. Google "Comes vs Microsoft iowa"
- jthill, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0@saturn5: You know, I think "opposing" isn't quite descriptive enough.
I think that, before people start wanting to block it, a point of view has to include talk-radio-quality rhetoric. Characterization. Strawmen. False premises. Imputing motive. Raw ignorance. Things like that. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Yes I am being sarcastic, well done. After the outstanding discussion on PDF files I thought to add another outstanding discussion....
- RoskMachine, on 10/12/2007, -4/+4@ leha
That's a bunch of nonsense, I'm afraid. Monopolies have literally never come about within the free market. In fact, government is the primary creator of monopolies--and the vast majority of companies persecuted by anti-trust regulators were in fact "dominating" the market by making themselves far more efficient than their competitors. The following quote is representative of anti-trust non-logic:
"In what is perhaps the best example of nonsensical double-talk in antitrust history, in 1944 Judge Learned Hand found Alcoa guilty of "monopolizing" the virgin ingot aluminum market by employing "superior skill and foresight" which the judge feared had "forestalled" competition by those businesses with less skill and foresight. He condemned Alcoa for being extremely adept at correctly anticipating market demand for its product and then supplying that demand, to the "exclusion" of its less efficient competitors.
Alcoa "embraced every new opportunity" with a "great" organization, said the judge, and manned the organization with "elite business personnel." It was obvious to the confused and befuddled Judge Hand that gaining market share through entrepreneurial excellence should be illegal."
That's from this article: http://www.mises.org/story/436 - flatfish, on 10/12/2007, -10/+10Microsoft have certainly been behind numerous dirty tricks campaigns over the years, (DrDos, It's not done till Lotus won't run, etc) but Roy Schestowitz has taken Microsoft bashing to a new level. Schestowitz has single handedly turned comp.os.linux.advocacy from a Linux advocacy group into a Microsoft/Windows hate group. It's a shame he doesn't put his copious amounts of free time toward a better cause, like advocating Linux for example.
- benitojuarez, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Suprisingly PDF files open up real quick in IE7 on Vista. I know when I tried opening a pdf within ie6 on windows xp it wasnt uncommon to wait up to 5 minutes for the window to unfreeze and the page to load.
I have acrobat reader 8 installed, the free version, not the full paid version. - baalzebub, on 10/12/2007, -3/+2it is not "just a company" it is always someone within the company in control...
- oliofactor, on 10/12/2007, -3/+2@leha
Actually leha the word free does mean do what ever the hell you want. Maybe you should read a few economic books before you start swinging your crazy "I lurned it in 8th grade" economics. Your government regulations you speak so highly of are increasing the cost of doing business for everyone, and therefor harms everyone. Monopolys can and do occur, but if you think about it who perpetuates these organizations? Certainly not lobbyist groups pushing for regulation in their favor. ""GASP"" but its cool man live in your own little word. - Koray, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1I was going to say something alone those lines. It's just comforting to know the people on the administrative end of the company that has their product on most government computers worldwide can't be arsed add the "ea e" to please.
- Tarl, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0LOL. you sir, win the award!! of being clueless...
- hackwrench, on 10/12/2007, -6/+4"It all started in Digg
Shestowitz, I think you overrate your importance. The press didn't have to go to Digg to access the documents. They did have to concern themselves with how they presented the story, however, and that is sufficient to explain your beating them to release. - nunbot, on 10/12/2007, -11/+9i'll just lower my thumb :)
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -2/+0Wow I didn't know they had email in 1994!
- spyrochaete, on 10/12/2007, -5/+3This would be FUD if the submitter said it was a recent memo, but the title just says it is newly leaked. Chances are Microsoft has reformed this policy a zillion times in the past 13 years so it's no longer relevant.
-
Show 51 - 74 of 74 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is