| ActiveMac | Anonymous | Create a User | Reviews | News | Forums | Advertise |
|
|
|
User Controls |
|
New User |
|
Login |
|
Edit/View My Profile |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ActiveMac |
|
Articles |
|
Forums |
|
Links |
|
News |
|
News Search |
|
Reviews |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
News Centers |
|
Windows/Microsoft |
|
DVD |
|
ActiveHardware |
|
Xbox |
|
MaINTosh |
|
News Search |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ANet Chats |
|
The Lobby |
|
Special Events Room |
|
Developer's Lounge |
|
XBox Chat |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ's |
|
Windows 98/98 SE |
|
Windows 2000 |
|
Windows Me |
|
Windows "Whistler" XP |
|
Windows CE |
|
Internet Explorer 6 |
|
Internet Explorer 5 |
|
Xbox |
|
DirectX |
|
DVD's |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TopTechTips |
|
Registry Tips |
|
Windows 95/98 |
|
Windows 2000 |
|
Internet Explorer 4 |
|
Internet Explorer 5 |
|
Windows NT Tips |
|
Program Tips |
|
Easter Eggs |
|
Hardware |
|
DVD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Latest Reviews |
|
Applications |
|
Microsoft Windows XP Professional |
|
Norton SystemWorks 2002 |
|
|
|
Hardware |
|
Intel Personal Audio Player 3000 |
|
Microsoft Wireless IntelliMouse Explorer |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Site News/Info |
|
About This Site |
|
Affiliates |
|
ANet Forums |
|
Contact Us |
|
Default Home Page |
|
Link To Us |
|
Links |
|
Member Pages |
|
Site Search |
|
Awards |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Credits |
 |
Microsoft's secret technology in danger! | |
|
||
| Time: 00:13 EST/05:13 GMT | News Source: ZDNet | Posted By: Kenneth van Surksum | ||
|
This one was too rich to pass up. Wednesday in an EU antitrust court, Microsoft lawyer Ian Forrester was arguing that the EU's record fine and antitrust ruling should be overturned. During the opening statements he complained: "[The decision] condemns a company for not saying yes to a competitor who requests a huge amount of valuable, secret future technology. And the remedy is to help anyone with an interest build a replica, a functional equivalent." I want to know what all this secret technology is! I mean, are we talking cold fusion here, or is it that code that makes Google Desktop Search crash when you use IE7b2? Excuse me Mr. Forrester but nobody is trying to (God forbid) build a replica of Windows here. | ||
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 1 through 25 of 319 Last | Next |
The time now is
10:38:47 PM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
| #1 By 5912 (62.58.60.27) at 4/27/2006 2:29:48 AM |
| More fodder for MS's cheerleaders. Bring it on.. |
| #2 By 15406 (216.191.227.68) at 4/27/2006 8:47:12 AM |
| Nothing new here. It's one of MS' usual tricks. MS should be allowed to act however it pleases or else innovation itself is in mortal danger! After all, what's good for MS is good for the US/World/Universe. |
| #3 By 13030 (198.22.121.110) at 4/27/2006 10:34:35 AM |
| Danger, Will Robinson! |
| #4 By 32132 (64.180.219.241) at 4/27/2006 11:05:33 AM |
| Stealing intellectual property and hating Microsoft are the 2 commandments of the OSS movement. |
| #5 By 12071 (203.185.215.149) at 4/27/2006 10:49:44 PM |
|
#5 "The Samba project is explicitly about building a replica of Windows"
No-one spreads FUD like a Microsoft fanboy. http://us4.samba.org/samba/docs/FAQ/ "Samba is a suite of programs that enables interoperability between Linux/Unix servers and Windows clients." Go look up the definition of the word in bold - it's what the EU case is all about, not stealing their secret sauce, or building a Windows replica, or killing innovation or whatever else Microsoft will try and make you believe with their propaganda PR machine. |
| #6 By 32132 (64.180.219.241) at 4/28/2006 1:50:05 AM |
|
"Samba was originally developed for Unix by Andrew Tridgell at the Australian National University, originally by reverse-engineering the protocol used by DEC PATHWORKS server software using a packet sniffer. Tridgell later discovered that the protocol was largely identical to that used by other network server systems, including Microsoft's LAN Manager software, and he decided to focus on Microsoft network compatibility after that."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samba_software Reverse engineer. Steal other peoples ideas. Never invent your own. OSS all the way. http://samba.org/ftp/tridge/misc/french_cafe.txt In Tridgells own words: "I call this method the "French Cafe technique". Imagine you wanted to learn French, and there were no books, courses etc available to teach you. You might decide to learn by flying to France and sitting in a French Cafe and just listening to the conversations around you. You take copious notes on what the customers say to the waiter and what food arrives. That way you eventually learn the words for "bread", "coffee" etc. We use the same technique to learn about protocol additions that Microsoft makes. We use a network sniffer to listen in on conversations between Microsoft clients and servers and over time we learn the "words" for "file size", "datestamp" as we observe what is sent for each query." ... "Now imagine using all of the above techniques (plus some other similar techniques I have not gone into here) over a period of 12 years. Thats how Samba was written." Imagine spending those 12 years inventing something new instead of just stealing from Microsoft! Oh ... right. Not the OSS way. This post was edited by NotParker on Friday, April 28, 2006 at 01:56. |
| #7 By 12071 (203.206.253.53) at 4/28/2006 8:51:54 AM |
|
#7 Did you at any stage of looking up and reading that fantastic OSS site that you like to quote from on quite a regular basis (Wikipedia) pause and think that the reason a protocol had to be reverse engineered is because it was proprietary and there was no way to interoperate with the said system? I'll let you read http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reverse_engineer yourself but I'll leave you with a famous reverse engineering feat that you should be well aware of as without it you more than likely wouldn't be using the computer you are right now - yes, reverse engineering the BIOS. Somehow I can't see you complaining too much about that one!
"Steal other peoples ideas. Never invent your own." You're right, OSS has only achieved 50% of what Microsoft do, they should also buy companies out to achieve the other 50%! "Imagine spending those 12 years inventing something new instead of just stealing from Microsoft!" Exactly - 12 years of many people's work could have been saved if Microsoft was ever interested in interoperability like they make out to be! They weren't and aren't, so people have to do their best to interoperate with Microsoft by the means described in your quotes. Samba has absolutely no interest in creating a Windows clone - they simply want to enable users of other OS to interoperate with Microsoft's OS. But I can see why you would have an issue with that. After all, if really bad when things are open and users are given options and freedoms. It's much better to lock them in where you can keep tabs. |
| #8 By 32132 (64.180.219.241) at 4/28/2006 2:28:05 PM |
|
#8 Come on Kabuki boy. You lost this one big time.
Samba is about stealing. Instead of inventing client software and a new protocol that works on Windows PC's, they steal it. Why not invent a better protocol? Why steal an existing one? |
| #9 By 12071 (203.206.253.53) at 4/29/2006 4:10:19 AM |
|
#9 "Why not invent a better protocol? Why steal an existing one?"
INTEROPERABILITY!!!!! Same reason why the BIOS was reverse engineered. Did you miss that one? #10 "The eventual goal, of course, it to completely mimic a Windows NT Domain Controller." for the purposes of INTEROPERABILITY!!!!! Yes, you are a "Microsoft fanboy spreading FUD" and you know it. You even equated a Windows NT Domain Controller to a Windows server! Parkkker at least is a nutcase, what's your excuse for the FUD? |
| #10 By 47203 (60.224.176.251) at 4/29/2006 7:00:40 AM |
| #10 - Mimicing something is not the same as duplicating something. |
| #11 By 32132 (64.180.219.241) at 4/29/2006 2:01:27 PM |
|
#9 "INTEROPERABILITY!!!!!"
You are so ignorant. There were many options for PC / Unix interoperability. In fact, PATHWORKS from Digital was one. It worked pretty good. There were various NFS clients available. There was no need to steal Microsofts technology. However, the goal of Samba and most open source is to undercut Microsoft by stealing their ideas. #12 "Mimicing something is not the same as duplicating something" Sure it is in this case. |
| #12 By 17996 (66.235.19.95) at 4/29/2006 6:46:01 PM |
| GDS crashes in IE7b2 because it grovels in private IE data structures. These are undocumented and as such, subject to change between versions. GDS assumes that they aren't going to change and thus crashes. |
| #13 By 17996 (66.235.19.95) at 4/29/2006 6:52:26 PM |
|
#8/#11 - Samba wouldn't need to reverse-engineer/clone Microsoft's networking protocols in order to interoperate. They could create their own server, their own protocol, and then *write the necessary client software for Windows to connect to their servers*. Novell did this--heck, Windows even used to come with the software to connect to Novell servers.
There's no reason why they had to fool a Windows client OS into thinking it was talking to a Microsoft server. Heaven forbid they need to distribute some software to client computers in order for them to talk to their servers! |
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 1 through 25 of 319 Last | Next |
The time now is
10:38:47 PM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
