-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
____/ Homer on Monday 07 Sep 2009 23:09 : \____
> Verily I say unto thee, that Roy Schestowitz spake thusly:
>> ____/ Marti van Lin on Monday 07 Sep 2009 14:40 : \____
>>> Thanks, Miguel de Icaza, for making the choice so easy :-p
>> We need GNOME too. I still use it sometimes. GNOME is not Miguel.
> Yes, if we walk away from Gnome, then Microsoft Evangelists like Icaza
> win, and Gnome becomes just more MS "IP". Better to stay and fight, to
> discourage the spread of the Microsoft disease... at least in terms of
> campaigning. That doesn't mean I want to use it in the interim though.
Here's an E-mail that I got some days ago (on the same topic):
"I see that you were an avid SuSE fan! So was I. My first Linux distro was RH5.0. In Sept of
1998 I switched to SuSE and purchased 22 boxed sets. Then Novell bought them. I was on the SuSE
UseNet newsgroup, which Novel took over, and one of the first messages they posted was that SuSE
owners would, from then on, be required to get written permission, from a lady whose name I can't
remember anymore, IF you wanted to create archival copies of your installation. I posted a
message on the newsgroup reminding them of the terms of the GPL and how their new requirement
was a breech of contract. That started a firestorm. Even then, as now, there were folks (I
suspect Novell employees) who attacked anyone who supported the GPL. They twisted the meaning of
the four freedoms in ways I didn't think a logical person could do in order to justify Novell's
actions. Novell backed down after "Mark" (who posted the original msg) consulted "someone" (I
suspect a Novell attorney) and recanted the new rule. But, I could see the handwriting on the
wall and I decided to look for more GPL-greener pastures. History bore my suspicions out.
Novell then bought Ximian and de Icaza. That gave them control over GNOME, Evolution and MONO.
I believe that de Icaza is and always has been an MS mole. I believe he became one in 1999 when
he was invited, along with his partner Nate, to come to Redmond and talk about a job. MS
couldn't hire him as an employee because he had only a student visa, but I suspect they hired him
as a PAID consultant operating out of his Mexican home, and he's been doing his best to infect
Linux with MS IP every since.
"Within a couple years Novell and MS signed their infamous "agreement" and Novell started paying
MS a royalty for each copy of SLES sold. It's like a jail-house confession where the person
says "I confess, HE did it!". For $300M Novell "admits" that Linux contains MS IP. Then they
proceed to do an end-run around the GPL by dividing FOSS developers into two groups, those who
contribute to the SLES and those who do not. To the former MS grants "immunity" from future MS
lawsuits, but not to the latter. This agreement adds a "right" to some FOSS coders but NOT the
others. The GPL strictly forbids this, because all recipients of GPL code should enjoy ALL the
right of the GPL, so legally, IMO, Novell is not allowed to distribute GPL software. But, no
one in the FSF or other Linux organizations with any clout has the courage to call Novell out on
it. Just the contrary, they give tacit approval of the deal!
I was stunned when the Ubuntu Technical Board voted, on June 29th, 2009, to make future releases
of the Ubuntu desktop remix DEPENDENT upon MONO. That would give Ubuntu TWO desktop APIs (GTK2
& MONO) but it needs only one. My suspicions are that the next step would be to either replace
the GTK API with MONO's and create Ubuntu's desktop ENTIRELY out of MONO, using the gui parts of
MONO, or to weave GTK and MONO together in such a way that MONO's operation is not impaired but
it cannot be removed without wiping out GTK and the DE at the same time. Luckily, it was
revealed in mid July that contrary to the clams of MONO proponents, and Microsoft's "Promise",
the ECMA 334 & 335 standard applied ONLY to C# and the CLI, but NOT to the GUI parts of MONO.
As I said before, either de Icaza was caught in a lie or he was caught with his pants down,
because he and his MONO acolytes had been assuring us that MONO was TOTALLY SAFE from MS IP
contamination. I cannot see him NOT knowing the difference, considering that he has been working
hand in hand with Microsoft developers and management for nearly ten years as he recreated .NET
~~ Best of wishes
"99http://Schestowitz.com | Free as in Free Beer | PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
Load average (/proc/loadavg): 0.28 0.37 0.47 1/415 23558
http://iuron.com - semantic search engine project initiative
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----