Posts Tagged ‘business’

Nokia To Acquire Trolltech

Monday, January 28th, 2008

From OSNews:

Trolltech, the originator of Qt, which forms the basis of the Linux KDE desktop environment, is being acquired by Nokia, the world’s number-one mobile phone vendor. Nokia expects its acquisition of Trolltech to accelerate its cross-platform software strategy for mobile devices and desktop applications, and to enhance its Internet services business. The original press release is also available. Update: “We will continue to actively develop Qt and Qtopia. We also want to underline that we will continue to support the open source community by continuing to release these technologies under the GPL.”

Some gnomies are already starting to panic. What will happen to Maemo? Has Symbian reason to panic too? ;-)

Was this move motivated by Android ?

RIAA mafia wants you to pay your music multiple times

Sunday, December 30th, 2007

A citizen of USA is being sued by the RIAA for ripping CDs in order to play them in the computer.

This opens a really stupid discussion. This is my point of view as a consumer.

The music industry still wants to run their old business model. They want to charge you for expensive CDs. I haven’t bought many CDs since long time. The reasons are simple: I don’t have a CD player, and I don’t listen CDs on the TV/DVD player because I want to make playlists out of many artists and styles and not just loop over 2 good songs and 10 bad ones. Then I want to go walking and bring that playlist with me. To the car, etc.

The usual understanding of CD license model is “private use”. That means I can play it 10.000 times or as much as I want. However, because the reason above, people don’t want CDs. And because the RIAA don’t sell CDs, and they are years late (and also incompetent) to get into the digital market business, the solution is to (as usual) exploit the legal system, and try to change it so the user will pay for every song for every medium. So if you want to listen a song in your car radio, you have to pay for it again.

What this comment mentions is interesting:

Uh oh, George Bush better watch out! The Beatles have never released iTunes tracks… yet, according to his interview here. He’s got them on his iPod. I wonder if the RIAA will go after him next?

There is nothing you can do. The RIAA already as been sued for acting like a mafia/criminal organization but the end of the digital rights war is far away, and everything that happens today will mostly only affect our children’s. We are already screwed up and will have to live with crap for some years.

Not buying RIAA (and friends) albums is an option. I have to admit that most of the music I like is still under RIAA control. You can find those using the RIAA radar.

I own a good bunch of CDs. But as they are not a good investment because I would need to pay for the music again now that I don’t listen to CD media I am not buying more CDs. I have to think (or rethink) my music strategy for the next years. Perhaps start looking in the top 100 RIAA-free albums? or just switch to realtime internet radio?

Darl McBride interview

Tuesday, September 11th, 2007

Interesting interview to the most hated man in software, the CEO and president of the litigation and former software company SCO, Darl McBride.

Best quote:

Then in the “excluded assets” it says, “excluding copyrights and patents.” Well, that’s the thing that never made sense. So when I first hired on (at) the company, we had intellectual property attorneys look at that, and they said, “This makes no sense.” You can’t buy software without the copyright. It’s like buying a book without the words. It doesn’t make any sense at all….

What are millions of users doing with proprietary software? Buying licenses. Buying “some rights” (to use, for example), not the copyright. When you buy a book. It comes with the words, but you don’t get the copyright.

Even with free software, you get a super-combo of rights which allow you to do anything except restricting those rights to someone. But still you don’t get the copyright ;-).

Preguntas y Respuestas en el caso Microsoft-Gobierno de Chile

Monday, July 30th, 2007

Usuarios chilenos se oponen enérgicamente a acuerdo entre el Gobierno y Microsoft

Tuesday, July 24th, 2007

En el iBlog de emol.com ha aparecido un artículo sobre como ha reaccionado la ciudadanía al tema Microsoft-Gobierno (el cual comenté aquí).

Espacios virtuales han plasmado el total rechazo a la firma del documento al que han calificado como una venta de los ciudadanos chilenos a la multinacional.

Lo mejor, la imagen que apareció en elantro.cl:

Image Hosted by ImageShack.us
Shot at 2007-07-24

ACTI (o sus miembros) comienza(n) a sembrar miedo

Tuesday, July 17th, 2007

(El Mercurio ):

Acuerdos internacionales: Neutralidad tecnológica en riesgo ante proyecto de diputados

La Asociación Chilena de Empresas de Tecnologías de la Información (ACTI) advirtió los riesgos que implica el acuerdo alcanzado en la Cámara de Diputados, durante la semana >pasada, que solicita a la Presidenta de la República disponer la implementación en las oficinas de la Administración del Estado de software libres en sus sistemas informáticos.>

La medida, que se haría extensiva a todos los establecimientos educacionales del país, iría contra “los acuerdos internacionales que Chile posee referente a neutralidad tecnológica, e iría en contra de lo que es la tendencia mundial en la materia”, aseguró Raúl Ciudad, presidente de la ACTI.

Para Ciudad, la neutralidad tecnológica impulsa la libre competencia que, con una adecuada protección a los derechos de propiedad intelectual, estimula la inversión en >investigación y desarrollo, la innovación, la creación de empleos de alto valor agregado y bien remunerados y la generación de impuestos, entre otras situaciones.

El asesor jurídico de ACTI, Rodrigo Rojas, aseguró que la iniciativa de los diputados “podría violar garantías constitucionales, tales como el principio de igualdad ante la ley y el de no discriminación”.

El termino “neutralidad tecnológica” es un termino que salió de los promotores del software libre.

La implementación de software libre por parte del Estado no viola ninguna garantía constitucional:

  • El software libre lo puede proveer cualquier empresa. Fomenta la competencia y la economía local.
  • El que los ciudadanos requieran softwares de ciertas compañias, como Microsoft, Adobe para acceder a datos públicos (cosa que sucede hoy) si es una violación a estas garantías.
  • ¿ Vamos a empezar con FUD criollo haciendo mención a temas como propiedad intelectual e investigación o desarrollo ?

Hoy en día la industria tiene las siguientes características:

  • No hay competencia. Solo un par de proveedores. Entre ellos Microsoft (miembro de la ACTI)
  • El dinero en soporte se lo lleva la industria extranjera
  • No hay respeto por los estándares abiertos. Datos del Estado son almacenados en formatos proprietarios que requieren de pago de licencias para ser vistos por un ciudadano (discriminación). Los datos del estado requieren el uso de los sistemas de los proveedores mencionados anteriormente.
  • El software libre estimula el respeto por los estándares abiertos, la no discriminación de plataforma tecnológica y la no discriminación al soporte e industria local.
  • El software libre fomenta la investigación universitaria y la generación de proyectos. Vean a la Unión Europea.
  • El software libre esta basado en la idea del copyright, con licencias permisivas por parte de los dueños del copyright.

A continuación les anuncio la estrategia que los lobbystas de las corporaciones utilizarán para expander miedo y terror ante nuestros parlamentarios:

  • Utilizarán la palabra “propiedad intelectual” en vez de “derechos de autor” para meter en un solo saco patentes, copyright y patatas fritas, para expander el miedo y duda de que el software libre no respeta la propiedad intelectual. Por supuesto, jamás será mencionado un solo caso de violaciones de copyright de corporaciones que perjudican a los autores de software libre.
  • Que el software libre causará desempleo y menos impuestos. Claro, seguramente el tener a una corporación extranjera con un call-center en Guatemala dando soporte y llevandose las ganancias fuera perjudicará menos el empleo que si muchas pymes locales dan soporte a software libre en forma local. LinuxCenter es un buen ejemplo ( y es miembro de la ACTI ).

En cierta forma esto es resultado de lo mal que Roberto Sepúlveda abordo el tema, centrándolo en un tema de costos. En un post anterior hice mención de como el proyecto del diputado Navarro, centrado en la neutralidad tecnológica (que coincidencia, la misma palabra de la que se quiere apropiar la ACTI), es una razón con mas peso a nivel de país y democracia que el tema costos (que es una concecuencia, no una razón).

Update: La noticia está en también en Fayerwayer.

Some quotes from the Microsoft patent FUD

Tuesday, May 15th, 2007

There has been soime noise around an article in Fortune Magazine where Microsoft says “Linux infringes intellectual property”.

This FUD has always a especial characteristic:

  • They talk about “intellectual property”, not about patents or copyright, trying to create confusion.

This FUD strategy is lead by their lawyer Horacio Gutierrez. Then they are able to say things like “Opensource has high quality because it contains Microsoft intellectual property”. As they mixed patents and copyright, this can lead people to think open source has copied Microsoft code into their programs, instead of the real fact: U.S. patent system is screwed and every obvious concept or idea is patented (like the double click of a mouse).

This is a very dirty game. The quality of the software is not very determined by the patents you implement, but how the code is implemented. Microsoft products are a good example: Lot of obvious patents (most of them invalid, as they file so many that they end patenting “intellectual property” from other people) but horrible quality.

Open source software contains no code from Microsoft nor other proprietary company. This is easy to check: the code is open and available. You can’t say the same about Microsoft. Do they include open source software illegally in their products? Nobody knows. The source code is not available. This could be used as a FUD weapon, if the community would be interested in playing dirty games, of course.

Some quotes from the noise generated in the press:

From Is Microsoft Still Just Posturing Over Open Source?:

For now, though, the most to do is continue to say “we’ll see.” Microsoft is still continuing to say things without putting court filings where its mouth is.

From Open-source users, companies scoff at Microsoft threats:

“Microsoft is certainly not the only owner of patents in this area, and perhaps not even the owner of the largest number of patents in these areas,” he said. “Microsoft will need to be careful what it starts, given that it cannot know where this will end.”

Lindsay, Zemlin and others also said they believe Microsoft is exploiting the patent system in the U.S. to buy time as it tries to compete in an industry where it is no longer a thought leader.

“It’s just like with SCO Group — when they no longer had a product to sell, it started suing people,” he said. “It looks like Microsoft is throwing in the towel on trying to be innovative.”

From Microsoft details patent breaches:

Open-source proponents are frustrated by Microsoft’s repeated allusions to patent violations because “they never say what patents being violated, never make any assertions, never put the evidence out there,” said Larry Augustin, a technology startup investor who launched SourceForge.net, a prominent open-source development site, in 1999.

If Microsoft were to start suing, it could also kick off a patent war on a grand scale. An organization called the Open Innovation Network, funded by IBM Corp., Red Hat Inc. and others, has amassed a vast number of software patents. In the event of a Microsoft lawsuit against open source companies or customers, the OIN would retaliate in kind.

“We believe it’s highly likely that Microsoft would infringe some of our patents,” said Jerry Rosenthal, OIN’s chief executive.

TOP 81 R&D spenders

Thursday, April 19th, 2007

Here.

Keeping geeks happy

Sunday, March 25th, 2007

Daemon tells about this post A Note To Employers: 8 Things Intelligent People, Geeks and Nerds Need To Work Happily.

Some links and crap stories.

Thursday, March 15th, 2007

Interesting stuff

Look how journalists do logic math:

Novell has issued a joint press release with Microsoft, in which HSBC, a customer of joint technology from the two companies, claims that Windows has a lower total cost of ownership than Linux.

This comes from:

In the release, Matthew O’Neill, group head of distributed systems for HSBC Global IT operations, states that the bank’s existing Linux environment is more expensive to maintain than its Windows environment. “Some will be surprised to learn that our Windows environment has a lower total cost of ownership than our current Linux environment.”

So he concludes:

Although it is unclear at this time which Linux distributions the bank is using, the fact Novell is associated with a statement that claims Linux has a higher total cost of ownership than Windows will surprise and anger many in the open-source community.

So, because HSBC has a complex and more expensive Linux environment, you can conclude the TCO of Linux is higher than Windows.

This is the most funny simplification of life I have heard since the joke of measuring a cow’s volume:

A mathematician, an engineer and a physicist sat around a table discussing the best way to measure the volume of a cow. The mathematician suggested the use of geometry and symettry relationships of the cow, but his idea was rejected for being too time-consuming. The engineer suggested placing the cow in a pool of water and measuring the change in the height of the water, but this idea was considered impractical. “It’s easy,” said the physicist. “We’ll make an assumption that the cow is a small sphere, calculate the volume, and then blow it up to the actual size.”

HSBC hasn’t claimed Linux has a higher total cost of ownership than Windows. They claimed THEIR environment has. That includes lot of variables are not mentioned.

  • How many versions of Windows are in the Windows environment?
  • How are both environments maintained?
  • etc

“will surprise and anger many in the open-source community”. Come on. The reasons why Linux is better are far away from stupid and simplistic TCO calculations.