[CLUE-Talk] Legal breaking of the MS monopoly WAS:Re:[CLUE-Tech] HP laptop

[Joe 'Zonker' Brockmeier]

On Wed, 30 Jan 2002, Kevin Cullis wrote:

*snip*

> I emailed Hans and about his article and had a question which I assumed
> and he answered yes to: if I had his ReiserFS and wanted to add it to my
> Windows OS, can I?  He stated and I assumed that we can't (both
> technically and license wise), MS will refuse to allow it, and that's
> their choice.  However, if you bought a car and wanted to replace the
> so-so radio with another and better one, you can and it doesn't void the
> warrantee (I'm not a lawyer, I'd have to check).  But with Linux, it can
> be done, but not with a Windows OS.  Unless, of course, you pay MS for
> the info, etc., etc., etc. In the car situation, I don't have to (that
> I'm aware of) and can do it at my choosing and timeframe. This to me is
> being anti-competitive. This is an issue which needs to be discussed and
> talked about more and more to get it through CIO's and other Executive's
> heads.

Replacing the filesystem is a lot bigger job than replacing a car
radio. It'd be more like replacing the engine...which would void
the warranty. IIRC there are drivers that allow people to access
Ext2 or other filesystems with Windows, but not as the native
filesystem.

This, in and of itself, is not anti-competitive. The fact that
Linux will work with a number of filesystems is a big bonus,
as is the fact that you could roll your own and no one would try
to stop you. The fact that one monolithic company doesn't control
the direction of Linux is also a big bonus.

> I'd be curious how many OEMs are around to support the auto industry
> with third party add ons compared with Windows and software vendors.
> While, yes, the auto industry has been around a lot longer, there can be
> some analysis that can be gleaned from the info.

Cars and operating systems make good analogies to a point, but
only to a point.

There's a lot of difference between the industries. A lot of
companies make car radios, tires and other minor add-ons for
cars -- but very few (if any) make replacement engines, and
no company that I'm aware of makes replacement doors or hoods
or seats for mass production autos other than the original
equipment manufacturers. This is why if you get your door crushed
in an accident you can either buy another from the dealer or
go to a junkyard -- you won't find one at Wal-Mart.

There are a ton of OEMs who manufacture parts for vehicles in
production, but they're directly contracted by the auto
manufacturers themselves -- so they're still dependent on
Ford, Chrysler or whomever. All the add ons for vehicles are
fairly minor -- radios, trailer hitches, custom hubcaps,
custom steering wheels... mostly cosmetic.

The software/computer industry goes back quite a ways as well.
Not quite as far as the auto industry, but if you use the
development of ENIAC as the starting point it goes back more
than fifty years. Quite long enough to draw useful conclusions.

The problem is that most people seem to think the history of
computing begins with Microsoft. They don't understand that
the idea of proprietary and closed software is relatively new.
In short, they really don't know what they've lost already
because they've never had it.

Take care,

Zonker
--
Joe 'Zonker' Brockmeier -=- jbrockmeier at earthlink.net
http://www.DissociatedPress.net/
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
"If there's going to be any future for us, our first invention
must be a meme-killer. We must destroy in ourselves and in
the people around us the meme proclaiming civilization to be
an unsurpassable invention." -- Daniel Quinn