Some time ago I came upon this article in the old bsdforums (taken down recently). The article implies that M$ wants to charge subscription quota by usage of their OS’s (M$ Windoze was comfirmed in the article, M$ Linux is rumored to follow).
Microsoft’s plan would instead monitor the machine to track things such as disk storage space, processor cores and memory used, then bill the user for what was consumed during a set period.
the company admitted that the overall cost to the user might be higher than for a standard PC purchase.
The Road Has Run Out On Microsoft’s Traditional Software Licensing Business Model.
The Pay As You Go Model Makes Microsoft The Sole Toll Taker.
Microsoft Wants Your Credit Card.
Google Is Eating Microsoft’s Breakfast, Lunch And Dinner.
which is this “MS Linux” you speak of? MS can’t own/buy Linux, nor can it control it, as this OS is protected by licenses and common patents (such as those gathered by OIN) and it is the property of the many who contribute to it. There is no single entity which controls Linux
Also, does MS really think that all people who use computers are millionairs so it can charge them such amount of $$$? If they really do this, they will damage themselves more than they realize. This is yet another tactic by MS to try and suck out every penny of its users. I don’t think if this becomes reality that many people will swallow it. This also could be a case for totalitarian monopolistic behavior and I’m sure the EU won’t let it go by. This is pure exploitation of own customers. Also, MS doesn’t own the hardware I buy, so I see their argument to charge as very moot!
From what I could read. M$ intends to eliminate the PC (PC/Mac/Sun) platform/computer type and replace it with M$'s propietary, web-only computing platform. I got from reading that M$ plans to move this sneakilly by planting malware, cracking major websites and computing systems and in general making people unconfortable, then explaining that all of this are “inherent flaws” of the PC architecture and that the M$ “platform” is free of those “flaws” (at this point people is supposed to be so pissed that they buy the story), then to finish off, after a while they pass a law making the PC platform illegal “in name of homeland security” and we’re screwed up by then.
Also, about the M$ Linux reference. I dunno what it means, but it’s a reference that began to appear in diferent linux/BSD/IT tech forums after the series of “dubious” deals between Microsoft and some distro makers (I dunno exactly when, but it’s that particular timeframe when that term, and the Microsoft Linux - the premier linux distro parody website appeared).
Well that will be stupid 'cause it will make more people go away from them and their influence on the software market will drastically drop. I think they know that and this scenario is improbable.
But if it happens there is nothing bad. More people to use linux and more people to contribute even if they ask stupid questions. So we will have the best OS without a doubt and winows can suck it >:)rotfl!
Sure, MS made a few patent deals with Novell and Xandros but they nowhere near own Linux. These are just IP deals with a promise not to sue customers and a collaboration contract between MS and the said companies. They do not transfer any “owner” rights to MS, nor do they transfer any other Linux licenses over to MS.
You have to realize that Linux gets a lot of contribution from different (major) companies like IBM, Novell, Red Hat, LSI Logic, Cisco, Sony, Toshiba, NTT Cyberlabs, Intel, AMD, Canonical, etc and such companies have also contributed patents to the Open Invention Network (OIN) which collects them to defend Linux and its rights against any patent threats or trolls. The companies who contribute to Linux aren’t doing it for fun but they have a (huge) business interest in it. If MS is to rise and try to “own” Linux, it will become very ugly for them and I don’t think they have enough lawyers over there in Redmond to win the case. MS claims that Linux violates ~100 of its patents and thus believes people who use it should pay up. How many patents does MS violate of, say, IBM? A lot I’d say, and till present time, MS was only vocal about such violations but each time people asked to show the evidence, they keep quiet or run away or just twist around the story and spread more FUD (SCO anyone?)
Further, there’s a huge difference between cloud computing/software as a service (SaaS) and owning your hardware and billing you for how long you use it or what you use on it. If what the article describes becomes reality, this will be the death of MS itself and many people will straight out reject it. Suppose you’re an avid gamer who spends 5 hours/day to play games. With this, you’d have to be a small millionaire to pay MS for all the time you spend playing games. Also how do you fight against/justify buggy MS software that while you were away for some time and left your PC running, suddenly a wild process goes amok and starts hogging your CPU thus increasing the amount you have to pay?
If such thing becomes reality, I’m pretty sure you’ll see a huge shift towards Linux/BSD or Apple (or both). This is really getting ridiculous and shows that MS doesn’t care for its customers (not that they have much in the past) and is only interested in how deep their pockets go. They see that their classic business model fails at present and instead of delivering decent products that are worth spending money on and increase competition and innovation, they adjust their marketing model (but leave their software as is) in trying to control every single aspect of the “computer experience” of people. Such thing is a blatant violation of customer rights and an authoritarian totalitarian monopolistic behavior!
As for cloud computing itself. I will not leave my data to some company to hold it, and I’m sure many people won’t either
you are really into conspiracy theories, aren’t you?
Do you realize that most cell phone providers have a similar business model? You get a phone for free or for a reduced price, and they charge you either a monthly fee plus calls and messages.
Cable providers: You get the receiver for free, but they charge you on a “per view” base. Energy: You get the cable to your house for free, and they charge for the energy you consumed. More examples exist, I’m sure.
I really don’t see the plain evil in this business model.
Actually. I do know that the deal is only for IP stuff, I was only referring to it and the parody website because baskitcaise asked what M$ linux was (which I didn’t knew at that time neither).
Buckesfeld. I didn’t write that article, I only posted it because it seemed interesting (I found it while trying to salvage a bunch of old networking and system administration howtos that were in that BSD forum to post them in the new one), It didn’t sound as a “conspiracy theory” (yeah, I know guess it was a slight naivety on my part :shame: ).