Dead Last !

A picture is worth a thousand words. Here's the result of a recent Forrester Research survey - The 2005 Technology Brand Scorecard. Microsoft barely made the chart.

Forrester's explanation - "One measure of consumers' dissatisfaction with Microsoft is seen in the 5.4 million households that give it a brand trust score of 1 [distrust a lot] or 2 [distrust a bit]. .... These households know they run Microsoft software but would be just as happy to leave it behind — if they could." ars technica has the gory details.

There it is in black and white - I mean in full color. NO ONE trusts Microsoft as a brand. What does that tell you about the richest company in the world? And the manner in which they got rich.

Aye, the company that keeps repeating the "Trustworthy Computing" mantra is DEAD LAST when it comes to being trusted. Ballmer better "sponsor" another survey real quick showing that twenty two Server 2003 certified partners "trust" Microsoft more than any other company. Heh.

Intellectual Property

At a recent keynote speech in Turin on GPL v3, Richard Stallman made an observation about the phrase "intellectual property"

"... Before I get into the main subject, which is the plans for version three of the GPL, I want to mention a very important fundamental issue.

There is a term that some people use, which causes terrible confusion and should never be used, and that is the term "intellectual property". Now, I heard someone mention that term. I don't think he was explaining why that term should not be used.

It is devastatingly harmful to use the term "intellectual property" because that term implies the existence of something which does not exist.

Copyright law exists. Patent law exists. They have almost nothing in common in terms of the requirements that they put on the public. Trademark law also exists. It has nothing in common with copyright law or patent law about what it requires of the public. So, the idea that there is some general thing which these are instances of already gets people so confused that they cannot understand these issues. There is no such thing. These are three separate unrelated issues, and any attempt to generalize about them guarantees confusion. Everyone who uses the term "intellectual property" is either confused himself or trying to confuse you. ...."

Although I don't agree with Stallman's ultra strict views on DRM, I too dislike the use of the phrase "intellectual property" and the fact that it is intended to confuse more than clarify. The classic example in recent times is of course the infamous SCO lawsuit against IBM. Darl McBride would always use that term in the media sobbing about how their intellectual property was usurped. But when it came to defining things in court, they are still at a loss to producing the bare minimum of evidence after three years of discovery.

It is interesting to note that the Number One purveyors of this phrase are Microsoft and SCO. And the tech media mindlessly parrot the phrase, further validating Microsoft's intent. Microsoft has a whole web site dedicated to - what else?, SELLING you this crap.

Property has to be tangible. Legally, the property protected by any so called "Intellectual Property" laws must be tangible. So the next time you hear the phrase "intellectual property" uttered, ask yourself - Is this a Patent, Copyright, or Trademark issue ? If not, someone is more than likely trying to sell you a bridge in Brooklyn.

Glass Houses and Stones

So now Stephen Toulouse is lecturing Apple on Security. The sheer GALL of Microsoft and the people that are in charge there always amazes me. Stepto wants Apple to hire a security figure head - you know - someone like him, because he doesn't think Apple is doing a good job on passing on information about Security Updates.

The following line really got to me. "Look, the only way you can tackle security issues is by getting out ahead of them and clearly communicating to your users the threat, and the clear guidance on how to be safe." Are you kidding me? When was the last time Microsoft EVER got ahead of a security issue ? Till Open Source software and the popularity of Firefox forced Microsoft to suddenly acquire the "Security Religion", Microsoft used to live in constant denial that there were even any holes in their precious windows. They tend to forget but this was the company that would actually bash researchers for finding and reporting vulnerabilities in their OS. And as far as being "safe" is concerned, I found a way to be safe. I STOPPED using that malware infested OS called Windows and switched to OSX. I have never felt safer on my computer since that day.

Stepto is lecturing Apple at the time when Microsoft is facing YET ANOTHER zero day exploit ! He seems to have the attitude that "we patch stuff every day, so we are the security experts". His sarcastic quote from his blog states "But hey, I've only been doing it for years now so what do I know." Sorry to inform you Mr. Toulouse, but in this business that doesn't make you an expert. It just means that you (Microsoft) do a LOUSY job when it comes to writing secure software. Would Steve Ballmer take kindly to the former executives of Enron advising him on what to do with Microsoft's $60 billion? I didn't think so.

It would do well for Microsoft to work on their malware infested OS instead of pointing fingers at other companies. After all, the record on viruses worms and spyware when Windows is compared to OS X is still > 100,000 to NONE!

Here's another quote from Mr. Toulouse's blog. "... and mark my words, the company will have to seek outside expertise in the form of a head of security communications in the next 12 months." Well Stephen. Consider your words marked. That's the beauty of the internet. Words can come back to haunt you and there's really nowhere to hide.

UCON 87 KY 83

And thus the season ends.

I just have to say ....

Patrick Sparks - 28 points, 5 steals, 2 assists and a rebound.

But what I saw from him today can't be measured by mere numbers.
Kentucky Boy. Heart of a Champion.

SCO's Revenue Continues Down the Drain

I know that there are probably many honest hard working 9 to 5 shlubs at SCO, but when I hear news like this,

I can't help but think it couldn't happen to anyone more deserving.

"The net loss for the first quarter of fiscal year 2006 was almost $4.6 million ...

SCO Chief Financial Officer Bert Young blamed the decrease in revenue on the continued competitive pressures on its Unix products and services from Linux during a press conference."

Hitched your wagon to the wrong horse eh Darl ? How's that Linux licensing scam coming along?

Maybe Darl can get Mike Anderer to call Steve Ballmer. Microsoft may want to buy some more Unix licenses for tens of millions of dollars. Or Ballmer could convince Baystar into another PIPE deal.
:-p

From Excellence to Mediocrity

Florida 79 Kentucky 64

Florida has now beaten KY four times in a row!. And this is basketball we are talking about, NOT football. For all those who were hoping for a "recovery" based on the LSU and Tennessee games, welcome back to Tubby Ball. I maintain what I had said in my post after the Vandy sweep. Tubbys era has been a journey downhill. From excellence to mediocrity.

People say the expectations of KY fans are too high. But I think they should be. This is KY basketball. And YES, anything short of a championship is a disappointment. So a 19-11 season and the middle rung of the SEC is definitely NOT acceptable to me, nor should it be for any KY fan.

Demanding an Apology

I have never understood this concept, and I hear it all the time now. It seems like everyday you read / hear in the media about someone "demanding" an apology for being wronged. People do it, groups do it, and even nations do it.

What good does it do to DEMAND an apology? And if you demand one and get one - say at gunpoint, does it actually mean anything? Are they really sorry for what they did or are they only saying "Im' sorry" to avoid the consequences?. I have never demanded an apology from anyone. That does not mean I endorse being a doormat by any means. When I am wronged, I make it abundantly clear to the person who wronged me about what they had done. If they then feel sorry for what they have done and apologize, I can then choose to accept their apology or not. If they don't, then I am clear as to where they stand.

Demanding an apology is a sort of macho streak, like twisting someone's arm in the schoolyard till they tell you they are sorry. In a mature adult world it is completely meaningless. In fact even if the person that wronged you felt sorry for what they had done, how would you know if you demanded an apology and got one?

Just a thought ...