LinuxOne's "LinuxMac 0.9" Investigated 236
The following was written by Slashdot reader Peter C. Norton
Scott Ananian (cananian@mit.edu) and I have been working with the LinuxOne "LinuxMac 0.9" product here at LinuxWorld Expo to figure out what's going on with the product, what it is, and whether there is value in their product. Scott was particularly interested and well informed about Macintosh hardware, since he works on maintaining the part of the kernel that supports Linux on Mac 68030 hardware (the old mac se/30, some the mac ii's, etc.).
In a way, we're following up on the information at: this page.
You'll see an assertion from a representative of LinuxOne that the LinuxMac product is a result of proprietary technology developed in a prior business by a company owned by the founder of LinuxOne. I can conclusively assert that based on using the pre-release of this product that this is currently completely false. Also, the program claims to be version 1.0, though the floppy says 0.9.
First of all, the floppy that they are selling to users contains a single RPM package, whose contents are as follows:
/root/Desktop/LinuxMac.kdelnk
/usr/local/bin/CLFormatter
/usr/local/bin/CommonLink
/usr/local/bin/cl
/usr/local/bin/cm
/usr/local/bin/hformat
/usr/share/common-link/linuxone-logo.bmp
The main program is CommonLink. Notice the "hformat" command? That's the utility that comes with the HFS Utilities that LinuxOne's representative claimed isn't even on their development network. However:
[root@col /root]# /usr/local/bin/hformat --license
This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by the Free Software Foundation; either version 2 of the License, or (at your option) any later version.
This program is distributed in the hope that it will be useful, but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. See the GNU General Public License for more details.
You should have received a copy of the GNU General Public License along
with this program; if not, write to the Free Software Foundation, Inc.,
675 Mass Ave, Cambridge, MA 02139, USA.
[root@col /root]#
There isn't any source code on the floppy, though, and I expect to be talking with LinuxOne about this.
Anyway, the CommonLink application itself is a KDE-based gui that talks launches a mounting application or a formatting application. Each one gives you the option to do these things with a "Windows 95" "Mac" or "Linux" option. The mounting application has no logic internally to mount any media. It calls the system-standard "mount" utility. Scott and I have confirmed this - there is no possibility that we're wrong about this. After mounting the floppy with the mount command, it invokes the KDE File Manager, KFM, to present the floppy to the end user. Conclusion: they wrote a very small gui in C++ to invoke standard utilities.
The second utility, the formatting program, calls the standard linux fdformat utility (a low level formatter to prepare a floppy for any use), and then it calls hformat to put a mac filesystem on it.
If a "quick erase" (ala the windows formatting stuff) is done, then it just runs:
hformat -l MacFloppy /dev/fd0H1440
Though if you put s space in the name after -l it breaks (a beginner's programming error).
Conclusion: This is just another simple gui which uses utilities which are not written, maintained, or contributed to by LinuxOne or its staff.
In short:
The LinuxMac product contains no proprietary technology. It relies on standard linux kernel modules for filesystems (confirmed through testing), and it relies on standard system utilities to access floppies (again, confirmed through testing).
In addition, the utilities are only useable by root. There is no way a user could use these utilities to format or mount a floppy without the root user making changes to the system.
Please let me know if you're interested in the details of the testing, or if you have any other questions.
linuxone flames (Score:1)
Did anybody else go to their website and
notice that they are running a "flame of the
week" contest? These people are actually
posting flames that people send them (some
of which are pretty funny). This seems like
a(nother) very bad business decision.
Re:LinuxOne at Linux Expo in NYC (Score:2)
The 'answer phrase' is the giveaway - "What division can I direct you to?" It's a call centre, guys - an answering service. I work in one, to pay the rent, and I'm constantly amazed by the number of people who can't grasp the concept of an answering service - other companies use us to answer their phones, give rudimentary information about their product, make them look like an international company with a giant switch, constantly ringing phones, etc...
It's corporate fraud on a huge scale.
But it's not particularly clever to pass judgement on LinuxOne (as much as it seems warranted!) based on the performance of another company and someone working at that company whose main skill is answering phones.
Incidentally, if you asked the same questions of a Windows salesman, would you get any more intelligent answers? Of course not. You're asking the wrong type of person.
Be nice to telephonists. They have to deal with... well, you.
Re:Poor taste, but not illegal.. (Score:1)
Re:no source code on the floppy...so what? (Score:1)
-Peter (C. Norton)
Re:Proprietary code (Score:1)
-Peter
Here's the confirmation (Score:1)
[spacey@obelisk
LinuxMac-0.9.0-1.i386.rpm lost+found
[spacey@obelisk
-Peter (C. Norton)
Trying to get you... (Score:1)
I just called the number posted here, and contacted a woman with a heavy chinese accent who told me that Mr. Bottoms is not present, and that she does not know when he'll be in.
Me: Do you know when he'll be in?
Her: I don't know. Some days he is in late some days he is not even coming in.
So, since the number I was given doesn't provide me with a way of contacting Mr. Bottom, let me turn around and ask Mr. Bottom to contact me. If he is still in the New York City area I am available to meet. He can contact me at the email address provided in the article.
-Peter (C. Norton)
Re:Peter C. Norton = Norton Utilities Guy? (Score:2)
-Peter (C. Norton)
Re:Highly unlikely... (Score:2)
http://www.theswindle.com
Big Surprise. (Score:1)
And the generic Microsoft-style product names are getting on my nerves. LinuxMac? Puh-leeze. If these guys keep it up, maybe I'll even start liking Caldera.
LinuxOne: The One Linux IPO to miss this year.
---
pb Reply or e-mail; don't vaguely moderate [152.7.41.11].
Re:Big Surprise. (Score:1)
LinuxOne
Internet Explorer
LinuxMac
ActiveX
And, for that matter, Office, Word, Windows, Money, etc., etc., etc.
The only original things Microsoft ever did... they bought from other people.
Apparently LinuxOne can't do that, they're forced to resort to outright theft.
---
pb Reply or e-mail; don't vaguely moderate [152.7.41.11].
Never attribute to malice... (Score:2)
...What can be adequatly explained by stupidity.
It's possable that they are more totally clueless than anything. Of course, that's still a very good reason to stay far away from any IPO from them.
It's also possable that there's fraud at the top and cluelessness on all levels below. Time will tell.
Re:Proprietary code (Score:1)
Poor taste, but not illegal.. (Score:2)
As long as they in some way supply you with the source for the binary that they call from their exe, they're all set.
You see, they're doing doing an exec of it. The actualy 'wrapper' that they are producing it indeed their own code, granted, I could write it in less then an hour in perl, or even as an sh script.
The short story.. While what they are doing is unethical, it is no way breaks the GPL, taking into consideration that they provide the source for the GPL utilities provided, which no one has, as of yet, proven the case of..
Re:Poor taste, but not illegal.. (Score:2)
Re:Here's the confirmation (Score:2)
The biggest impact would be to file a lawsuit for a good chunk of what they have sold, 'past damages' or something of that sort.
As of right now, they have no valid licence, as they have broken their legal contract with the authors of the tool.
Rumour has it... (Score:2)
Seriously, if writing a GUI constitutes the proprietary development of an OS, then Windows must also be an OS. Hmmmm. Was the CEO of LinuxOne a friend of William Gates III at college?
Re:Peter Norton @ LinuxOne (Score:1)
There have been a lot of people lynched in history, and I'm willing to bet a large portion of them were not of any African heritage.
I fail to see how this is a troubling matter.
Perhaps instead of roping up LinuxOne, we should run them through...however, I may take offense as a great deal of my potential ancient relavites have been run through in the past.
Licensing Fee for use of QT... (Score:5)
I'm wondering if LinuxOne has paid the licensing fee for use of QT in a proprietary product. The QPL [troll.no] prohibits proprietary software, so they can't develop it under that.
What is the developer version license again? Is it a whopping $1,550 per developer or something like that? I'd be interested to find out if someone has informed the folks at troll tech. They are already selling this product on their web site.
CmdrChalupa (Who knows not how to change his sig =)
Re:Is anyone compiling the "LinuxOne Debunking Pag (Score:2)
Yes, if it were truthful they'd probably lose. Though in any case it'd still cost the defendant considerable time and money to fight the lawsuit.
Re:Please hire me Mr Bottoms (Score:1)
Yeah, so serious that you posted anonymously.
With your intelligence I reckon he should give you stock options.
Regards, Ralph.
Three Rings for the Kernel... etc. (Score:4)
Seven for the Debian-lords in their halls of stone,
Nine for Microsoft Men doomed to die,
LinuxOne for the Dark Lord on his dark throne
In the Land of Mountain View, CA where the Shadows lie.
LinuxOne to ruin them all, LinuxOne to fail them,
LinuxOne to bring them all and in the darkness blind them....
In the Land of Mountain View where the Shadows and bad IPOs lie.
-- Seth Cohn
(Lifted from the LinuxOne flame archive.)
GPL requirement in this case (Score:2)
Why can't they just point to the sources on somebody else's web site if they haven't made any modifications? Two reasons:
Thanks
Bruce
Re:GPL requirement in this case (Score:3)
An NDA that restricts rights that you would otherwise have under the GPL is in violation of the GPL's terms. You're required to convey to all other parties the same rights that the GPL gives you. If you are legally bound from obeying the terms of the GPL, the entire license terminates and you have no rights regarding the program, no right to use or modify it, etc. Other people to whom you have redistributed the program retain their rights.
When does the GPL start? When you distribute source or binaries to anyone.
And to who does the GPL apply? This is a bit complicated. You are responsible to the copyright owner to comply with the license. You are responsible to those to whom you distributed binaries to distribute source on request. You are also responsible to any third party to distribute source on request if you don't distribute it along with the binary. Anyone to whom the program is distributed is also responsible to comply with the terms of the license.
Remember, I'm not an attorney and thus this isn't legal advice. But I'm the best you're going to get around here, unfortunately.
Thanks
Bruce
To Richard Bottoms (Score:5)
I missed the lynching threat but no doubt it's there. I would not suggest you take it as a racist sentiment, but more as an expression of how offended we are. I myself have proposed that LinuxOne Inc. be "run out of town on a rail", I don't know if that has any racist connotations.
Yes, you screwed up and you now have a whole lot to learn. To start with, I can direct you to an attorney in Palo Alto who can design your GPL compliance program, if you wish. Just write to me at bruce@perens.com .
The sentiments expressed here are not those of VA or Andover.net, that's something else you need to learn. But if you can turn the company around, I'm sure that will get coverage.
Thanks
Bruce
Re:Peter Norton @ LinuxOne (Score:4)
Ironic. You posted that at 11:34am. You're willing to pay for his expenses in getting to you, but unless he's in your local area, the chances of him actually making it there to the meeting you're holding are almost nil. Or would you be willing to delay said meeting until his arrival?
"That we've fucked up is not in dispute"
This is amusing. Care to post this on the LinuxOne webpage? While _you_ may admit your company has made some horrendous blunders, that's certainly hasn't stopped the marketing people from trying to convince everyone of the exact opposite. How about some good ole "Truth in Advertising"?
"That we had the balls to come to New York should also not be in dispute."
You're right. You were there. And I must admit, your company had to have some pretty giantic kahones to come to the premiere Linux trade show with a repackaged set of standard utilities that you claim is your new and innovative product. You also claim that you don't use these utilities at all, and that, in fact, you don't have a copy of them anywhere.
You seem intelligent enough to realize the horrible mistakes your company is making. Perhaps it's time that you (and your company) began correcting these mistakes, as opposed to committing further blatant blunders. And _if_, not when, your company begins to play by the rules, _then_ you may get the same level of coverage. But only if your efforts to make amends and repair the damage are as equally strong as the blunders you're making now.
Re:Pull the Trademark!!! (Score:2)
___
Negative Credibility (Score:2)
And that buzzword is linux. VA and Redhat are great companies, and they actually have something to offer, but they did cash in on that buzzword. There's nothing shameful in making lots of money if you actually have something to offer like Redhat and VA.
But keep in mind that linuxone only needs to have 1/10th of their success in order to "succeed" in what they're doing.
Re:nope (Score:2)
I used to think that was a good idea, but it turns out that it's not. Amazon doesn't make all of its money off of book sales, it also makes money advertising and so on, so even when you just go to waste their bandwidth and take up resources, they're glad to have you do it, because it's one more hit they add to their hitcount. They then go out to advertisers and say "We had X hits/day which means that advertising costs $Y"
The bigger the $X, the bigger the $Y I would think.
Really though, they do make money without you ever buying anything. If websites couldn't do that, then slashdot would have never been bought by Andover, and Andover would have never been swallowed by VA.
That was brutal, man (Score:2)
I have no idea about the legality of taping conversations on the phone like that, but getting people to reiterate lies like that and eliciting things that can appear damaging to them later seems to me like what was intended when there were laws made about "entrapment"
That said, the phone conversation was funny as hell, and they deserve to be exposed. I feel bad for that sorry employee though, who obviously can't swallow her pride and say "I don't know" on any of the issues...RPM a programming language??? Might she somehow be thinking of
Just tell me one thing man, ease my mind. Please tell me that you were saying "ly-nucks" instead of "lih-nucks" on the phone because you were playing the part of the dumb customer.
That was brutal, man (Score:2)
I have no idea about the legality of taping conversations on the phone like that, but getting people to reiterate lies like that and eliciting things that can appear damaging to them later seems to me like what was intended when there were laws made about "entrapment"
That said, the phone conversation was funny as hell, and they deserve to be exposed. I feel bad for that sorry employee though, who obviously can't swallow her pride and say "I don't know" on any of the issues...RPM a programming language??? Might she somehow be thinking of
Just tell me one thing man, ease my mind. Please tell me that you were saying "ly-nucks" instead of "lih-nucks" on the phone because you were playing the part of the dumb customer.
LinuxOne at Linux Expo in NYC (Score:5)
But they were actually there! There was some guy who looked like he was in his late 50's (Caucasian male) who said that he was the VP of the company. I walked up to their booth, and I was just checking out what they had to offer, (mostly CD's and a few stickers and things, frankly they had one of the most boring booths there) and true to form, somebody walked up and said "This floppy that you gave me has program X on it" (I don't remember what program X was) "Program X is under the GPL, so I was wondering if I can get a source code floppy or CD for this program"
After much hemming and hawing, the VP of LinuxOne (if that's who he was) explained that he wasn't a technical guy, that he was just there to run the booth, and that he would talk to the more technical people. The guy at the booth gave him a hard time a while longer and eventually agreed to write down his email address for the LinuxOne guy to get in touch with him later. (Yeah, like that'll ever happen)
Doesn't it seem strange that Linux One would send somebody who didn't even know enough about linux software to realize that for a lot of packages, it's probably somewhat expected to have access to the source code? It's possible that this guy was playing dumb - but it sure didn't look like he was playing, if you get my drift. I can't believe that they would send somebody non-technical to the show, even if only to snowjob the show-goers.
When seeing people flame LinuxOne on slashdot, I read up on the company, and thought that they were a completely crappy, flighty company that seemed determined to crowbar the dollars out of hapless daytraders, but still, somewhere I had some drop of pity for them since it was possible that they were the victims of some gigantic misunderstanding.
They're not. I hate to say it, but short of whatever the Natalie Portman trolls have been saying, whatever negative thing that you've heard about Linux One is probably true. I certainly can't think of a single attack on them that I've ever heard that doesn't seem to be true.
nomenclature is destiny (Score:1)
(Slow, deep breath) Mr. Bottoms:
I come from a Navy family and am the son of a WW II Army NCO, so I bow to no one when it comes to using salty language, but "...we fucked up..." and "that we had the balls to..." belongs in the goat locker (the chiefs' quarters, ye lubbers), not off the keyboard of some tycoon-wannabee.
I think it's indicative of your astonishing lack of judgement that you've chosen to respond in a prominent forum of the Linux and OSS communities in this fashion. The last two employers I had the misfortune to labor for who behaved in such a manner didn't make out any better than you seem destined to.
Mr. Bottoms, did they all talk like that where you come from? You're not some dirtbag who doesn't care whether he's taken seriously -- are you? Do you kiss your mother with that mouth? Haven't you considered that many of your company's employees and investors (the smart ones that you want to keep, anyway) read Slashdot faithfully?
You, sir, are a foolish, foolish man, and others will have to suffer along with you for your egregious mistakes.
Re:Something's wrong then. (Score:1)
I believe this is so. You would be allowed to charge them for the media and postage (and possible some reasonable amount for the time & effort to create the floppies & mail them out, not sure about that though). But once you distribute it, you are obligated to make the source available to *anyone* who asks for it. Obviously, the most reasonable method would be to e-mail the appropriate files, or post them on a web site. I don't believe you are obligated to provide them in any specific format (e.g., you don't have to produce them on paper tape if someone asks), but you are obligated to make a reasonable effort.
NO LICENSE, not Source Code (Score:1)
---
Re:LinuxOne at Linux Expo in NYC (Score:2)
No I think that's sad.
Okay. I give you a point on that one. Except when I say funny, it is in it's most sarcastic tone. (Or maybe you missed that because you were too interested in misjudging me.) I agree, it's very sad.
They are phone staff because they aren't the smartest or the quickest or the luckiest people but they still have to make a living.
Guess what? I answer phones for a living where I work too. That puts me in the same boat as this person. But -- There's a difference. The point of placing people on the telephones is not just to take orders and write up an invoice. What if the person calling wants to know a little about the product? Hmm? Does that mean that the people who aren't "the smartest or the quickest or the luckiest" are allowed to be uninformed about the products they are supposed to be selling? Now picture this: Suppose I decide "Hey, this LinuxOne shit sounds GREAT! Especially that RPM programming language. I want it!" Then I buy it, and find that two-thirds of the information given to me was an outright lie. How would I feel? Replace me with the Corporate Suit who decides to give Linux a try. How is HE going to feel?
Oh, and don't throw a guilt trip at me about these people "making a living." I do the same thing where I work, and I'm damn sure informed about the products we sell. You just missed my point.
See the problem with what you did irrevelent of the fact that it was tapes and potentially illegal was the fact that the person is potentially publically libeled against; or more precisely the company.
Lets see here....Libel? I don't think so. Libel is publishing falsities in order to damage someone's reputation. I published no false information, so where do you get Libel from? That being the case, I suppose the Slashdot article is Libel too? Libel....pfft, you sound like JP.
This person could loose their job because you as the shittless little punk that you are had the gaul to actually deliberately lead the person on with false data of your own.
I was leading the SALESPERSON on? If you read the transcript, I believe you will find the opposite is true. If I had not known a damn thing about anything, I would have been led to believe that apache was a server architecture, RPM is a programming language, and EVERY distribution of Linux is insecure. I fed absolutely no information to this person, yet you insist that I "lead the person on with false data".
You know not everyone knows everything all at once we all learn.
If she doesn't know what the product is/does, why is she selling it? Who qualified her to answer the phones?
I would respectively ask that you grow up and live and let live. You can't really believe that you actually treated that human like a human do you?
Tell me what was so inhuman about what was done. This was not a personal attack against this single person, and I state that fact on the page. What you missed, was the fact this was to show the unprofessionalism of the company, as well as the uninformed nature of it's employees. I called LinuxOne back on the weekend after this phone call was made. The person answered the phone "Hello?" I thought I had a wrong number, and called back. Same thing. I had to ASK if that number was for LinuxOne. Laer in the conversation, I told this person I wanted to order 2000 copies, and I was told to call Red Hat. Is this what people expect from a company? Would you want to deal with this company?
Hmm well if you call up about your car or whatnot that gets into the shop that the mechanics should deliberately make you look like an ass right?
Sorry. I know enough to take my car to several places to get several opinions before I get it fixed. Oh, and the car shop is the one offering the service, not the customer. You've got your metaphor backwards.
-- Give him Head? Be a Beacon?
Re:LinuxOne at Linux Expo in NYC (Score:2)
Sure, I could see the humor in this (in fact, I tried hard several times to keep from laughing.
When you read the transcript, you notice the conversation was between "Accipiter" and "LinuxOne", not "Accipiter" and "Salesperson" or "Name". Throughout the entire phone call, this woman was representing her company. She was very professional, helpful, and polite....but quite uninformed.
But thanks for the comment.
-- Give him Head? Be a Beacon?
Re:That was brutal, man (Score:2)
Actually, Linus pronounces it "Lee-Nicks", if I remember correctly.
His name is pronounced similarly. "Lee-Nis", rhyming with "Knee Miss"
But, Linus also said he doesn't care how people pronounce it, just so long as they use it. No arguments here.
-- Give him Head? Be a Beacon?
Re:Points of problems (Score:2)
HELLO! MY PAGE DID SAY THAT! Here's a few excerpts:
"Yes, I know that not everyone can be totally informed of a product, but that's not an excuse for giving misinformation, as you will read below."
"Conclusion: This sales associate was VERY uninformed. Okay, she may have not been the most technical person in the world, but at several points in our conversation she gave me total misinformation. It would have been perfectly okay to say "I don't know", but instead she insisted RPM was a programming language, and that Apache was a server architecture."
....Or did you even BOTHER to read the whole thing?
You then asked if there were methods of programming in rpm and such. I am sorry as I cannot view your page now but I got the impression that you were toying with the person and allowing them to continue to think that what they said was correct when it wasn't.
Wrong. I was asking the questions that a "person who didn't know anything" would ask. If I was toying with them, I would have phrased the entire conversation a lot more lower in intelligence. I acted like an interested business person, and phrased my questions accordingly. I didn't ask any questions that would be considered out of line, especially considering the information I was given. Sorry, but your argument just doesn't hold up.
-- Give him Head? Be a Beacon?
Re:LinuxOne at Linux Expo in NYC (Score:5)
So not only are their Booth people (executives?) very uninformed, so are their phone staff.
The following URL has a quick wrap-up of the LinuxOne situation, as well as a call I placed to them. I spoke with a salesperson who frankly, didn't know a damn thing about what she was pitching. That's quite evident in the transcript that's on the same page.
http://hackphreak.org/~accipiter/ [hackphreak.org]
-- Give him Head? Be a Beacon?
Pfffft. (Score:1)
Re:Peter Norton @ LinuxOne (Score:2)
Not only have you obviously not read the disclaimer at the top of every comment page - "The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. Slashdot is not responsible for what they say" - but you're 'pulling the race card', which is incredibly bad form.
If you want us to take you seriously, you need to stop 'fucking up' (as you put it so eloquently) and start backpedaling now.
An official statement from LinuxOne explaining your behavior and your corrective intentions would be a good place to start.
VagueMaster strikes again - is that you, Bryce ?!? (Score:1)
>i don't think they were all that vague.
and replies:
"I don't think this statement is very specific"
If your attention span could stretch more than one full stop back, you'd see that it was a direct reply to your earlier sentence:
"Vague allusions to the quality of my post really don't prove anything, and are just useful for distraction."
There is one thing there that you used the very word "vague" about: Allusions to the quality of [your] post.
What he is saying is, in effect: "My allusions to the quality of your post weren't vague".
Of course, that you "don't think this statement is very specific" only goes to show he's right: The quality of your posts really does suck.
(And that is, ironically, probably yet another example of the failure of that public school system you're a product of, and so misguidedly eager to defend. Especially misguided since you only managed to expose it all the more in the process.)
HTH!
Christian R. Conrad
MY opinions, not my employer's - Hedengren, Finland.
If these guys want to perpetrate a scam (Score:2)
At best it sounds like the old 'vaporware' scam, a fraud mastered by you know who, advertise the heck out of a product or service just to get enough orders to finance it's development.
Re:LinuxOne at Linux Expo in NYC (Score:1)
Does not compute.
Re:Peter Norton @ LinuxOne (Score:1)
Cheers!
Re:LinuxOne at Linux Expo in NYC (Score:2)
Nixon was in a place where that's true. In the majority of states, only one person in the conversation has to give permission to record it.
The law regarding a person from one state recording a conversation with a person in another is shaky, but generally it's believed that the law in the state where the recording was made would prevail.
Re:That was brutal, man (Score:1)
Almost right.
You can hear an audio fragment of Linus pronouncing Linux here [neep.net].
Oh ya... to play it, just cat linux.au >
Have fun
In addition... (Score:1)
In addtion, Mandrake has not misrepresented itself. They have openly admitted what they do, and have not tried to throw up smokescreens of having propriatary additions to Linux. In the past, LinuxOne has claimed that this Mac thing was not based on any existing Linux software, which seems to be false.
I use Mandrake. I like it. I have no problem with what they are doing. I do have major questions about LinuxOne however. They need to adhere to the GPL, and come clean about what they are doing.
Re:LinuxOne at Linux Expo in NYC (Score:2)
Consciousness is not what it thinks it is
Thought exists only as an abstraction
Re:Is anyone compiling the "LinuxOne Debunking Pag (Score:2)
Now if it can be proven that the underwriting firm had direct knowledge that the firm is a fraud, that might be a different issue. In general though, the onus is not on the investment banks to run around and make sure that everything the issuer says is true.
In regards to their risk, it depends how LinuxOne is taken public. The only route is not through underwriting, rather the risk can be shifted to the issuer through what is known as a "best effort" agreement in which they essentially just act as a broker, not to mention a few others. Even in the case of underwriting though, the underwriters don't necessarily bear signficant risk--even if the issuing company is a bad egg. As long as the bank sells the issue before the market realizes its mistake, they're in the clear. Which is quite likely as long as there is Linux hype in the short term. Especially when the issues are normally significantly discounted and mostly devoid of Day-Traderesque red hot pricing (which the possibly fraudulent owners might be hoping/depending on).
Bottom Line: Don't depend on these investment banks to filter out the slimy issues.
Re:That was brutal, man (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:sue for what? (Score:1)
Re:so then it's not available (Score:1)
Quit calling others trolls... it seemed you were the troll, making arguments such as "what if you don't believe in phones?"...
Re:so then it's not available (Score:1)
Quit calling others trolls... it seemed you were the troll, making arguments such as "what if you don't believe in phones?"...
Something's wrong then. (Score:1)
So, if LinuxOne distributed the binaries along with the source code on the floppy, then only the people who received the floppies would be legally required to have access to the source code, which they could do whatever they want with.
However, since they don't distribute the source with the binary, they must give the source to anyone who asks, regardless as to whether or not they've received a binary?
That seems just wrong.
It's always been my impression that the GPL only applies between the copyright holder, you, and the person you distribute the software to. For instance, if i modified your GPLed program and sold it to "JIM", would I then be required to send the source code, on floppy, to 10,000 people who then request it from me? I wouldn't think so, unless I'd given them the binaries.
Same with LinuxOne. I don't see why they should need to make their source available to anyone who hasn't received a binary.
Re:GPL requirement in this case (Score:2)
When does the GPL come into force? Once a program is distributed? Concieved? Or what?
For instance, when there was all the grumbling about the slashdot code about Rob saying it was almost GPLed, according to his FAQ, people jumped to his defence, saying that since he wasn't distributing it, he was excempt from that part of the GPL.
When Corel attempted to stymie the redistribution of it's beta, half of the crowd here said that since they were distributing the distro, it should be available for all to see. But the other half was saying that since people were generally expectedt o sign NDA's, it could be construed that they were becoming, to a limited extent, employees of Corel, and therefore would be under no obligation to distribute the source to their beta distribution.
Then, when there was a discussion about the NSA contracting an outside company to create a "secure" linux distibution, it was reasoned that the community probably wouldn't ever get the source, because in that case, the GPL applied only to the NSA and it's contracting company. Since the only customer of that company for the product was the NSA, the NSA would be the only ones legally required to be able to get the source code.
Did all that make sense? It just seems that the GPL is applied with varying degree's of insistance. There also doesn't seem to be a clearing house for all GPL related questions and other issues.
Here's the final question?
When does the GPL start?
a - when you begin internal development?
b - when you begin using the software in a production environment
c - when you distribute binaries to "anyone"
d - when you distribute binaries to "everyone"
And to who does the GPL apply?
a - anyone that asks for it?
b - only the people that you distributed binaries to?
Maybe one day this issue will be cleared up... But right now it seems that the GPL is full of selective loopholes.
Lawsuit! (Score:2)
This company is a blatent fraud, and they insult the intelligence of the OSS community and the concept of Linux as a whole. This is definately something that needs to be acknowldeged and made an example of legally. When do they get their Cease and Desist order?
Re:sue for what? (Score:2)
no source code on the floppy...so what? (Score:2)
Re:not unexpected (Score:2)
Bzzzzzt!
VA Linux is not another distro. From their website [valinux.com]:
VA Linux Systems Software Package v.6.0
Although we do not create our own distribution, VA optimizes the Linux kernel for each system type and includes the most popular Linux distributions preinstalled.
Re:As an African-American!?!? (Score:2)
Don't you know the story of the boy who cried 'wolf!'? The point is, since it is a serious problem, it is all the worse to cry 'racism' when there is no conatation of any sort of racism whatsoever. IIRC lynching is one of the very traditional methods of dealing with scamming business men who come into the local town trying to pull a fast one; I'm not advocating its use now (hopefully we're a bit beyond that) but the metaphor is perfectly appropriate and is no different from any other 'justice' type execution as regards racism.
That's why it's playing the race card, because it's diverting the argument to an ad hominem attack. Or don't you believe calling someone a racist, who hasn't shown that in any way is a personal insult?
Chris
Re:As an African-American!?!? (Score:2)
Well, sure; but emotions are running pretty high about this whole Linuxone scam
I thought it was a fair request.
Maybe coming from you. But not from one of the perpetrators of this scam.
I think his statement was a weak and unfocused attempt at a personal insult directed at both the poster and slashdot/linux va. I think he was correct only in that lyching is racist term. It is much more offensive than words like nigger. Perhaps because I know that so many people have died unjustly, I don't find it acceptable even if used in ignorance of the racial connotation.
Well, you have an argument; However, I still can't accept that the connotation is that racial, considering how many other things have been done to blacks (not to mention many other unfortunate groups) and considering how many other people have been lynched. That being said, I can definitely respect your opinion and feelings on the matter, and believe me, I probably wouldn't have used the term either; but that's more due to my aversion to violence to anyone
Chris
Re:Peter Norton @ LinuxOne (Score:2)
No one is going to lynch you. If anything, we'll just ignore you by refusing to purchase any LinuxOne goods and servers and make sure that the truth about the organization you represent is clearly and correctly presented to as broad an audience as possible.
And pardon me for asking, but since when did racism get injected into this discussion? Is that how you view this debate, as racist-inspired? We might be angry (I'm very angry), but this comment from you about lynching is just one more clue to the rest of the world as to how clueless you and LinuxOne really are. You're viewed strictly on your technical merits, of which all of you without exception have absolutely none.
Re:no source code on the floppy...so what? (Score:2)
I realize the crack about eight-track was tongue-in-cheek... but since the rest of it was at least semi-serious, I wanted to set the record straight... One should be able to beat on them and at least get a series of PKZIP'ed floppies.... :) (seriously, IBM used to distribute AIX on floppies among other media... there is precedent...)
--
"We cannot legislate against all the stupid things people will do" -- Jesse Ventura
Re:LinuxMac Apple Refund Day (Score:2)
Microsoft does *not* make computers.. they just forced computer makers to use their OS. BIG difference.
Hell.. by your logic we should force 3com to sell PalmPilots without an OS......
Maybe it's a good thing... (Score:3)
Anyway, back to my point: maybe this LinuxOne thing will wind up being a "good thing" for the Linux community as well as for the respectable vendors when all is said and done. Think about it. LinuxOne is as good a counterpoint to almost every other Linux vendor and distro out there (if not all). Any comparison between them and any other vendor is going to result in nothing but glowing remarks for the "good guy" vendors.
In the press, anytime that LinuxOne is mentioned they are going to be compared to Mandrake, which will have to be explained as a RedHat derivative which will, in turn, be compared to Corel, SuSE, Debian, etc. Notice that all the comparisons are talking about Linux and Linux vendors. Nowhere was a non-Linux comparison made. The case for Linux being non-viable due to lack of anything has been erased because all anyone is talking about is Linux.
So, as evil or greedy as they seem, maybe they will turn out to have done Linux (in general) a favor. Kind of a double edged sword, I know, but hey.
Heck, it's almost as if it's an inept Microsoft plot that's in the process of exploding in their face.
Of course that's just my hallucination. I could be stoned.
ack, brain not working (Score:2)
Too much influence from reading the AC idiots posting below.
As for Peter Norton, there are plenty of those [switchboard.com] also.
nope (Score:3)
North isn't an uncommon name, anyway. A quick romp [switchboard.com] through the phonebook will turn up at least 19 Peter Norths living in the US.
LinuxMac, hfsutils, and GPL (Score:5)
As the author of hfsutils [mars.org], and someone who is actively investigating this matter, I can confirm that LinuxOne's LinuxMac product as currently distributed provides no real functionality except a GUI wrapper and the ability to create Macintosh HFS file systems by bundling hformat.
The fact that the GPL'd hformat is included without a conspicuous copyright notice, without a copy of the GPL, and without including or making an offer to obtain the source has understandably raised my concern. Since I own the copyright, I am in the process of pursuing a legal remedy.
If you've purchased a copy of LinuxMac, or if you have information or concerns about the way it is being distributed, I'd like to hear from you [mailto].
Re:Proprietary code (Score:2)
-----------
"You can't shake the Devil's hand and say you're only kidding."
Re:sue for what? (Score:2)
Re:GPL requirement in this case (Score:2)
Rob is the author of the slashdot code, and as such can do anything he wishes. The license is for others who wish to use or distribute the code.
Re:no source code on the floppy...so what? (Score:3)
I don't think 8-track currently consists of a medium customarily used for software interchange, and I've not heard of any written offer.
Re:LinuxOne at Linux Expo in NYC (Score:2)
Roy Bentley Holmes
Vice President of Sales
Tel: (408) 929-3331
Fax: (408) 929-3330
LINUXONE, INC.
201 San Antonio Circle C250
Mountain View, CA 94040
Tel: (650) 948-6201
Fax: (650) 948-2932
roy@linuxone.net
www.linuxone.net
He couldn't answer any questions that I asked. I simply asked what development tools are on the distibution, and he referred me to this other guy who told me "Linux Lite runs on Windows"???? It was like they were programmed for certain responses. But didn't know what to do if someone asked them something of content.
Also, a guy from Loki was there messing with their heads! He placed a Linux Mandrake Hat on their box (on top of the penguin), and they didn't even notice. I started asking a few more questions and the VP had to pick up the box and read it. Still he didn't notice that hat, and couldn't answer my questions. I later saw him at the session with Bob Young. He was sitting in the audience trying to stay awake. He obviously didn't have a clue about the Open Source community nor Linux.
(-1 Redundant)
PS. Sorry if this posted twice, I hit stop right after I hit submit, because I just realized I had his card and I don't know if it made it to Slashdot or not the first time.
Steven Rostedt
Re:Proprietary code (Score:3)
It's not that the GUI wrapper isn't useful or isn't signifigant enough -- lord help us if there is a time when anything is too insignifigant to develop -- but it's their blantantly false claims that are the issue here.
-JuPo
Bravery and History (Score:2)
In an environment where businesses are working hard to build a unique business model and at the same time earn the respect of the community that they depend on... LinuxOne has done nothing to earn any simular respect. A foolish publicity stunt does not change that. LinuxOne charged across that fine line. Pointing that fact out just makes the act more foolish.
The sad thing is that Linux - its legal workings, its code, and its community - is freely available online. There is no veil of secrecy. The legal requirements and the expectations of Linux's community are available for the reading; mirrored in many cases. It just takes someone with the vested interest in Linux to look and read.That this minor research hasn't been done already is disturbing. Surely the effort it took too find Linux code would have exposed LinuxOne to its community and, even more blatent, its legal language? The cynical amoung us would point out that, given the simplicity of the task, the information found was most likely ignored. You'll forgive me if I find myself affected by these cynics and doubt the need to cover any future "overhaul of [your] practices".
Re:If these guys want to perpetrate a scam (Score:2)
They're not trying to scam the OSS community, they're trying to scam uninformed stock buyers, many of whom are old retirees who invest their life savings.
Pull the Trademark!!! (Score:2)
Sure they have product, but since these products are rip offs with no added value whatsoever, it can be discounted.
It's time to protect the Linux trademark from the damage that can be done by short-sighted opportunists like this.
MV
Regarding "When we succeed" (Score:2)
and overhaul of our practices we'll expect the
> same level of coverage of that too.
When? I'm not from Missouri but
Show Me!!!
Right now you have nothing but copies of others' work. We know it. You know it.
Right now you have the word "Linux" in you name and have filed for IPO based on the above cited nothing. Smells like "get rich quick!! opportunism and to us sounds like a threat to the market integrity of the name "Linux."
Withdraw your IPO filing. Create a real business plan. Create something real and release it properly. THEN come back to us asking for respect.
I repeat, right now you have nothing and have therefore earned nothing except for the scorn of the community you have parasitically attached yourselves to.
-M
Purpose of LinuxOne flame contest (Score:2)
"Oh yeah, that's a little contest we are running on our web site. Go check it out. Those crazy techies love to do this kind of stuff."
If you don't know what I'm talking about check here [linuxone.net].
--jb
So? (Score:2)
Maybe it is time for some big publicity and then all these people doing this investigative work can get back to doing something a bit more productive.
Productive meaning work on stuff for me, which includes pretty much anything except repeating that LinuxOne is a hoax gone terribly wrong (right?)
And no, this is not a flame to those that expose these misleading statements and stuff, as that is an important thing. But if we spend our entire days looking at what others are doing, we don't get anything done, that is why I am not going to business school, I want to get some work done.
Re:no source code on the floppy...so what? (Score:2)
I don't like LinuxOne, but if your gonna show people that they're a no good company little things like that won't convince many I don't think. I'd hate to give them an opening to say "Yah well (reputable company X) provided me with a floppy and it doesn't have the source on it!"
Bwahahaha... (Score:2)
LinuxOne now has negative credibility.. If they were a
BTW, LinuxOne! Yeah, you! Perhaps you should hire some actual programmers! Take me for example! I wrote essentially your entire 'LinuxMac' in an afternoon! Hell, just troll a the computer lab at your local community college! At least the newbies there have learned to properly catch white-space padding!
Re:Negative Credibility (Score:2)
100,000 shares at $22. Sale in 2 weeks through charitable foundation at 30-50. Guaranteed minimum take of $2.2 million USD. Disband charity, walk with the cash and watch stock plummet.
$2,200,000 goes a long way in Taiwan..
I honestly hope they're not as bad as all appearances lead me to believe.
Re:Highly unlikely... (Score:4)
Charles Ponzi, graduate of the University of Rome: Gave us the modern 'bubble scheme'. Made millions paying his early investors with the deposits of later ones.
William Gates III, college dropout, holder of several honorary degrees: Sold billions of dollars worth of an Operating System look-alike. Maintained his income through shady contracts and the media.
LinuxOne, questionable education: Simple compound stock swindle based on marketing-hype and optioning of Wall Street buzzwords. Uses the same structure as the failed 'gas-saver' swindles of the fifties and sixties; Offer stock based on UberUseful product coming to market, place stock in escrow with uninterested party, sell stock and run with cash to extradition-free island nation.
Shylocks, hucksters and con-artists of any ilk should be laughing outloud at LinuxOne. Why isn't the financial world??
Re:LinuxOne at Linux Expo in NYC (Score:2)
Tripp made those tapes so she could get a book deal out of a friend's confidences. She only turned them over to the feds when she found out that what she had done was illegal...
The book deal was discussed well after she made the tapes. (N.B. Said book was very hypothetical, and was never written.) The tapes were made because Tripp was being already being slandered by the White House as a liar for mentioning a discussion she had witnessed. She was concerned that the White House would publicly lie and smear about her, as they had done to many others who spoke out against the administration (Kathleen Willey et al). She was being pressured to perjure herself for the President by Ms. Lewinsky (the "talking points" memo) and wanted evidence of her own honesty to fall back on if she was going to have to testify truthfully in court against these people.
and Kennith Starr was getting desperate to get SOMETHING on Clinton.
This is even funnier. The OIC (Starr's office) had already secured almost two dozen indictments, most followed by convictions or plea bargains, against members of the administration. They already had their plate full with a number of other areas, such as the travel office firings and Web Hubbel. The last thing they needed was a tawdry sex scandal distraction from more substantial abuses within the administration. But since the President had apparently obstructed justice (as they belived he had on many other occasions), the evidence could not be ignored. With re to a personal vendetta against Clinton in the OIC, keep in mind about half the lawyers in Starr's office were Democrats. But professional prosecutors pursue regardless of party.
Finally, there is a great explanation of the gap in the Nixon tapes in the hilarious movie Dick.
It's remarkable that of all the people you mention, Nixon, Lewinsky, Clinton and Tripp, LT is the only one who is "evil." Yours is a strange belief system.
Re:In defense of Clinton (Score:2)
Points of problems (Score:2)
So you don't want flames? (Score:3)
Re:Peter Norton @ LinuxOne (Score:2)
To imply that they are, and then try to invoke some racial tension with the statement is poor form. But, we've learned not to expect anything better from LinuxOne.
Is anyone compiling the "LinuxOne Debunking Page"? (Score:5)
Jenny
Re:Peter Norton @ LinuxOne (Score:2)
Re:Peter Norton @ LinuxOne (Score:5)
As an African in America it is troubling to see yet another black man hide behind so-called racism once they are caught in a bad situation.
As a programmer who one day hopes to contribute code that it will be GPLed it is troubling that a fellow black man may hide behind racism to justify the reasons his company refused to abide by my license.
By the way slashdot and VA Linux do not in any way control the content on this "board", so your comments on lynching should be directed at the posters of those comments and not Slashdot or VA Linux (I hope you don't think by playing the race card you will get them to censor those posts?)
That we've fucked up is not in dispute.
Glad you realize...we all mess up every once in a while but your company is taking this to the next level.
That we had the balls to come to New York should also not be in dispute.
It takes balls for a legitimate company to come to computer expo?
And, when we succed in our re-engineering and overhaul of our practices we'll expect the same level of coverage of that too. Beleive me when I say I'll be on your website every other day checking up on it and once there's any mention of a "successful engineering" slashdot will be flooded with submissions.
PS: I had a whole bunch of semi-technical questions regarding why you're sales staff don't know what RPM is (or that the R in it stands for Red Hat), or that VA Linux doesn't sell a linux distro or that your website runs Red Hat [ttp] but I decided against it before I get accused of lynching you as well
"Windows-like" use!!? WTF? (Score:2)
From the LinuxOne Products page: As a MAC OS/LinuxPPC user I find this langauge highly offensive. From your informative posts I knew these guys were not terribly bright, but I did not expect them to be abusive...
Still, you have to expect a little guano arround any large penguin colony...
Re:Peter Norton @ LinuxOne (Score:2)
I assume you are referring to the "I got the hammer and nails" post. Since he/she probably didn't know that you were African-American until now, it's a safe bet that has nothing to do with anything. His comments are most likely inspired by a belief that your company is either staffed by incompetent developers or is a complete fraud.
It may be true that VA Linux happens to own the network which hosts Slashdot, but I find it hard to believe that the Slashdot readers who post negative articles and comments about your company are all pawns of VA Linux under orders to spread bad press about LinuxOne. Frankly, since VA Linux actually has a product (unlike LinuxOne which appears to be distributing RedHat with a different label on the box), they probably don't even care.
That we've fucked up is not in dispute.
If by "fucked up", you mean "deliberately attempted to mislead," or "distributed someone else's product with our name on it," then you are correct.
You want to know why no one likes LinuxOne? Because your practices stink of Microsoft. The company that distributed a version of Intergalactic Research's Q-DOS and charged $60 for it, and then went on to rip off the Macintosh GUI and charge $180 for it. Your practices (and Microsoft's) may not be illegal, but they're pretty lame.
And, when we succed in our re-engineering and overhaul of our practices we'll expect the same level of coverage of that too.
The best software companies are the ones with products that inspire nerds to say things like, "Whoa! That's really cool!" Assuming you're not trying to pull some kind of IPO scam, and your programmers aren't 3rd string losers, and you really want to clear your name, then hack some badass code that makes us all ooh and ah.
Best available resource so far (Score:2)
Re:LinuxMac, hfsutils, and GPL (Score:3)
Plus I've taken Bruce Perens up on his offer about some legal help in the GPL arena and taken on the role of GPL compliance officer for the company.
You have my private email for reply.
Thanks,
Richard Bottoms
Peter Norton @ LinuxOne (Score:5)
Please contact me:
Richard Bottoms
Dir. Business Development
LinuxOne
rbottoms@linuxone.net
or call
650.948.6201
2. To Andover and Slashdot, as an African-American it is troubling to read threats of lynching on this board, but if that's how VA Linux Systems and Slashdot choose to handle its business competitors, so be it.
That we've fucked up is not in dispute. That we had the balls to come to New York should also not be in dispute. And, when we succed in our re-engineering and overhaul of our practices we'll expect the same level of coverage of that too.
r.b.