<div class="gmail_quote"> <br>On Tue, Jul 21, 2009 at 8:51 AM, Paul W. Frields <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:stickster@gmail.com">stickster@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
<div class="im">On Tue, Jul 21, 2009 at 12:25:14PM +0300, Nicu Buculei wrote:<br>
> On 07/21/2009 12:04 PM, Keiran Smith wrote:<br>
>> Well looks like us linux users can look forward to some of the<br>
>> instabilities of windows in our Own Operating Systems. What are<br>
>> microsoft thinking<br>
><br>
> I don't think you will be affected by this code unless you run a<br>
> virtualized Linux guest on a Windows host and if you do that... well,<br>
> probably you already have bigger problems :p<br>
><br>
> I am quite pleased by the Microsoft announcement, from now on when an MS<br>
> astroturfer will try to throw FUD at me about Linux being inferior<br>
> security and quality wise compared with Microsoft solutions I can smile<br>
> and point Microsoft *is* a contributor to the Linux kernel.<br>
><br>
> The same about GPL: after releasing code under GPL, it would be really<br>
> embarrassing for Microsoft to call again it as being "communist",<br>
> "cancer" or "Pac-Man".<br>
<br>
</div>I think it's quite simple for Microsoft to say, "We still don't like<br>
the GPL, but because these drivers will help our customers, and<br>
because this license is required to get them in the kernel, we've done<br>
it." Certainly there are places in Microsoft that are open to<br>
thinking constructively about open source and how it fits into their<br>
business and customer engagements. But I think trying to cast it as a<br>
philosophical sea change is wishful thinking.<br>
<font color="#888888"><br>
--<br>
Paul W. Frields <a href="http://paul.frields.org/" target="_blank">http://paul.frields.org/</a><br>
gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233 5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717<br>
<a href="http://redhat.com/" target="_blank">http://redhat.com/</a> - - - - <a href="http://pfrields.fedorapeople.org/" target="_blank">http://pfrields.fedorapeople.org/</a><br>
<a href="http://irc.freenode.net" target="_blank">irc.freenode.net</a>: stickster @ #fedora-docs, #fedora-devel, #fredlug<br>
</font><div><div></div><div class="h5"><br>
--<br>
Fedora-marketing-list mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Fedora-marketing-list@redhat.com">Fedora-marketing-list@redhat.com</a><br>
<a href="https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-marketing-list" target="_blank">https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-marketing-list</a><br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br>Hi all:<br><br>-what is the best side of this with Fedora and are we supporting this, if yes then why? <br>-More than, does anyone can violate the GPL license rules for their own business?<br>
-Why we saying Microsoft as a contributor to the linux kernel while it is already developed by Linux contributor? <br>
<br>
Rashadul Islam<br>
GPG 5557BFAC<br><a href="mailto:irashadul@gmail.com">irashadul@gmail.com</a><br>