The Thieving Bastards Have Done It Again.

[Samsonite 181]

I've been saying for years that microsoft has begged, borrowed, or stolen nearly everything

they have ever done, and the thieving bastards have done it again:

**************

 

Plurk: Microsoft went to great lengths to steal code

 

Plurk has issued an official response to Microsoft's apology, and it isn't pretty. The startup is hinting that it wants to hold Redmond accountable.

By Emil Protalinski | Last updated December 17, 2009 9:28 AM

 

 

Plurk has issued an official response to Redmond's apology for stealing Plurk's code for use in the microblogging service Juku. The startup isn't ruling out taking the software giant to court. "We are still thinking of pursuing the full extent of our legal options available due the seriousness of the situation. Basically, Microsoft accepts responsibility, but they don't offer accountability."

 

Earlier this week, Plurk accused Microsoft of stealing about 80 percent of its code to create the microblog Juku for MSN China. Redmond responded by pulling the site down and starting an investigation. So far, Microsoft has "acknowledged that a portion of the code they provided was indeed copied," though it blamed a vendor for doing the stealing, which was "in clear violation of the vendor's contract with the MSN China joint venture, and equally inconsistent with Microsoft's policies respecting intellectual property."

 

Plurk further explained that it has only been around for two years, still doesn't have a marketing department or a sales department, and that all capital is put toward development. The startup even offers open source code for some parts of its efforts. After trying to win over the reader by showing how small, but hard-working the company is, Plurk gets serious again. Apparently, Microsoft went to great lengths to the steal the code, according to Plurk: "This event wasn't just a simple matter of merely lifting code; due to the nature of the uniqueness of our product and user interface, it took a good amount of deliberate studying and digging through our codes with the full intention of replicating our product user experience, functionality, and end results."

 

Microsoft then had the advantage of its huge marketing budget for promoting its "innovative product" while Plurk stood by the wayside. At least Microsoft's huge mistake is giving Plurk a ton of free publicity.

 

http://arstechnica.com/microsoft/news/2009...-steal-code.ars

[bratpack 91]

Well bugger me thats interesting lol

[Samsonite 181]

It's not the first time. Think of Stac Electronics, their product 'Stacker' and m$-dos 6.0.

[bratpack 91]

Now thats more interesting,but still not good enough to give me a hard on lol

[joekicker 53]

I've been saying for years that microsoft has begged, borrowed, or stolen nearly everything

they have ever done, and the thieving bastards have done it again:

 

I hadn't read about your previous campaigns in the jihad, but in this particular case the software was contracted by Microsoft, and totally written by a third party. That doesn't take Microsoft out of responsibility of course, but Microsoft neither begged, borrowed, nor stole a thing. It does look right now like it BOUGHT a program that fell off the back of a truck.

 

.

Edited December 20, 2009 by joekicker

[Samsonite 181]

....but in this particular case the software was contracted by Microsoft, and totally written by a third party....

Could you please be kind enough to provide a link to that information?

 

....it does look right now like it BOUGHT a program that fell off the back of a truck.

Sounds similar to the time mickeysoft bought "Quck & Dirty Dos," which, in turn, was nothing more than a plagiarized copy of Digital Research's CP/M.

[joekicker 53]

Could you please be kind enough to provide a link to that information?

 

Oh come ON, GIYF ferpetesake. "juku microsoft' gets hundreds of hits in current news stories. Here is the Seattle PI

 

On Tuesday morning, Microsoft admitted that MSN Juku contains code ripped off from Plurk. The software superpower indefinitely suspended access to MSN Juku, which Microsoft said was developed by a third-party vendor that contracted with MSN China.

Edited December 20, 2009 by joekicker

[Samsonite 181]

Oh come ON, GIYF ferpetesake. "juku microsoft' gets hundreds of hits in current news stories. Here is the Seattle PI

 

On Tuesday morning, Microsoft admitted that MSN Juku contains code ripped off from Plurk. The software superpower indefinitely suspended access to MSN Juku, which Microsoft said was developed by a third-party vendor that contracted with MSN China.

microsoft said? microsoft said??!! So you are assuming a company with their track record is telling the truth and the victim of their crime is not?

Edited December 20, 2009 by Samsonite

[baht_miser 9]

Nothing Microsoft does surprises me. It seems they will attempt to control everything by any means necessary. And yet, I continue to use their products.

[Samsonite 181]

Nothing Microsoft does surprises me. It seems they will attempt to control everything by any means necessary. And yet, I continue to use their products.

The question then becomes, why, when there are alternatives?

[joekicker 53]

microsoft said? microsoft said??!! So you are assuming a company with their track record is telling the truth and the victim of their crime is not?

 

You see, that's why I didn't give you links because you would accuse me. And you did.

 

Google is your friend. You can be so blind that you refuse to learn the juku facts, of course you can. But you stop shooting the messenger while you're being blind, deaf and stubborn, hear? Stop accusing, and go look up the facts (here is one suggestion for a starting place), come back and report what YOU found.

 

.

Edited December 21, 2009 by joekicker

[baht_miser 9]

The question then becomes, why, when there are alternatives?

It just seems easier to go with the main-stream rather than making a stand on principal. Also there is the issue of compatibility and familiarity with the programs in use by the masses. Yes, I use Microsoft, though I scorn their very name.

[frostfire 1,279]

Why is it that you take every opportunity to bash M$, sam? Could it be jealousy?

 

Business is ruthless. Always has been and always will be. Get over it.

 

Frosty

[Samsonite 181]

It just seems easier to go with the main-stream rather than making a stand on principal. Also there is the issue of compatibility and familiarity with the programs in use by the masses. Yes, I use Microsoft, though I scorn their very name...

There have been times when I've thought of giving up and becoming a microsoftie Kool-Aid drinker like one poster in this thread (not you), but when so moved I boot over to windows and it only takes about 20 minutes and I'm "cured."

Once you have set up and ran a good Linux system and, therefore, have at hand something to compare ms-windows to, it becomes painfully obvious ms-windows is an inferior operating system.

 

There are alternatives to the microsoft monopoly and there is very little done on a windows machine that can't be duplicated on a Linux box or a Mac, even if that means running windows in a virtual machine on your Linux or Mac desktop. For example, while HP supplies Linux drivers for their "All-In-One" office products and their standalone printers, they do not, for whatever reasons, provide Linux drivers for their standalone scanners. As the HP prosperity software that came with my scanner does a better job than the generic Linux scanning software (this just applies to this one particular model) I have XP running in a virtual box (machine) on my Slackware64 Linux/KDE desktop. XP thinks it is a separate box on a network, but it is running on the Linux desktop as another application.

 

OpenSUSE Linux (11.2 is the current version) would be a good choice for ms-windows users who would like to try Linux. Like most Linux distributions it can be downloaded for free from the Internet.

 

http://www.opensuse.org/en/

 

 

PCLinuxOS is a more multimedia oriented distribution and very popular.

 

http://pclinuxos.com/

 

 

If you would like to get under the hood (bonnet) and learn Linux then you would enjoy Slackware Linux.

The oldest and still active Linux distribution available.

 

http://www.slackware.org

Edited December 22, 2009 by Samsonite

[MrMango 672]

Sounds similar to the time mickeysoft bought "Quck & Dirty Dos," which, in turn, was nothing more than a plagiarized copy of Digital Research's CP/M.

Not the way I remember it, and I was in the mini-computer business at the time. This is my memory of the early days of the PC revolution.

 

Digital Research was run by Gary Kendall with his wife being the bitch behind the throne. Microsoft was a small company, specializing in writing Basic language software. Both Companies’ software was written for the 8080 chip, which was the prevalent chip in the nerd type PC market.

 

IBM at the time was the dominate Company (Think Intel and Microsoft combined) in the computer business, but they totally missed the start of the PC revolution of 9 bit processors.

 

IBM made a fatal and flawed decision. Rather than developing its own chip and writing software for it, like they had been doing for the last 40 years, they decided to outsource it.

 

They purchased the 8086 (8 and 16 bit chip) from Intel and eventually bought 20% of Intel to assure that they would have a reliable chip source.

 

They then made a trip from Florida where IBM was headquartering, to talk to Digital Research about licensing their CPM operating system for the new machine that they were developing. They also planned to go to Seattle to do the same from Microsoft for a Basic complier.

 

IBM had a very strict corporate policy that it would not talk to anyone that did not sign a very one sided agreement that restricted them from saying anything, but let IBM do anything it wanted with such discussions.

When they visited Digital Research, they gave the forms to Kendall and his bitch, which promptly refused to even discuss signing such an agreement! The IBM people had no choice but to shake there heads and leave, to there next stop in Seattle.

 

Upon arriving at Microsoft, they showed the non disclosure agreement to them, and then had no problems signing such an agreement as they had nothing that IBM could use against them – They were almost a startup.

IBM quickly signed Basic licenses with Microsoft, and during the discussions IBM disclosed the problems with Digital Research. Microsoft then offered to supply them with a DOS.

Microsoft of course, did not have an operating system, but a small Company called Seattle Computer had developed a crude version based around Digital Research’s CPM system. Unkown to IBM, Microsoft purchased it for $50,000 and supplied IBM with it.

 

As the last act of stupidity, when IBM was ready to sell the first PC, Kendall relented and also supplied a DOS operating system, but decided that his OS was far better and they charged double what Microsoft charged - $40 rather then $20 per computer.

 

Talk about being at he right place at the right time – I consider Bill Gates to be the richest accidental Billionaire in the world.

 

Please no flames – I have no sources, just memories.

[Samsonite 181]

Not the way I remember it, and I was in the mini-computer business at the time.

It was all fairly well documented in a PBS Specal called "The Triumphs of the Nerds." If you can't find a copy you can rent it from Netflix. The story was also ran with interviews, as was done in "The Triumphs of the Nerds," with people who were actually involved, on a PBS show by the name of, 'Computer Chronicles."

 

...IBM made a fatal and flawed decision. Rather than developing its own chip and writing software for it, like they had been doing for the last 40 years, they decided to outsource it....

Not quite. The head of IBM knew that because of their huge bureaucracy it would takes years to get anything done and commissioned a hand full of his employees to "do it on their own" almost as if it were a "secret project." IBM built their own PCs, but they did it with off the shelf parts.

 

...They then made a trip from Florida where IBM was headquartering, to talk to Digital Research about licensing their CPM operating system for the new machine that they were developing. They also planned to go to Seattle to do the same from Microsoft for a Basic complier....

IBM is and was headquartered in Armonk, New York. The PC project once it was given the green light, was headquartered in Boca Raton, Florida.

IBM, thinking microsoft did operating systems, made the first trip to Seattle. I'll give gates this, he told IBM they did not have an operating system and sent IBM to Digital Research who was headquartered in Monterey, California. Pacific Grove, California, actually.

 

....then they visited Digital Research, they gave the forms to Kendall and his bitch, which promptly refused to even discuss signing such an agreement! The IBM people had no choice but to shake there heads and leave, to there next stop in Seattle....

Gary Kildal was not there when the meeting first started, but by the time he arrived his wife and the company attorney had already refused to sign the disclosure form.

iBM went back to microsoft and gates, not one to miss an opportunity told IBM they would get an operating system.

 

...a small Company called Seattle Computer had developed a crude version based around Digital Research’s CPM system. Unkown to IBM, Microsoft purchased it for $50,000 and supplied IBM with it....

It was called Quick and Dirty Dos and was written by Tim Paterson, an employee of Seattle Computer who admitted on screen he used Digital Research's CP/M documentation as his guide line. The narrator, actually the guy who wrote "The Triumphs of the Nerds," put two monitors side by side and shows you that other than changing the prompt and the name, there were no differences between what became known as ms-dos and CP/M.

 

As the last act of stupidity, when IBM was ready to sell the first PC, Kendall relented and also supplied a DOS operating system, but decided that his OS was far better and they charged double what Microsoft charged - $40 rather then $20 per computer....

When IBM sold the first PCs, they gave the buyer the option of either ms-dos or Digital Research's CP/M. ms-dos was priced at $40.00. CP/M was priced at... around $240.00. Digital Research had nothing to do with that pricing policy and it came as a complete surprise to them. As a result of such a wide difference in the price, well, as they say, the rest is history.

 

Talk about being at he right place at the right time – I consider Bill Gates to be the richest accidental Billionaire in the world.

He has admitted that. It was during a, IIRC a "60 Minutes" interview. The softball question was to inferred that if gates hadn't made his fortune in software he would have done it some other way. His response was a flat, no. He basically said he was in the right place at the right time or it never would have happened.

Edited December 24, 2009 by Samsonite

[baht_miser 9]

There have been times when I've thought of giving up and becoming a microsoftie Kool-Aid drinker like one poster in this thread (not you), but when so moved I boot over to windows and it only takes about 20 minutes and I'm "cured."

Once you have set up and ran a good Linux system and, therefore, have at hand something to compare ms-windows to, it becomes painfully obvious ms-windows is an inferior operating system.

 

 

...

 

If you would like to get under the hood (bonnet) and learn Linux then you would enjoy Slackware Linux.

The oldest and still active Linux distribution available.

 

http://www.slackware.org

Thanks for the detailed info.

[Samsonite 181]

Why does a company as large as mickeysoft feel they have to steal?! With all the people on their payroll you would think someone would come up with an original idea every now and then, eh?

Here we go again:

 

"Court bans sale of Word; Microsoft promises fix

 

Reuters

By JESSICA MINTZ, AP Technology Writer – Tue Dec 22, 6:42 pm ET

 

SEATTLE – A federal appeals court ordered Microsoft Corp. to stop selling its Word program in January and pay a Canadian software company $290 million for violating a patent, upholding the judgment of a lower court.

 

But people looking to buy Word or Microsoft's Office package in the U.S. won't have to go without the software. Microsoft said Tuesday it expects that new versions of the product, with the computer code in question removed, will be ready for sale when the injunction begins on Jan. 11.

 

Toronto-based i4i Inc. sued Microsoft in 2007, saying it owned the technology behind a tool in the popular word processing program. The technology in question gives Word users an improved way to edit XML, or code that tells the program how to interpret and display a document's contents.

 

A Texas jury found that Microsoft Word willfully infringed on the patent. Microsoft appealed that decision, but the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit on Tuesday upheld the lower court's damage award and the injunction against future sales of infringing copies of Word.

 

Michel Vulpe, founder and co-inventor of i4i, said in a statement that the company is pleased with the decision, calling it "an important step in protecting the property rights of small inventors."

 

Microsoft said it has been preparing for such a judgment since August. Copies of Word and Office sold before Jan. 11 aren't affected by the court's decision. And Microsoft said it has "put the wheels in motion to remove this little-used feature" from versions of Word 2007 and Office 2007 that would be sold after that date.

 

"Beta" or test versions of Word 2010 and Office 2010, expected to be finalized next year, do not contain the offending code, the software maker said.

 

Redmond, Wash.-based Microsoft said it may appeal further, asking for either a rehearing in front of the appeals court's full panel of judges or in front of the U.S. Supreme Court.

___

 

Associated Press writer Devlin Barrett in Washington contributed to this report.

 

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091222/ap_on_...291cnRiYW5zc2Fs

Edited December 23, 2009 by Samsonite

[Samsonite 181]

Oh, why am I not surprised?

*********

October 16th, 2009

Microsoft exposes Firefox users to drive-by malware downloads

Posted by Ryan Naraine @ 9:24 am

 

Remember that Microsoft .NET Framework Assistant add-on that Microsoft sneaked into Firefox without explicit permission from end users?

 

Well, the code in that add-on has a serious code execution vulnerability that exposes Firefox users to the “browse and you’re owned” attacks that are typically used in drive-by malware downloads.

 

[ SEE: Patch Tuesday: MS plugs critical IE, Windows Media Player holes ]

 

The flaw was addressed in the MS09-054 bulletin that covered “critical” holes in Microsoft’s Internet Explorer but, as Redmond’s Security Research & Defense team explains, the drive-by download risk extends beyond Microsoft’s browser.

 

A browse-and-get-owned attack vector exists. All that is needed is for a user to be lured to a malicious website. Triggering this vulnerability involves the use of a malicious XBAP (XAML Browser Application). Please note that while this attack vector matches one of the attack vectors for MS09-061, the underlying vulnerability is different. Here, the affected process is the Windows Presentation Foundation (WPF) hosting process, PresentationHost.exe.

 

While the vulnerability is in an IE component, there is an attack vector for Firefox users as well. The reason is that .NET Framework 3.5 SP1 installs a “Windows Presentation Foundation” plug-in in Firefox.

 

Now, Microsoft’s security folks are actually recommending that Firefox users uninstall the buggy add-on:

 

For Firefox users with .NET Framework 3.5 installed, you may use “Tools”-> “Add-ons” -> “Plugins”, select “Windows Presentation Foundation”, and click “Disable”.

 

This introduction of vulnerabilities in a competing browser is a colossal embarrassment for Microsoft. At the time of the surreptitious installs, there were prescient warnings from many in the community about the security implications of introducing new code into browsers without the knowledge — and consent — of end users.

 

[ SEE: Microsoft says Google Chrome Frame doubles IE attack surface ]

 

This episode also underscores some of the hypocrisy that has risen to the surface in the new browser wars. When Google announced it would introduce a plug-in that runs Google Chrome inside Microsoft’s Internet Explorer, Microsoft whipped out the security card and warned that Google’s move increased IE’s attack surface.

 

“Given the security issues with plug-ins in general and Google Chrome in particular, Google Chrome Frame running as a plug-in has doubled the attach area for malware and malicious scripts. This is not a risk we would recommend our friends and families take.”

 

Of course, when it’s Microsoft introducing the security risk to other browsers (Silverlight, anyone?), we should all just grin and take it.

 

Hat tip to Gregg Keizer.

 

Ryan Naraine is a journalist and security evangelist at Kaspersky Lab. He manages Threatpost.com, a security news portal. Here is Ryan's full profile and disclosure of his industry affiliations.

*************

http://blogs.zdnet.com/security/?p=4614&am...htCol;top-rated

Edited January 2, 2010 by Samsonite