ru.linux

 
 - RU.LINUX ---------------------------------------------------------------------
 From : Sergey Lentsov                       2:4615/71.10   04 Oct 2001  17:56:51
 To : All
 Subject : URL: http://www.lwn.net/2001/1004/
 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
 

    [1][LWN Logo] 
    
                                [2]Click Here 
    [LWN.net]
    
              Bringing you the latest news from the Linux World.
    Dedicated to keeping Linux users up-to-date, with concise news for all
                                  interests
    
    Sections:
     Main page
     [3]Security
     [4]Kernel
     [5]Distributions
     [6]On the Desktop
     [7]Development
     [8]Commerce
     [9]Linux in the news
     [10]Announcements
     [11]Linux History
     [12]Letters
    [13]All in one big page
    
    Other LWN stuff:
     [14]Daily Updates
     [15]Calendar
     [16]Linux Stocks Page
     [17]Book reviews
     [18]Penguin Gallery
    
     [19]Archives/search
     [20]Use LWN headlines
     [21]Contact us
    
    TUCOWS.com:
     [22]linux.tucows.com
     [23]Ext2
     [24]Themes
    
    Recent features:
    - [25]O'Reilly Open Source Conference
    - [26]OLS 2001
    - [27]Gael Duval
    - [28]Kernel Summit
    - [29]Singapore Linux Conference
    - [30]djbdns
    - [31]LinuxWorld NY
    - [32]Jason Haas
    - [33]Larry Wall
    - [34]Bruce Momjian
    - [35]2000 Timeline
    
    Here is the [36]permanent site for this page.
    
    See also: [37]last week's LWN.
    
 Leading items and editorials
 
    A new, proprietary web? Back in mid-August, the World Wide Web
    Consortium (W3C) put out [38]a draft policy on the incorporation of
    patented technology into web standards. The W3C, evidently, did not
    feel much need to publicize this draft, and it came dangerously near
    to ending its comment period with almost nobody realizing what was in
    it. That would have been an unfortunate development. Fortunately, Adam
    Warner was paying attention and issued a detailed [39]call for action
    telling the community what was up.
    
    So, what is up, exactly? The draft policy would allow the W3C to
    incorporate patented technology into web standards as long as the
    patent holder agreed to license the technology in a "reasonable and
    non-discriminatory" manner. This policy, called RAND, makes it
    possible for vendors of proprietary products to know that they can use
    the given technology.
    
    The problem, of course, is that it is not generally possible for free
    software to use patented algorithms. If an implementation of an
    algorithm can not be distributed without the payment of royalties, the
    code obviously can not be put up for download on the net. And the GPL,
    of course, does not allow the inclusion of code with such
    restrictions.
    
    Imagine a future web whose standards include patented technology. That
    is a web that can only be accessed with proprietary software - a very
    different web than the one we have now. It is, conceivably, a web
    without Apache, Mozilla, Konqueror, and many other tools we depend on.
    It's a web that would make certain vendors very happy, since it would
    eliminate the free software threat.
    
    This is a real scenario, and one that could happen quickly. Consider
    the "Scalable Vector Graphics" (SVG) standard, adopted by the W3C on
    September 4. This standard, in fact, includes patented technology (of
    [40]the worst, stupid software patent variety) from Apple, which will
    be available under RAND terms. In other words, the W3C is already
    behaving as if the new policy were in force, which casts some doubt on
    its public comment policy. SVG is not only proprietary, but the
    licensing terms are not publicly available. SVG, in other words, is
    inaccessible to free software. See [41]Daniel Phillips's
    well-researched comments for more information on SVG.
    
    There is a possible alternative scenario, of course to the proprietary
    web: the W3C, by endorsing proprietary standards, finds itself left
    behind by a web that does not want to go that way. The Open Group's
    attempt to take X11 proprietary has been put forward as an example of
    how this could happen. That time, however, we had the XFree86 project,
    which was already the real heart of X11 development. It is not clear
    that there is a body that is well positioned to supersede the W3C in
    this manner. It may not be so easy this time.
    
    If necessary, however, that is what we will have to do.
    
    In response to the last-minute outcry, the W3C has [42]extended the
    comment period, but only to October 11. Now is the time to send in
    polite, well-reasoned arguments on why this policy should not be
    adopted. The people attempting to push through this policy know very
    well what they are doing, but they may still respond to a determined
    show of opposition. There may still be time to make a difference here.
    Perhaps we can avoid a corporate takeover of the web.
    
    (See also: [43]the patent policy comment list, which contains the
    comments posted so far. Included therein are comments from [44]Alan
    Cox, [45]Andrew Tridgell, [46]Bruce Perens, [47]Chuck Mead, [48]Dan
    York, [49]Eben Moglen (on behalf of the Free Software Foundation),
    [50]Ian Clarke, [51]Jeremy Allison, [52]Joe "Zonker" Brockmeier,
    [53]John Gilmore, [54]Richard Stallman, [55]Russell Nelson, [56]Theo
    de Raadt, [57]Tim O'Reilly, and many, many others).
    
    Opportunities in migration services? Last week, the Gartner Group
    suggested that businesses should consider moving away from IIS toward
    other, more secure web servers. The [58]latest Netcraft survey
    suggests that a number of businesses are doing exactly that - tens of
    thousands of IIS-based web sites have disappeared from the net
    recently. Corporate IT operations will stay with a given course
    through inertia for a long time, but, with a sufficient push, they
    will start looking at alternatives. Microsoft's more recent licensing
    and upgrade policies are giving more businesses reasons to look around
    as well.
    
    It seems there should be an opportunity here. After being told for
    years that superior alternatives exist in the form of free software,
    some businesses are starting to look at them. But if all those
    businesses encounter is a pointer to a download site and a collection
    of HOWTOs, they may not look for very long. Now is the time for
    enterprising free software businesses to step forward with
    well-designed, targeted migration services.
    
    Starnix has been quick to see the opportunity here: the Toronto-based
    company has [59]announced a new service to help companies migrate away
    from IIS. The package includes a version of Apache hosted on a secured
    Linux system, consulting, and support services. Here is an offering
    that should be successful; it is a narrowly-targeted service which
    meets a pressing business need.
    
    There should be other such opportunities in the free software world.
    Linux is increasingly ready to take on a wider role in corporate
    computing, and that will create opportunities for companies that can
    help. Those seeking to profit off such opportunities should proceed
    carefully, however; there are several prerequisites that must be met:
      * There must be a real motivation for companies to change. For many,
        Apache's advantages have been insufficient until the recent set of
        IIS security problems started causing real pain. The blue screen
        of death does not appear to be enough to make many desktop users
        look elsewhere. The pressure to adopt a new solution has to be
        strong before most people will think seriously about it.
      * Companies offering migration services must host substantial
        expertise on both the old and new systems. Linux expertise alone
        is insufficient; you must know all about the system you intend to
        replace as well. As Larry Augustin [60]pointed out a few weeks
        ago, many people who are pushing a Linux desktop have failed to
        understand what Microsoft power users are really doing with their
        systems. Approaching the market with only half the necessary
        knowledge is a recipe for failure.
      * There must be convincing support options available. Nobody likes
        the fear that they could be stuck trying to solve problems on
        their own.
      * The free software alternative must be truly superior. For most
        users, the fact that a particular program is free is not enough;
        it must be demonstrably better at solving their problems. The free
        office suites, despite their amazing progress, have probably not
        yet reached that point for many users.
        
    Free software support offerings probably need another look as well.
    These offerings look much like support services for proprietary
    software. The software in question becomes a black box, and the
    support provider takes charge of making it work. But one of the
    advantages of free software is that it is not a black box. "We'll take
    charge" services can deprive their customers of some of the advantages
    of free software. True free software support services should bring
    their customers into the free software community.
    
    Helping customers migrate from proprietary products may not be the
    most exciting business to be in. And it certainly will not be an easy
    business. But it could well prove to be a workable business model for
    those working with free software, even in these difficult times.
    
    Inside this LWN.net weekly edition:
      * [61]Security: The top 20 Internet security vulnerabilities; more
        trouble with PHP.
      * [62]Kernel: Maintaining 0.01; security module licensing; handling
        high network loads.
      * [63]Distributions: Buy a Box Set or Download?; Mandrake Linux 8.1;
        SuSE Linux 7.3. MaxOS and BearOps Linux.
      * [64]On the Desktop: The gamers way - playing games on Linux, Sun
        releases StarOffice 6.0 beta and Ximian adds channels.
      * [65]Development: Dedicated Systems, measuring cluster performance,
        LPRng 3.7.8, Midgard 1.4.2, Python 2.2a4.
      * [66]Commerce: SuSE closes funding round; C|Net sells
        LinuxDevices.com; Alta Terra Ventures Corp.
      * [67]History: What will happen to the Linux VARs?; Linux Myths;
        Corel/Microsoft alliance.
      * [68]Letters: Audio editors; patented web standards; non-free
        security modules.
        
    ...plus the usual array of reports, updates, and announcements.
    
    This Week's LWN was brought to you by:
      * [69]Jonathan Corbet, Executive Editor
      * [70]Michael J. Hammel, Senior Editor
        
    October 4, 2001
    
                               [71]Click Here 
    
                               [72]Click Here 
    
    
                                                        [73]Next: Security
    
    [74]Eklektix, Inc. Linux powered! Copyright Л 2001 [75]Eklektix, Inc.,
    all rights reserved
    Linux (R) is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds
 
 References
 
    1. http://lwn.net/
    2. http://ads.tucows.com/click.ng/pageid=001-012-132-000-000-001-000-000-012
    3. http://lwn.net/2001/1004/security.php3
    4. http://lwn.net/2001/1004/kernel.php3
    5. http://lwn.net/2001/1004/dists.php3
    6. http://lwn.net/2001/1004/desktop.php3
    7. http://lwn.net/2001/1004/devel.php3
    8. http://lwn.net/2001/1004/commerce.php3
    9. http://lwn.net/2001/1004/press.php3
   10. http://lwn.net/2001/1004/announce.php3
   11. http://lwn.net/2001/1004/history.php3
   12. http://lwn.net/2001/1004/letters.php3
   13. http://lwn.net//2001/1004/bigpage.php3
   14. http://lwn.net/daily/
   15. http://linuxcalendar.com/
   16. http://lwn.net/stocks/
   17. http://lwn.net/Reviews/
   18. http://lwn.net/Gallery/
   19. http://lwn.net/archives/
   20. http://lwn.net/op/headlines.phtml
   21. http://lwn.net/op/Contact.html
   22. http://linux.tucows.com/
   23. http://news.tucows.com/ext2/
   24. http://unixthemes.tucows.com/
   25. http://lwn.net/2001/features/oreilly2001/
   26. http://lwn.net/2001/features/OLS/
   27. http://lwn.net/2001/features/MandrakeSoft.php3
   28. http://lwn.net/2001/features/KernelSummit/
   29. http://lwn.net/2001/features/Singapore
   30. http://lwn.net/2001/features/djbdns.php3
   31. http://lwn.net/2001/features/linuxworldny/
   32. http://lwn.net/2001/features/JHaas/
   33. http://lwn.net/2001/features/LarryWall/
   34. http://lwn.net/2001/features/Momjian/
   35. http://lwn.net/2000/features/Timeline/
   36. http://lwn.net/2001/1004/
   37. http://lwn.net/2001/0927/
   38. http://www.w3.org/TR/2001/WD-patent-policy-20010816/
   39. http://lwn.net/2001/1004/a/w3c-patents.php3
   40.
 http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-patentpolicy-comment/2001Oct/0562.html
   41.
 http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-patentpolicy-comment/2001Oct/0555.html
   42. http://www.w3.org/2001/10/patent-response
   43. http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-patentpolicy-comment/
   44.
 http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-patentpolicy-comment/2001Sep/0131.html
   45.
 http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-patentpolicy-comment/2001Oct/0178.html
   46.
 http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-patentpolicy-comment/2001Oct/0027.html
   47.
 http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-patentpolicy-comment/2001Sep/0152.html
   48.
 http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-patentpolicy-comment/2001Sep/0616.html
   49.
 http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-patentpolicy-comment/2001Sep/0650.html
   50.
 http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-patentpolicy-comment/2001Oct/0302.html
   51.
 http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-patentpolicy-comment/2001Sep/0033.html
   52.
 http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-patentpolicy-comment/2001Sep/0257.html
   53.
 http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-patentpolicy-comment/2001Sep/0736.html
   54.
 http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-patentpolicy-comment/2001Oct/0018.html
   55.
 http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-patentpolicy-comment/2001Sep/0754.html
   56.
 http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-patentpolicy-comment/2001Sep/0412.html
   57.
 http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-patentpolicy-comment/2001Oct/0175.html
   58. http://www.netcraft.com/Survey/index-200109.html
   59. http://lwn.net/2001/1004/a/iis-migration.php3
   60. http://lwn.net/2001/1004/a/lma-replacement.php3
   61. http://lwn.net/2001/1004/security.php3
   62. http://lwn.net/2001/1004/kernel.php3
   63. http://lwn.net/2001/1004/dists.php3
   64. http://lwn.net/2001/1004/desktop.php3
   65. http://lwn.net/2001/1004/devel.php3
   66. http://lwn.net/2001/1004/commerce.php3
   67. http://lwn.net/2001/1004/history.php3
   68. http://lwn.net/2001/1004/letters.php3
   69. mailto:lwn@lwn.net
   70. mailto:lwn@lwn.net
   71. http://ads.tucows.com/click.ng/buttonpos=lwnbutton125top
   72. http://ads.tucows.com/click.ng/buttonpos=125-001-016
   73. http://lwn.net/2001/1004/security.php3
   74. http://www.eklektix.com/
   75. http://www.eklektix.com/
 
 --- ifmail v.2.14.os7-aks1
  * Origin: Unknown (2:4615/71.10@fidonet)
 
 

Вернуться к списку тем, сортированных по: возрастание даты  уменьшение даты  тема  автор