SimDesk ??
Martha H Adams
Houston, Texas, finding something else than Windows for its
computers. I thought this would be Linux. It wasn't. In fact, Linux
was mentioned nowhere in several long columns of newspaper text.
The story was, came renewal and updating time for their Windows
licenses (it seems to happen about every 2-4 years, costing near $250
per license), Houston city managers looked at the cost and balked.
Microsoft salesmen suggested if Houston didn't renew their licenses
they'd get visits from the Business Software Alliance to all their
offices and machines, and be assessed up to $150,000 per violation.
Microsoft says this wasn't intimidation. (!!)
Anyhow, the city managers began to look at options and they found
something named "SimDesk," which they chose despite the company's
short history.
Which is very interesting, for I *never heard* of SimDesk. I follow
several usenet newsgroups, and I've seen no mention by anybody
anywhere about SimDesk. It comes out of nowhere. What is this
SimDesk? Where from?
It occurs to me, perhaps SimDesk has hidden money roots leading back
to Microsoft. Something like their "Business Software Alliance".
Made with a purpose. Could SimDesk be a trojan on a giant scale?
It could work like this. SimDesk with its binaries from secret code
like Microsoft, competes with Microsoft and gets noticed in the
market. Over some time, it starts to become popular. But the SimDesk
binaries have trapdoors; when the time is right a signal is sent, and
SimDesk becomes a disaster for those who use it. The business
community of computer users gets badly hurt. SimDesk folds and
disappears, having *served the purpose it was made for*.
*Which is* to prove how good Microsoft is and how bad all those
non-Microsoft therefore rogue software companies are: Linux,
especially, which doesn't even have a single company it comes from.
Business owners, a lot of money there, are impatient about technical
detail: heads roll and major purchasing policies get set in concrete.
But,
*Nobody gets fired for buying Microsoft,* which sits clear of the
mess, saying, We warned you, we told you so. And of course, the
SimDesk debacle "proves" their words.
And that's my construction of one scenario of how SimDesk comes out of
nowhere, an instant leading alternative in business software vs
Microsoft.
Cheers -- Martha Adams
fast
> nowhere, an instant leading alternative in business software vs
> Microsoft.
>
> Cheers -- Martha Adams
http://zapatopi.net/afdb.html
--
Microsoft is not the answer, it is the question. The answer is NO!!!
Smart One
> I noticed something in one of yesterday's newspapers about the city of
> Houston, Texas, finding something else than Windows for its
> computers. I thought this would be Linux. It wasn't. In fact, Linux
> was mentioned nowhere in several long columns of newspaper text.
I thought that was odd too.
> The story was, came renewal and updating time for their Windows
> licenses (it seems to happen about every 2-4 years, costing near $250
> per license), Houston city managers looked at the cost and balked.
> Microsoft salesmen suggested if Houston didn't renew their licenses
> they'd get visits from the Business Software Alliance to all their
> offices and machines, and be assessed up to $150,000 per violation.
>
> Microsoft says this wasn't intimidation. (!!)
I can't believe their strong arm tactics. They are doing the same thing
with schools. One of the really bad things about their new "term based
licensing" setup is that you are locked into CONTINUALLY buying new
software. It isn't going to be like Windows 95 where you can still be
running it 7 years later if you can put up with it. With the new
licensing system, you pay every year even for an old OS. For some reason
the press hasn't seemed to pick up on this.
> Anyhow, the city managers began to look at options and they found
> something named "SimDesk," which they chose despite the company's
> short history.
I found that odd too.
> Which is very interesting, for I *never heard* of SimDesk. I follow
> several usenet newsgroups, and I've seen no mention by anybody
> anywhere about SimDesk. It comes out of nowhere. What is this
> SimDesk? Where from?
It looks to me like they've written their own office suite (or bought
someone elses defunct office suite) and are going to serve it to users
over the internet. Ala Citrix server, only they probably aren't using
Citrix becuase the licensing fees are so high.
I'd actually be surprized if OS isn't involved here somewhere. I tried to
get a closer look at the applications on their website, but for some
reason larger images aren't available. The images didn't look like
Windows images. The icons/menus were too big to have been created in
Visual C++ or VB.
> It occurs to me, perhaps SimDesk has hidden money roots leading back
> to Microsoft. Something like their "Business Software Alliance".
> Made with a purpose. Could SimDesk be a trojan on a giant scale?
Hmmmm.... the business model doesn't make sense. Lets say they wrote
those applications from the ground up. They still need to serve them. It
would still be costly to use a Microsoft server because I think you'd have
to buy seat licenses. I'll bet they are using Linux to serve it with some
sort of proprietary application serving routine. It might be an all out
vnc setup or even XWindows, but that would take a lot of bandwidth.
Bandwidth enters into this as well. It seems like the apps run on a
server.
> It could work like this. SimDesk with its binaries from secret code
> like Microsoft, competes with Microsoft and gets noticed in the
> market. Over some time, it starts to become popular. But the SimDesk
> binaries have trapdoors; when the time is right a signal is sent, and
> SimDesk becomes a disaster for those who use it. The business
> community of computer users gets badly hurt. SimDesk folds and
> disappears, having *served the purpose it was made for*.
Could be, but I doubt it. It looks like an unrelated effort.
> *Which is* to prove how good Microsoft is and how bad all those
> non-Microsoft therefore rogue software companies are: Linux,
> especially, which doesn't even have a single company it comes from.
> Business owners, a lot of money there, are impatient about technical
> detail: heads roll and major purchasing policies get set in concrete.
I can't see this being a good decision either. I think they should
have/could have went Linux and spent the money they are spending on
SimDesk on Linux support.
> But, *Nobody gets fired for buying Microsoft,* which sits clear of the
> mess, saying, We warned you, we told you so. And of course, the
> SimDesk debacle "proves" their words.
That sort of scenario will probably happen anyway.
Erik Funkenbusch
> The story was, came renewal and updating time for their Windows
> licenses (it seems to happen about every 2-4 years, costing near $250
> per license), Houston city managers looked at the cost and balked.
> Microsoft salesmen suggested if Houston didn't renew their licenses
> they'd get visits from the Business Software Alliance to all their
> offices and machines, and be assessed up to $150,000 per violation.
>
> Microsoft says this wasn't intimidation. (!!)
Actually, Houston readily admits that it owes microsoft about $500,000 for
unlicensed software.
It really depends on how it's phrased whether it's a threat or not.
1) We know, and you admit, that are using unlicensed software, so we're
planning to audit you. If you sign up for our comprehensive site plan
though, there will be no need for an audit because you are guaranteed to be
fully licensed.
2) If you don't sign up for our sweeping site license, we'll audit your ass
and you'll owe us tons of money.
Those are really two different things, but both can be portrayed the way the
article was written.
The fact is, Houston admits they're in violation. MS is fully within their
rights to demand an audit.
B'ichela
>
> Anyhow, the city managers began to look at options and they found
> something named "SimDesk," which they chose despite the company's
> short history.
>
> Which is very interesting, for I *never heard* of SimDesk. I follow
> several usenet newsgroups, and I've seen no mention by anybody
> anywhere about SimDesk. It comes out of nowhere. What is this
> SimDesk? Where from?
www.simdesk.com. heres a snip of the page (via links)
Welcome to SimDesk Technologies, Inc.
(p1 of 2)
[IMG]
[IMG]
[IMG]
[IMG]
Company History Overview Press Releases Report/Help
Request
Values & Philosophies Product List In the News Online Help
Files
Management
Corporate Contacts
Welcome to Simdesk Technologies, Inc. USA TODAY -
01/22/2003
(STI) How Houston took
on
Microsoft - and
won
SIMDESK TECHNOLOGIES, Inc., a software The city goes with
an
development company incorporated in 1999, upstart competitor
in a
has created technology that represents move that could help
the most significant and pioneering puncture Microsoft's
Internet innovation in the last 20 years. software monopoly
The essential component of the technology
is an exclusive, first to market,
proprietary web-enabled transport
protocol. Its patented methodology is
unrivaled and is the most groundbreaking
and efficient way for applications to
--
A tagline from Comp.os.Linux.Advocacy:
(I keep hearing RTFM, but I'm not sure where TFM is).
From the Desk of the Sysop of:
Planet Maca's Opus, a Free open BBS system.
Telephone 860-738-7176 300-33.6kbps
Telnet://pinkrose.dhis.org. Open 24/7!
The New Cnews maintainer
B'ichela
Rick
> Martha H Adams <m...@TheWorld.com> wrote:
>> The story was, came renewal and updating time for their Windows
>> licenses (it seems to happen about every 2-4 years, costing near $250
>> per license), Houston city managers looked at the cost and balked.
>> Microsoft salesmen suggested if Houston didn't renew their licenses
>> they'd get visits from the Business Software Alliance to all their
>> offices and machines, and be assessed up to $150,000 per violation.
>>
>> Microsoft says this wasn't intimidation. (!!)
>
> Actually, Houston readily admits that it owes microsoft about $500,000 for
> unlicensed software.
>
> It really depends on how it's phrased whether it's a threat or not.
>
> 1) We know, and you admit, that are using unlicensed software, so we're
> planning to audit you. If you sign up for our comprehensive site plan
> though, there will be no need for an audit because you are guaranteed to be
> fully licensed.
>
> 2) If you don't sign up for our sweeping site license, we'll audit your ass
> and you'll owe us tons of money.
>
> Those are really two different things, but both can be portrayed the way the
> article was written.
>
> The fact is, Houston admits they're in violation. MS is fully within their
> rights to demand an audit.
>
Yes, they are. And they have the right to use those license agreements in
an intimidating manner, as long as it is not illegal. And Houston has the
right to tell micro$oft to bugger off, it isn't going to pay to upgrade
every two years whether it wants to or not... and it si going with another
system... and BTW, we'll play it in National news.
>
(snip)
--
Rick
Joseph Dalton
> Martha H Adams <m...@TheWorld.com> wrote:
> > The story was, came renewal and updating time for their Windows
> > licenses (it seems to happen about every 2-4 years, costing near $250
> > per license), Houston city managers looked at the cost and balked.
> > Microsoft salesmen suggested if Houston didn't renew their licenses
> > they'd get visits from the Business Software Alliance to all their
> > offices and machines, and be assessed up to $150,000 per violation.
> >
> > Microsoft says this wasn't intimidation. (!!)
>
> Actually, Houston readily admits that it owes microsoft about $500,000 for
> unlicensed software.
>
> It really depends on how it's phrased whether it's a threat or not.
>
> 1) We know, and you admit, that are using unlicensed software, so we're
> planning to audit you. If you sign up for our comprehensive site plan
> though, there will be no need for an audit because you are guaranteed to be
> fully licensed.
>
> 2) If you don't sign up for our sweeping site license, we'll audit your ass
> and you'll owe us tons of money.
>
> Those are really two different things, but both can be portrayed the way the
> article was written.
>
> The fact is, Houston admits they're in violation. MS is fully within their
> rights to demand an audit.
>
Funny, I don't read the article that way.
<quote>
While not an audit, Haines (Microsoft rep) produced data
purporting to show the city owed Microsoft $1.1 million for software
he said was being used illegally by city workers, Lewis says.
...
Lewis decided to do his own count of Houston's software. Discrepancies
soon cropped up. Microsoft's data showed the public works department
to be short 252 Office licenses. But the city's check revealed it had
135 more Office licenses than it needed.
By Microsoft's count, another big department, the library, looked to
be short 450 Office licenses. But Houston rounded up documentation
covering all of those copies, including 111 donated by Microsoft
Chairman Bill Gates' charity foundation.
Houston said it owed Microsoft, at most, $500,000.
Haines responded with two new contracts, both for less than the
original $12 million, Lewis says, although neither side will release
details.
Microsoft is checking Houston's count. Lewis hasn't indicated interest
in Microsoft's revived offers and says he's committed to the SimDesk
deal. "If we owe Microsoft anything, we're prepared to pay," he adds.
</quote>
Sounds like its up in the air to me.
--
Joe Dalton
Lee Wei Shun
> Martha H Adams <m...@TheWorld.com> wrote:
>> The story was, came renewal and updating time for their Windows
>> licenses (it seems to happen about every 2-4 years, costing near $250
>> per license), Houston city managers looked at the cost and balked.
>> Microsoft salesmen suggested if Houston didn't renew their licenses
>> they'd get visits from the Business Software Alliance to all their
>> offices and machines, and be assessed up to $150,000 per violation.
>>
>> Microsoft says this wasn't intimidation. (!!)
>
> Actually, Houston readily admits that it owes microsoft about $500,000 for
> unlicensed software.
>
> It really depends on how it's phrased whether it's a threat or not.
>
> 1) We know, and you admit, that are using unlicensed software, so we're
> planning to audit you. If you sign up for our comprehensive site plan
> though, there will be no need for an audit because you are guaranteed to
> be fully licensed.
>
> 2) If you don't sign up for our sweeping site license, we'll audit your
> ass and you'll owe us tons of money.
>
> Those are really two different things, but both can be portrayed the way
> the article was written.
>
> The fact is, Houston admits they're in violation. MS is fully within
> their rights to demand an audit.
>
The context is really *who* states it:
Used car salesman:
"I'll make you an offer you can't refuse!"
Mafia boss:
"I'll make you an offer you can't refuse."
The chilling effects are quite different.
Cheers,
Wei Shun
--
Change to leews to mail.
Linux user #61399
The beginning of the end
Andres Soolo
>> And that's my construction of one scenario of how SimDesk comes out of
>> nowhere, an instant leading alternative in business software vs
>> Microsoft.
>
> http://zapatopi.net/afdb.html
Well, it certainly is a Dilbert-esque company. Look at their mission
statement, for example.
--
Andres Soolo <so...@math.ut.ee>
Beam me up, Scotty!