YOU OWN NOTHING! (so says Michael Robertson of Linspire)

[BillMorrow]

You Own Nothing

Michael Robertson of Linspire writes in an email bulliten:

About a year ago, it was revealed that I was the benefactor for the $200,000 Linux on Xbox project. The goal was to get Linux running on an Xbox without making any hardware changes. Many people perceived the project as a jab at Microsoft. It wasn't. Others thought it was an attempt to get publicity for Linspire.

Learn more the Xbox Linux Project:
http://news.com.com/Squeeze+Linux+into+ ... tml?tag=nl

It wasn't (they used another Linux product). In fact, I did it in secret so the focus would be on the technical challenge and the implications of closed hardware. Only after the project leaders begged me to disclose my name because it would bring more attention to the effort did I allow them to tell the press. Though the project did not achieve its full technical goal, still $150,000 was distributed. To me it was money well spent because it raised awareness of the biggest threat to personal ownership in the digital age - DRM (Digital Restrictions Management).

In spite of sharing the insides with a traditional PC, the Xbox has a dramatic and dangerous difference. A PC buyer can install any software or hardware that they wish. They own the machine and can change it to suit their needs - true ownership. There are no limitations. This open architecture is largely responsible for the two-decade personal computer revolution. With an Xbox, the user is merely renting the box. Microsoft decides what software (games) users can load and even how they can use it. When it connects to the net, Microsoft can and has instructed the machine to change its behavior to block certain users, functionality or software that it does not agree with. They are changing the rules after you purchase it to suit their needs and not your needs.

The Xbox served as the training wheels for Microsoft's new Longhorn operating system, which is slipping to a 2007 launch. Like the Xbox, Longhorn will limit what software you can load. In the guise of "security", Microsoft is trying to dramatically change the way PCs work. Instead of the owner deciding what software they want to install and run, Microsoft is seizing that power from them. Under the smokescreen of security, they are pronouncing that it is good for Microsoft to decide what software you can use.

It's the ultimate marketing challenge to explain to the world that turning over more control to Microsoft is an improvement that computer users should desire and pay money for. Microsoft has floated a series of hyper-technical sounding initiatives like Palladium and Next-Generation Secure Computing Base (NGSCB), each time explaining why it's a good thing for Microsoft to decide what software users should use. Earlier this week, Bill Gates talked about how it was like a "black box flight recorder," a not-so-subtle reference to 9/11 designed to tug on emotions. I leave it to others to comment on whether Microsoft has the security track record to decide what software is secure enough for me to be running. I'm more interested in the liberty and cost issues.

Some of you may be wondering why having choice over software is a "liberty" issue. We are quickly moving to a world where every communication, document, photo, song and movie is digitized and living on a PC or PC-like device. Software is the gateway to access parts of those elements. Without control over the software, there is no control of the underlying digital item. Your access can be taken away or modified at anytime. No control means you do not have ownership. This would be like buying a new home and then finding out that someone else has the keys to the front door and they control your access in and out of the home. You'd hardly feel like a home "owner" in such a situation.

Let me give you a concrete example. The biggest deployment of software control is Apple Computer's iTunes. Unbeknown to most users, all the music purchased from iTunes music store is only accessible from iTunes software because of DRM limitations. Buyers can't decide to listen to their songs on other software or even other hardware devices - Apple decides that, and they can change the rules when it suits them. (Apple states this in their Terms of Use.)

Unfortunately this is not a theoretical risk; it has already happened several times. Apple removed the ability to stream music from your home and office if they are on different networks. They tightened restrictions on how many CDs you can burn. They further clamped down on how many computers can stream the music simultaneously. They've even altered the iTunes software to limiting interoperability with music from competitor Real Networks. The problem is that this change all take place after you purchase the music and will continue to happen whenever it suits Apple. Music buyers are forced to use the new software because of bug fixes, security issues and new music needs they have, forcing users to meekly swallow the arbitrary changes Apple makes, which affects their music purchases. This is analogous to a rental agreement where the landlord can raise the rent, ban pets, or change other rules on a moment's notice. Now imagine this same corporate control over every document, photo, video as well as music file. This is what Microsoft will have and more if they can dictate what software can be run on your PC with their upcoming operating system.

Learn more about Lsongs:
http://www.lsongs.com/

I want to own my property. I want the liberty to decide what software I use. I want the freedom to listen to music and movies that I pay for on whatever device I want. I might like iTunes today, Windows Media tomorrow and Lsongs next year. I want that choice. The world needs consumers to have that choice so they will always be treated fairly. If consumers lose the choice they become locked into one vendor and lose control over the digital products they had purchased and assumed they "owned."

I don't think Apple or Microsoft are intentionally evil. I just think that corporations cannot resist the urge to block competitors and squeeze customers at every turn. If Microsoft controls what software I can run, they will charge a lot of money for that software because I will be locked in. If Apple has control, they will make it only work on their hardware, which won't be cheap. I don't want any company - even Linspire - controlling my digital world. If a corporation controls my PC, my software or how I use my digital property, then I really don't own it. Historian Lord Acton said it best:



"The danger is not that a particular class is unfit to govern. Every class is unfit to govern... Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely."

Linspire, MP3.com, SIPphone, MP3tunes, and all the other companies I am or have been involved with have steadfastly stood for open standards. I will continue to champion choice for consumers so each of us truly can own and control our property, including the portfolio of digital property consumers are acquiring in today's ever-expanding digital world.


-- Michael

Read past Michael's Minutes.

Please visit support.linspire.com to answers questions you may have about Linspire.

The Affordable Choice!

About Linspire
Linspire is an affordable Linux-based operating system, designed specifically for desktop and laptop computers in homes, schools and businesses. Linspire uses CNR technology that allows the installation, updating and management of hundreds of software programs usually with just one click. The 4.5 Linspire operating system is also offered in Spanish www.linspire.com/espanol, Italian www.linspire.com/italiano and Japanese www.linspire.com/livedoor. Those who are interested in becoming authorized resellers of Linspire should visit, www.linspire.com/reseller, or www.linspire.com/builder if interested in selling computers pre-loaded with Linspire.

We are located at 9333 Genesee Ave, 3rd floor, San Diego, CA, 92121
Linspire,Linspire Five-0 and CNR are trademarks of Linspire, Inc. All other company and product names may be the trademarks of their respective owners. © 2005. All rights reserved.

*****************************
I get these emails, this one is interesting reading.
Now argue about this one..
*****************************

[carbon_unit]

That is exactly why I run Linux full time on my Thinkpad!
I have been evaluating Linspire for a few days but for now I am sticking with Xandros.

[egibbs]

Interesting and amazingly timely Bill,

I am currently in the midst of learning to like Linux. After installing Ubuntu last week I've been learning how to do stuff, setting things up the way I like them, getting needed software, and fixing problems.

As I was driving to work today I was struck by the analogy that moving to a new OS is a lot like meoving into a new home. You need to move your stuff in, paint the walls the color you like, fix the leaky faucets, etc. The I realized that for years with Windows I've just been renting my apartment. Linux is a lot more like owning your own house - it's more work but affords a lot more freedom as well.

Under Windows I can't knock out a few walls and combine the dining and living rooms into a great room - the underlying structure is hidden from me and my rental agreement prohibits messing with it. I'm limited basically to re-arranging the furniture and hanging a few pictures.

Under Linux I can do anything I want as long as I have the carpentry skills required. Add a second floor? No problem. Or maybe I want a smaller place with less maintenance? No problem.

Mind you, I'm not knocking the rental model - it has it's place. There are lots of advantages to renting if you don't want to have to deal with the issues of ownership. In the real worlld I own a townhouse - sort of a middle ground between renting and full scale ownership. I get some of the freedom of ownership but can spend my summer weekends NOT doing yardwork. In exchange I give up the freedom to park an RV in my yard, which is fine.

I think the world needs both models - ownership and renting, as well as several graduations in between. People should be free to choose the model that best suits their needs and also free to change their model as their needs evolve throughout their life.

The problem with the current state of DRM, as Michael Robertson points out, is that it can become a powerful means of locking people in to the model they are currently using. If you have $30,000 worth of music that will only play on Apple software, and Apple someday chooses to only make that software available to renters of it's OS, how free are you to move?

Of course much of the blame goes to the consumers willingly accept those kinds of restrictions.

Suppose a landlord provided a free stereo in every apartment, but the stereo only played music in a proprietary format that the landlord owned the rights to. He was a decent sort of fellow, and only charged $.99 a song for the rights. You could go out and buy your own stereo if you wanted, but it would not play the songs in the landlord's format, and the sound quality would not be as good because the landlord's stereo was designed by experts to match the exact shape and acoustic properties of your apartment. So you buy the landlord's songs - hey it's just a couple bucks a day for a couple songs, less than the cost of a latte. But after a few years you have a big investment in music that will be wiped out if you ever decide to move. So you're locked not just into renting, but renting from that landlord only.

Now whose fault was that? The landlord who offered a service at a fair price but with restrictions? Or yours for investing so much money in something that was an obviously one sided deal to begin with.

There are a lot of complex issues here, and Michael Robertson is no dis-interested observer. But people need to be informed about the choices they are making, and understand the consequences for themselves before they find themselves hostage to their music library.

Ed Gibbs

[Batuta]

...

[jdhurst]

Batuta - your point mirrors Microsoft and the vending community. I have sympathy for that point of view, and pay for everything I have. The downside as I see it is that:

(1) DRM will get in the way of everything an honest person does and generally make life difficult.

(2) It is by now a given in the user community that vendors are happy to rip us off by making us pay for content we don't want (a whole CD of rubbish for one song), and a complete unwillingness to refund our money when the song paid for turns out to be rubbish as well.

The point can be made that the vending community wants DRM more to line their pockets than to protect their property. It turns out that they may not be as badly damaged as they claim because many people already do pay for what they have.

It is by no means an open and shut case. ... JD Hurst

[Batuta]

...

[carbon_unit]

As much as I used to like BeOS I don't hold out much hope for it's return, but it would be nice. I loved that OS.
I'm afraid theat Linux is the one that has the momentum right now (if you group them all together) to possibly bump windoze.
Even though Linux has many faults it is progressing rapidly and will someday be more usable than windoze. At that point developers will probably succumb to the wishes of big brother and I will have to move on to something else.
I'm not concerned so much with code purity or eye candy but with the amount of "Big Brother" that is in my OS of choice. Windoze is a convoluted nightmare to work on, Linux is complex and BeOS and OS2 (from what I understand) are simple and elegant, easy to modify and work with. The latter two OS'es would be the best to use but like the VHS vs Betamax issue went, the best isn't always the winner.

Now not to say I am a windoze hater. I make my living fixing broken windoze every day, but I assure you that there is no windoze booting at my home. My wife and I use linux and my daughter has an Imac. I spend 0 minutes a week fixing any of them.
I know better than to use windoze, but I'm glad others do.

[Batuta]

...

[asiafish]

To avoid Windows and still have a user friendly system is easy, just buy a Mac.

[GoEatFood]

I have to disagree with the person that said linux is a geek/hacker OS.

I don't know how long ago you did that for your friend or what version of Linux you used. but, I've found linux to be a mixed bag.

and if this guys sister is yanking out power plug out of a system...it's bound to crash even a windoze system shouldn't be shut down like that.

as to the Linux community saying that he shouldn't even own a computer. you must have went to the wrong forums...I've found fourms to be very help with even with my stupd questions when first starting with it. and I mean you obviously shouldn't ask a google answered question. that just truely shows you shouldn't be using a computer.

I've found that computers are bound to crash or have their bumps in the road and you use the computer user should be able to correct those...paying someone to fix something that most of the time can be taken care of in 30 minutes is just sad and it shows how we as a people have gotten lazy in seach for information.