IBM Subpoenas Microsoft! Sun! Baystar and HP!

Hmmm...methinks you have an agenda.

Hmmmm....most pro-Gates trolls say that. Then the facts are brought forth and they vanish.

I checked the two sources you included in your reply

Good. I have many more.

the first says nothing about him stealing code, only about his gifts to Harvard.

Read for comprehension, please. From TFA:

Gates has said that he withdrew from Harvard to pursue his career. However, according to interviews, he left after a dispute over alleged rules violations at the Aiken lab, including using its computers for private business.

''There was a flap, no question about it,'' says his father, William Gates Sr., who now runs his son's charitable foundation. ''My son felt a little put upon by the Harvard administration's attitude.''

The second "source" starts out with a paper titled "Why I Hate Microsoft", surely a cogent and unbiased view of the facts.

Yes, of course, because the title of the article has everything to do with the content of it.

Your response to my comment about using Microsoft sofware in courses doesn't address my comment. You jumped from my instructional use to some guesstimates about the costs of viruses...not the same thing,

My comment about cost was in direct response to your mild hand-wave..."Microsoft products may not be perfect..."

If Ford or Dow Chemical or Exxon-Mobile bilked the consumer for billions of dollars a year, I suspect that such comments would be a bit stronger. Somehow, William H. Gates III, a leftist scumbag, is held to a different standard and his company along with him.

but a common tactic used to deflect from the issue being discussed, especially when one doesn't know how to address the real issue.

Not actually reading the provided links and making up your own "facts" instead seems to be the more trollish of the two.

As to the caustic comment about my teaching, I teach software development courses (not op systems software) which are primarily concerned with application development. Visual Studio .NET provides a viable environment to accomplish that task,

You do warn your students about the problems of developing to a closed source model, yes? Especially after Microsoft's history of abandoning development platforms, leaving developers stranded and forcing business to spend millions of dollars to port their apps? Visual InterDev, anyone?

I've been writing and teaching software development for almost 30 years and never felt the necessity of having someone else's source code to make a point to my students.

Ah, the old appeal to authority fallacy. Well, Mr. "I've been a developer since rocks were soft," who cares how long you've been doing it wrong?

Oh, please...facts? What facts? Presenting your own words, you wrote:

Read for comprehension, please. From TFA:

Gates has said that he withdrew from Harvard to pursue his career. However, according to interviews, he left after a dispute over alleged rules violations at the Aiken lab, including using its computers for private business.

''There was a flap, no question about it,'' says his father, William Gates Sr., who now runs his son's charitable foundation. ''My son felt a little put upon by the Harvard administration's attitude.''

Show me where your quote says he stole Basic from Harvard. I did read your sources, but perhaps I'm not as adept at reading between the lines as you are.

Your well-articulated retort then poses:

If Ford or Dow Chemical or Exxon-Mobile bilked the consumer for billions of dollars a year, I suspect that such comments would be a bit stronger. Somehow, William H. Gates III, a leftist scumbag, is held to a different standard and his company along with him.

Gates "bilked" the consumer out of billions of dollars? How did he do that...by holding gun to their head, or did the billions come in from people who bought his products? People, like you, are free to buy whatever they wish. It seems to me there are billions of market votes that suggest he's done something right. And what are you basing your conclusion upon that Bill gates is a "leftist scumbag"? Your venom is clouding your vision.

You do warn your students about the problems of developing to a closed source model, yes?

As a matter of fact, we do discuss the dangers of not second-sourcing some types of software, but not in the application development areas, since we are teaching them to develop their own software, not to copy the software written by someone else. Further, if Microsoft "abandoned" a development platform (e.g., Visual Interdev), it was because it was not a popular platform and, when the market told them that, they quit producing it. I guess you think that a company should continue to support a product with no market...like IBM does OS2?

As to your stupid invective:

Ah, the old appeal to authority fallacy. Well, Mr. "I've been a developer since rocks were soft," who cares how long you've been doing it wrong?

Wow...I really got under your skin, didn't I. I wasn't appealing to my years of coding experience, I was simply pointing out that teaching software development doesn't need to rely on copying the source code of someone else. As further evidence of your immature way of attempting to put forth a cogent argument, what's your evidence that I've "...been doing it wrong?" Since you have no clue who I am, how could you possible make such a statement and assume it has merit? I could care less if you want to slander me personally. The really scary part is that you might be old enough to vote.

Show me where your quote says he stole Basic from Harvard.

For the record, Gates stole $40,000 in computer time from Harvard. The agreement between him, Harvard and the US Government that allowed him not to be expelled or charged required that he place the code into the public domain.

This is not in dispute. Gates' father has confirmed that the incident occurred and contemporaries of Gates have confirmed the story.

Code thefts during those days are almost impossible to prove because no one "owned" code. Later however (the Stac case comes to mind) code theft by Microsoft is well established.

Gates "bilked" the consumer out of billions of dollars? How did he do that...by holding gun to their head, or did the billions come in from people who bought his products?

I can tell by your post that you're not too bright so I'll type slowly...

When you knowingly continue to sell a defective product, and that defective product costs the buyers money, the term "bilked" is not inappropriate.

Further, if Microsoft "abandoned" a development platform (e.g., Visual Interdev), it was because it was not a popular platform and, when the market told them that, they quit producing it.

And had it not been a proprietary product, those developers could continue to use it, even after the primary provider discontinued it. Instead, the "market" will be forced to spend millions more dollars to port their apps.

If you aren't issuing that warning to your students then you're as much of an incompetent boob as your postings here indicate.

This, however, is common amongst Gates kneepadders. It's little different from the Clinton enablers. Sad.

Wow...I really got under your skin, didn't I.

Ummmm, wow. You really think highly of yourself to make such an assumption. But I shouldn't be surprised, I suppose, since clear, logical thinking doesn't appear to be your strong suit. However, I suppose I shouldn't be surprised. After all, the high-and-might attitude that you've displayed is fairly common among teachers nowdays. So far you've pretty much proven the old saw to be true..."Those that can't do, teach."

Since you have no clue who I am, how could you possible make such a statement and assume it has merit?

Your own statements indict you. You are passing along your biased and ignorant judgment to another generation. As a teacher, one would hope that you would be not only capable, but also interested in the damage that Bill Gates and his company have and continue to do to the American economy.

But rather than do your own research you've so far rejected information because of the title of the page, ignored the fact that Bill Gates stole $40,000 in computer time from Harvard in order to parse the statement as to whether that really means code theft or not, and generally abuse me since I won't get down on my knees and worship him as you do.

Since some idiot even greater than you (and I'm well aware of the existence of such at modern institutions of education) has seen fit to place you in charge of the indoctrination of the next generation of Billbots, I despair.

Hopefully, however, your particular affection for Bill has precluded you from spreading your genetic material anywhere other than at his feet, thus relieving us of the worry that you have spawned another generation of fawning, drooling morons.

Please...when you get passed personal attacks and become old enough to vote...don't.

Hmmm. So, first you attack me, then you whine that you're being attacked.

Victim mentality?

When you're ready to discuss whether Bill Gates is a leftist scumbag, a man without ethics or morals, then come on back.

And I've been old enough to vote for a very long time, though I'm not sure why you seem to be fixated on that.

I fear for your students.

Please...when you get passed ...

And I think you meant "past," there, teach.

Opps...you're right...it should be "past." It's 2am and I'm a little tired.

Sorry, I didn't mean to imply that I was fixated on your age. I just assumed that the immature thinking reflected in your arguments went along with being too young to vote. Thanks for the correction...I now know you're an immature thinker who is old enough to vote (but somehow, I don't feel any better knowing that).

I'd love to waste more time in a battle of wits with you, but I hate to do battle with a defenseless person, so I'll just leave you and your ignorance to placate one another.

I just assumed that the immature thinking reflected in your arguments went along with being too young to vote.

That's ok, I've assumed that your willingness to excuse the deprivations of Bill Gates and his company go along with your general lack of ability to think clearly.

Thanks for the correction...I now know you're an immature thinker who is old enough to vote (but somehow, I don't feel any better knowing that).

Well, that's too bad. But perhaps if you'd do more thinking and less feeling, you wouldn't be a syncophant for a criminal.

Do you wear your "Free Mumia" t-shirt to class too?

I'd love to waste more time in a battle of wits with you, but I hate to do battle with a defenseless person, so I'll just leave you and your ignorance to placate one another.

Ooooooh, I'm wounded. What's next? Are you going to start ranting, "I know you are, but what am I?"

I've come to suspect that you have the problem that most liberals have, one well reflected upon by Ronald Reagan...

"It's not so much that liberals are ignorant," Ronald Reagan once said. "It just that so much of what they know isn't so."

Go educate yourself about Bill Gates and the other Left-Wing Billionaire Collectivist Pigs.

And about how Microsoft, while one one hand vehemently stating that opening their source code to the general public would be very, very bad, have no problem in giving it all to the government of Communist China. Do note that Microsoft resisited letting the US government have a look at the very same code.

Then you certainly won't be ignorant any more.

Check out the latest over at Groklaw about this. Rob Enderle (analyst cum SCO cheerleader) is trying to say that IBM has some strange motive for doing this late discovery, when in fact they are doing it according to the court's schedule. Don't analysts bother to check facts anymore?

As always, I read the original article without taking Jones' word for it, and as always on IBM/SCO, she's right.