Well, this got my attention. InformationWeek has just stated in a strange anti-GPL, anti-Linux, anti-Open Source article called "Open Source Is Dead, Long Live Open Patents?" (he imagines the IBM patent move this week was to replace the GPL, if I've followed his train of thought) that IBM owns Unix

Open source innovator and SNORT creator, Sourcefire, Inc., today announced that it has acquired ClamAV™, a leading open source gateway anti-virus and anti-malware project.

There are some sites out there that claim to be pro-Microsoft, anti-Linux, anti-open source, or simply appear to favor Microsoft and closed source. That’s fine with me, but then why isn’t closed source good enough for your website? Here is a list of sites that ironically run open source, and even Linux.

Although Linux lovers will rightly say that an anti-piracy initiative isn’t necessary in the FOSS world, free and open source software has overtaken the world yet, and the piracy of commercial software is still a crime that Microsoft is most definitely investigating, chasing and prosecuting.

This is not about being anti-Microsoft. I oversee thousands of machines that use Microsoft software, and many users need applications that are available only for the Microsoft environment. It's not about being anti-Apple. I respect the user experience of Mac OS X, and I wish Steve Jobs would license the operating system to other hardware manufacturers.

There has been a lot of debate recently over whether or not it's a good idea to run an anti-virus program if you're using Linux. I hope to clear up a common misunderstanding: An anti-virus program running on Linux is designed to detect Windows viruses, so that they aren't spread, unknowingly, by the Linux user. This article explains when you should run a Linux anti-virus, and what exactly they do.

This one has been circulating for the past few hours (also sent to Groklaw and added by now). The articles really speak for themselves and they all originate from (or cite) IDG. Although it is not related to Novell, it sure relates to anti-consumer — and probably anti-competitive too — moves from Microsoft.

Ars Technica's Ken Fisher suggested in his article, WGA failure highlights major flaw in Microsoft's anti-piracy strategy, that Microsoft needs a new "anti-piracy" strategy. I not only agree that they need a new strategy, I'll even go so far as to help them craft it.

Microsoft has replaced its controversial anti-Linux Get the Facts Web site with a kinder, gentler site explaining how its Windows Server operating system compares to open-source Linux as well as other competitive OSes