A Brief History of Microsoft FUD (2006)
lxer.com
lxer.com
Microsoft: Linux is slow, illegal, communist, unreliable.
Linux advocates: Microsoft is slow, horribly insecure, crashes all the time.
Apple: Windows is for stupid people who aren't like you, hard to use, insecure.
Most of them have varying amounts of real truth attached to them but generally overlook the big picture or just frame it in a way that makes them look best.
In addition, most of the talking points work off of the previous age, things that were much more true some considerable time ago.
"So how might this apply to open source? Well, consider a US carrier offering an Android handset: under the new laws, they would effectively be required to prove that not only did they not use any pirated Microsoft software, but that none of their suppliers did either. And given that many of those suppliers are likely to be in China, where piracy is not completely unknown, the chances that at least one supplier is in fact using the odd dodgy copy of Windows or Office is probably somewhat close to 1.
But it goes much further than Android. One of the biggest growth areas for Linux is consumer electronics. Many of the most exciting low-cost digital consumer products are running stripped-down and customised versions of Linux at their heart – and not Microsoft's Windows CE. Again, retailers and importers of those Linux-based systems would need to be able to prove that not a single one of their suppliers had a single pirated copy of Microsoft products anywhere. If they couldn't, Microsoft could effectively block the import of those products into the US states that have passed this new legislation."
Your quote seems like a reasonable line of thought, but it's not exactly targeting open source, it's targeting users of pirated software. It could lead to some open source collateral damage, but OTOH it could lead to suppliers switching to opensource software. Why are they running pirated Windows anyway?
I can guarantee that Microsoft isn't going to pursue this sort of legal action against companies that are building products on Windows & Windows Phone 7.
It is yet another attempt on their part to impose a tax on companies that aren't building on their platforms & the prime target is clearly companies building on open source platforms specifically Linux & Android.
-Mahatma Gandhi
Then it has won, no? :-)
Fortunately, these are almost all based on the same kernel, which will allow for better interoperability and cross-platform software (cross-platform meaning Ubuntu/Red Hat/BSD/Mac etc, not Windows/*nix variant). OSS is a philosophy, not a monopolistic party.
Or, possibly, the beginning of an Apple-dominated monopoly.
In my experience the kernel is not such a big issue when it comes to cross-platform software. In fact, having a cross-platform core is doable right now with reasonable effort. The problems are ironically related to the different desktop managers, package managers and so on. :)
"If Google is just a house of cards, what's he so worried about??"
"Ballmer is not worried about google. that's WHY he said he would burry them. granted google will be a strong contender against microsoft.but do you Really think the microsoft empire will lose?! doubt it."
"Like wow... that's amazing. I guess Google is really going to do an OS and a browser."
"I'm scared to say it, but Google doesn't actually have a stable, reliable income at this point. Their stock offering and Google Earth Pro isn't enough revenue to survive an all out war with M$."
"I find the Google brand advocates funny. Google is indeed a house of card. And the reason is simple - if Google ceases to exist tommorrow, it would not matter to me or the majority of the Internet. There are plenty of 'search' technology out there."
"Google is just a bunch of PhDs trying to screw some money and get laid. They have no product, no income, no long term strategy and no future. Google is possibly last but deffinitely biggest dot com baloon about to do the typical dotcom boooooom... I just imagine Booom logo in Google colour letters."
"As much as I adore Linux and hate Microsoft everybody here is wayy off. How can you say that a search engine is the next 'holy grail' of computing? Who actually believes that Google will come out with an OS?"
"As much as I've seen AJAX hyped it's not a desktop app replacement by any means. Ever had Google Earth time out and just go to la la land? Ever seen it be as quick and responsive as Open Office or Word?"
That's barely 6 years... oh how the world has changed...
For example, he complains about MS defending their patents, and sees this as a direct attach on Open Source. Other than the fact that Android is sort-of-open, there doesn't seem to be a relationship. As he points out the patent problem is the fault of the USPO, not MS. Yet still spends half the article on this topic. (To call MS out for patent litigation is completely absurd - the list of companies currently litigating over patents is really, really long.)
Exhibit B has to do with MS lobbying for favorable legislation. Again this is pretty much standard practice with large companies these days. Sure it's dumb legislation, but blame the politicians for failing their job, not the company for doing theirs. again the direct link to "attacking open source" seems weak.
So here you have a company indulging in activities that pretty much all the major players are doing these days. Patent protection and lobbying are not exactly MS invented tactics. Both exist because the legislative system allows for them.
No, for using bogus patents to attack competition. Defending patents is something totally different.
> Again this is pretty much standard practice with large companies these days. Sure it's dumb legislation, but blame the politicians for failing their job,
Neither popularity of the practice nor ineptitude of the parties whose duty is to prevent it make the practice OK in my book.
He's obviously not alone, but it's a pity when the
article is clouded with so much obvious bias
MS defending their patents
as a direct attach on Open Source
Microsoft is attacking all its competitors that are perceived as threats, not by means of healthy competition and innovation -- but by cloning products, distributing those products by means of its monopoly, actively seeking even the dumbest of patents, changing legislature in their favor, and also suing and threatening the smaller companies that can't fight back (like Motorola and HTC).
If this trend continues, sooner or later everybody will pay a Microsoft-tax, i.e. Microsoft will be the ultimate patent troll.
the list of companies currently litigating over
patents is really, really long
this is pretty much standard practice with large
companies these days
Sure it's dumb legislation, but blame the
politicians for failing their job
Patent protection and lobbying are not exactly
MS invented tactics. Both exist because the
legislative system allows for them.
Great way of pointing out how much the situation sucks, btw. Yes, it's not Microsoft's fault, it's the fault of their customers that tolerate, excuse or applaud such behavior, without thinking that this hurts the economy and ultimately everybody.
And btw, in this reply I haven't mentioned "open-source" once, as this is a problem far bigger than that, IMHO.
Unfortunately the author writes the article from a point-of-view that implies that this is a "Microsoft versus Open-Source" issue. This is a pity because it allows people to choose sides based on their personal view of Microsoft. It hides the real issue, which is that the Patent system is broken, and the legislative system is bought-and-paid-for by companies who can effectively afford to buy an election.
Patent litigation, and the threat thereof affects software companies in numerous ways quite independently of their open, or closed, source nature.
Company-favored-legislation is rife across all industries.
My point is not that it's ok for MS to behave like this - my point is that to pitch the problem as being caused by MS allows the issue to be clouded - for example should we picket outside Redmond, or the USPO in Washington?