Slashdot Mirror
Penguin Payola: More On "Purchased" Reviews
David Hume writes: "Upside Today has an article entitled Penguin Payola
which also does a good job of surrounding the recent complaining by Tucows and ZD-Net that Linux reviews are bought instead of earned. Upside Today reaches the same concusion as Penguinista regarding Reality On The "Purchased" Linux Reviews."
...Is this really worth 3 /. stories?
Maybe Slashdot has somehow been getting free software out of this.
Donate background CPU time to fight cancer.
I have been given several free copies of Linux products, all of which were given to me at trade shows.
In retrospect, I now know this was an evil plot to indoctrinate me into the hellish world of free software.
In the past, I read these really cool (and totally objective) internet news and PC magazines that told me the truth about how great microsoft was, how stable the PC platform was, and how sending them hundreds of dollars a year for software was good for me and America.
It's terrible the way these free software people have warped my fragile little mind.
There oughta be a law.
Treatment, not tyranny. End the drug war and free our American POWs.
See my user info for links.
Back in April, MandrakeSoft issued a press release saying that they had the most downloaded ISO distribution from TUCOWS. They referenced what was aparently a regular download stats page on TUCOWS http://linux.tucows.com/hotlist.html that the reader would assume is updated on a monthly basis. However, TUCOWS has never updated this page. To me that indicates they created the page at Mandrake's request, or perhaps to court ad revenue from Mandrake.
If TUCOWS is truly unbiased, then they should either archive this page, and/or update it with the most current download statistics.
Also (and I apoligize if this was already addressed in one of the other SlashDot threads on this topic, this is the first I've read) Mandrake is distributed by MacMillan, and this may be a much more common practice in the book publishing industry. There are so many books published each year, that it is unusual to find reviews indicating a particular book is flawed. Except for works by authors who have previously had top ten bestsellers, it seems flawed books typically don't get reviewed. MacMillan may have assumed that if a review was going to be published it would be primarily complementary.
Work for Change & GET PAID!
Doesn't this quote say it all about what this potentially damaging controversy has turned into? A large flameflest without much concrete evidence that has already consumed three Slashdot articles and probably generated thousands of dollars in banner counts.
The general consensus seems to be that seasoned Linux users aren't getting burnt by this controversy at all, because most would have enough experience to determine any biases by the reviewed before going out to buy a box set. Only the writers and the forums are burning their credibility with this one by continuing to milk all they can from this controversy.
Perhaps all reviewers should at least make the recommendation that first-timers to a new distribution purchase a GPL CD of a distribution before making that hefty box-set purchase so that all controversy can subside once and for all. I also advise that if you are seeking to purchase a box set, look up distribution-neutral reviews of the free enclosed commercial products, because they all nearly work the same regardless of your distribution. This practice will stamp out biased reviews once and for all.
-- "I can't tell the future, I just work there." -- The Doctor
...and offers of more. Most of it is for Windows software I don't need or want, and that I'm not going to review.
:)
I happen to like Mandrake. It is my favorite Linux distribution. I just installed it on a laptop today, glitch-free. And I *bought* the copy I installed out of my own pocket because I wanted to have the actual boxed set, with the books, just once.
Usually, like any other person competent enough to write a Linux software or distribution review, I download what I need.
News has been slow this summer. But this slow?
- Robin
PS - the opinions in this post are mine alone. Slashdot and Andover/VA editors are individuals and do not always think alike.
Has someone given the Slashdot editors a pay incentive for beating this dead horse?! Personally, it seems from most of the responses to the very first article that slashdot's readers were pretty much along the lines of, "Well, duh, of course it happens. That's how the real world works, dummy!" So then we get a follow-up article, and then another follow-up article. Wee. So we get to hear the same useless gripes about how that's how corporations work and we're all fools to think that even Linux, the Luke Skywalker of open-source software, can't be brought to the Dark Side.
If I had a big stick, I'd personally fwap a few Slashdot editors. They set up this wonderful tool called 'Slashback' which is probably the most favorably reviewed thing to come out of Slashdot since v1.0 of Slash was released and then they don't use it!
Note: This review of Slashdot editorial practices did not garner the author any free software from either Slashdot or Microsoft. The author still obtains all free software through traditional warez channels.
If you don't need to live off your reviews then you can say whatever you want, but a bad review burns bridges - at least with the more petty companies. Burn too many and you run out of people that will talk to you. This is independant of the truthfulness of your work.
I gained some appreciateion of Mike Moore's "The Awful Truth" after a 60 Minutes special. Apparently he's running out of channels that will play his show...
...Is this really worth 3 /. stories?
/. reports on the situation. 3 times!
I mean, some guy complains that good reviews are given in exchange for free software. Problem is, that software was free to begin with! So the whole accusation doesn't make much sense.
ZDNet picks it up to be sensational. Go figure.
And then,
It isn't news that somebody is giving out free Free Software.
What would be news is if Microsoft or Sun gave out Free copies to reviewers, instead of free ones.
Of course, if they did that, they might not get such favorable reviews. But then, it would be just that more newsworthy, wouldn't it?