Slashdot Mirror
Red Hat And Lineo Respond To MS Embedded Linux FUD
jeffy124 writes: "Red Hat and Lineo, the major spearheads of Embedded Linux, have said that Microsoft's recent white paper comparing Linux and Windows XP embedded is full of inaccuracies, false facts, and overall distorts the value of Linux in general. Lineo has gone as far to say it flat out lies about Linux. ZDNet has Lineo's response, Red Hat comments, and a summary article." Updated by HeUnique: LynuxWorks has also wrote a response (only this one is a bit more detailed).
Linux is realtively new to this area, it was never their goal initially.
Linux had no 'initial goals'. When Linus 'initially' wrote it, it was for himself. And if you listen to his interviews, he plain out says that he is NOT competing with MS, nor does he really care about them.
I think its pretty funny sometimes. Linus creates an OS and gives it to the world. Suddenly thousands of people think that Linux's total reason for being is to destroy MS. Whatever..
Can all fish swim?
We all like to spit out the rhetoric about how "people listen to Microsoft, but not us", but the fact is, this is no longer true. The antitrust case, while falling short of remedying the Microsoft situation, has at least drastically changed Joe User's perception of Microsoft, as the below-expected XP adoption rate shows. Everyday, Linux becomes more and more mainstream, and as it does, we see an increasing number of mentions of Redhat and Linux in general in tech magazines and newspapers. Any resource people go to to find the latest technology news today is likely to have a Linux section in it (short of "Windows Magazine" and other Microsoft asskissers). It's silly to say that "people will only see the Microsoft lies and not the rebuttals by Lineo and Redhat." This may have been true three years ago, but not anymore.
"The problem with the French is that they don't have a word for 'entrepeneur'." -George W. Bush
Is if you needed to work with some proprietary MS protocol like CIFS, DCOM (embedded DCOM?? ugh), or some other stupid MS thing.
Someone you trust is one of us.
Why does MS always get the marketing leg up on Linux?
That's bacause the Linux mindset is not adept at hostile, predatory marketing tactics. It just doesn't come naturally for honest folks.
Because VxWorks is not the media's darling, and the European Union's ticket to a cheaper, more secure Government.
In short, this isn't about fighting the "real" enemy, because the "real" enemy can only do so much damage to Microsoft. Linux, on the other hand, could seriously cripple Microsoft's domination and even inflict some damage to their business model.
What's more, in this time of fear and suspicion, FUD is a much more lethal weapon. Even in "normal" times, FUD could destroy "lesser" companies, but now, when Governments and people around the world are scared shitless that the Big Bad Ogre is after them, personally...
It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
i wonder if this attack is due in some part to the linux handhelds (like the Sharp Zaurus and the Samsung) that are coming out. These pdas use the same hardware as the wince machines, but you don't have the MS tax associated with them.
Supreme executive power derives from a mandate from the masses, not from some farcical aquatic ceremony.
You're completely right, and I'd say it's a case of two competitors pretending each other is the primary contendor, when in reality neither of them are (see major battery advertisements for an example of this in action: Agree to only focus on each other and consumers will be fooled into thinking that you're the two most important games in town [because why else would you focus on each other?]). In the serious embedded sphere I doubt either Lineo or Embedded CE/NT/2000/XP have any market saturation at all versus vxworks, QNX, etc.
It's silly to say that "people will only see the Microsoft lies and not the rebuttals by Lineo and Redhat." This may have been true three years ago, but not anymore.
I disagree. The people that know about Linux as a viable option to M$ are the same as they have always been, the technically oriented *cough* geeks *cough* people that keep up on the latest computer accessories.
A perfect example of this is the Pentium comercials that have been running on TV, where the aliens in the UFO are playing with gizmos (not the gremlin one) and, bored, plug in a Pentium 4. Suddenly, everything comes to life.
What are the average users going to think when they go to buy a computer? Are they going to ask "what is a reliable, cost effective processor?" Not a chance. They are going to say "I want to mix and burn CD's. Obviously, I need a Pentium 4." To reach the majority, PR and marketing are everything.
"...At the end of the day"..."when everyone goes home, you're stuck with yourself." RIP Layne Staley
You just validated Microsoft's arguments with your third point: no plethora of drivers. No matter how fancy Linux has gotten, it still hasn't been able to interface with the huge base of hardware that Microsoft products can. There are a lot of companies that cannot afford fancy new hardware; they must make do on something that was brought in years ago. And Microsoft products play nice with them.
Now, while we may be talking about embedded systems, realize that there are embedded system companies that have to make their systems work as seamlessly as possible with what their clients have lying about as well.
In addition, since at least 75% (incredibly conservative) of their end-users will be using some kind of Microsoft product on their home computer, having a Microsoft-run embedded system means happier end-users.
As for support, I would much rather have a big, rich company supporting my software than a bunch of chatrooms. If my system is compromised or causes damage, I want to be able to say, "This company here is responsible for it", instead of telling my pointy-haired boss that we either have to fix a problem ourselves with software that we shouldn't have to, or wait an indeterminate amount of time for "some people on the Internet" to fix it, or not. That's too big a liability for a company.
This
You want the liscensing changed, and you completely ignore the alternative, which was releasing the source. In fact, you ought to be sued to force the source to be released.
I'm betting the competitive advantage your competitors might get from seeing the source to your kernel mods would've been heavily outweighed by the time it took them to decipher it. Also, the easiest thing for them to do would be to also use Linux in their product, and releasing source, leaving you on a level playing field with respect to intellectual property concerns.
If they had tried to copy you, and also used Linux, it would've come down to which of your development teams could make a better product more quickly. Gee, that sounds like competition doesn't it?
Need a Python, C++, Unix, Linux develop
Has Linux ever had a successful pre-emptive publicity strike against MS?
.... There's MS's marketing, and there are the plain facts. We don't need to attack Microsoft on the marketing front. They do that for us. Their security record and dumb licensing costs will continue to harm Microsoft, regardless of what they say about Linux.
(NASDAQ Guy Voice)
Actually, there's a list of them published everyday - BUGTRAQ, the anti-MS marketing engine for the new millenium.
Moving on
Companies are slowly becoming more enlightened to Linux every day. Believe me, people are starting to notice the ridiculous security problems and licensing costs. One step at a time. I sit in the corner, waiting for the day when someone high up enough asks "I'm sick of this garbage and all our IT money going down the drain, there has to be an alternative, if only we had a choice!"
Yeah, but the option of at least having a binary library that does what you need is usually all you would ask for. Microsoft definitely wins the business case on this bullet item.
I like the embedded Linux option in a lot of ways, but honestly, the scariest thing about it is the GPL. There are too many competitors out there who'll just blatantly use every line of your source code in a knock-off box.
I've known firmware developers personally who've copied binary driver code illegally and used it in commercial products. Open sourcing your own work is just like handing those crooks the keys. You might as well give up your whole business model and go do something else.
Just paying MS for the libraries up front is a lot wiser of a business decision in most cases, because you're dealing with known, mostly-reasonable costs.
Why are you letting these clowns ruin our country?
It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
I worked in the embedded systems field (automated test equipment) some years ago, and it was not at all anything like the typical IT shop. For starters, the President and founder was an EE, as were most of the VPs, and the designers, and right on down the line to my little corner of the world. There were no gullible PHBs with liberal arts degrees masquerading as wannabe technologists; my managers ate, slept, and breathed silicon and clock rates. They didn't buy into anybody's slick and deceptive marketing practices back then, and I'll bet they don't fall for it now.
A colorful GUI with bundled streaming media is not going to send those guys flying through the air like in the commercials, but it's guaranteed to send the salesmen flying out the door.
... if I could read half of the white paper. In Opera at 100% the examples cited by Microsoft in their tables are barely legible. So much for standards compliance!
Sig: Where I'd put something witty if I could think of it.
No, it's fraud and misrepresentation. They're both illegal. I take it you think libel and slander are just "FUCKIN MARKETING" too?
if you want to say that MS actually lied in its whitepaper, you show me one point in that press release
"Linux lacks an integrated tool set, so OS and applications development time is slowed"
This is not true, there are several. Go to Trolltech's site (www.trolltech.com) to see one.
"For example, there are at least five different window managers and at least four competing browsers, increasing programming complexity and reducing the pool of available developers."
There is no reason why this should increase the complexity of development; the WM makes no impact on the code; there may be several browers (it's called choice) but there's only one HTML spec. Since these have no effect on the code the second part is also false.
"There is no common integrated development environment (IDE) for Linux. OS development is command-line driven and applications development requires a new set of tools for each device. Developers must either build their own tool-chain from piecing together Open Source tools or opt for a specific vendor's costly toolset."
This is bollocks from start to finish; most of it was true in 1998, though.
"Comprehensive OS foundation with proven performance and reliability"
This can't be true since XP has not been out long enough to be "proven" as reliable.
Then there's a bunch of benchmarks followed by "Note: WindowsXP Embedded was not tested directly. Internal Microsoft testing indicates that WindowsXP Embedded exhibited similar or better reliability and performance characteristics than WindowsXP Professional."
'Not tested directly' is the same as 'Not tested'.
"Linux looks to Java as a distributed applications development environment."
Linux has never done this; Linux looks to source code as a distributed application environment, in general.
"Open Source does not an ecosystem make"
Making this claim raises the question of is it true? I can't see any reasonable way to describe the millions of programmers supporting Open Source and the newsgroups and mailing lists where they can be contacted as anything other than an "ecosystem" in the sense MS is using.
"The Red Hat Worldwide Technical Support Guidelines and Definitions document states that Red Hat will not support any modifications made to their distribution of Linux that are not approved or recommended by them."
The lie here is only implied but is a lie all the same, it is that MS will do this. Try modifying Windows XPE's code (assuming you have it) and see if MS will help you debug it.
The distortions in the rest of the piece may indeed be marketing but if you said them of me I'd be laughing all the way to the bank with the damages award.
TWW
"Encyclopedia" is to "Wikipedia" what "Library" is to "Some people at a bus stop"
I have used ucLinux and Windows CE in the past and favor uCLinux.
Lineo, PLEASE get a new PR person. Just reading your responses to Microsoft's claims is agonizing. If I hadn't used uCLinux before, reading your remarks alone would stray me away.
Simple and to the point answers are effective in showing how simple and to the point uCLinux is.
This really isn't anything to get too inflated over. It was a pretty standard marketing whitepaper and could have come from just about any company. In college I did research on battery technologies (lead acid, lithium, ni-cad) and every company in this market drew a chart of power efficiency and capacity on a white paper that indicated their technology was favored.
Whitepapers are meant to point out your product's strengths (not weaknesses). Where there are gray areas, you spin it in your favor. To us, these spins look like inaccuracies, but I just assume that any company whose looking to embedded devices will take it with a grain of salt and do their research.
That aside, to me, one glaring thing that's missing from the whitepaper is that a company won't own any technology through licensing XP. With Linux, you can own it... and that's a large consideration when trying to build value from your work through IP or otherwise. I don't expect Microsoft to put that in their whitepaper though.
-- ;-)
Kuro5hin.org: where the good times never end.
Sue Microsoft? You think a small company like lineo can sue MS? Unfortunately in this country might makes right and MS has the might. This is a company that can bitchslap the United States around like a red headed stepchild for god's sake. You expect lineo to sue them? Yea right. All they can do is post their reply and hope that there is some media out there who hasn't been bought by MS and is brave enough to carry their story.
Yes MS is Lying, yes every time any higher up from MS says anything in the media there is at least one lie. MS is a corporation of liars, thives and scum. It's their corporate culture.
War is necrophilia.