Slashdot Mirror
MS Struggles to Discredit Linux
PrimeNumber writes "The Register has this interesting story about a supposedly "leaked" email from Microsoft Windows division VP Brian Valentine. Although half of it is admittedly suit/rah rah speak, the interesting nuggets mention use of Microsofts "Sun and Linux insiders"."
The whole email is pretty funny actually.
I hope people out there are not actually going to believe this. Please read the letter first and then think about it.
"Although half of it is admittedly suit/rah rah speak, the interesting nuggets mention use of Microsofts "Sun and Linux insiders"
hmmm, i wonder how this email was obtained?
Got Freedom?
Thinking?
One flaw with your comment about respectability.
This story is from The Register.
Maybe its a message to the linux community that its time to grow up. Look back at Amiga, Be, and OS2 newsgroups and you'll see the fine tipping point where advocacy gets stifling, annoying, and often leaves only the completely clueless fanboys participating in the discussion at all.
Personally I'd like to see /. evolve a bit in 2002...beating the linux drum is a useful practice, but a raison d'etre, it does not make.
Not hard to do, assuming clueless users. Just write it in HTML and embed a web bug. Every time the message is opened in Outlook (or Kmail) it sends a message home.
Best Slashdot Co
Honestly, isn't "discredit" a slightly harsh, or at least not-quite-right, word for this email? This isn't some mass-media FUD campaign; I mean, it's a motivational email to (presumably) a bunch of sales wonks, encouraging them to try and sell their products. Gasp, call the Justice Department.
It's not as if Linux vendors aren't out there right now doing the same thing, telling customers they're bug-nuts for running NT/2000/XP. I realize it's pretty funny and/or scary to hear him talk about "eliminating" Linux from customer sites, of doing "walkthroughs" to find hidden Linux machines, like some kind of Secret OS Police. But from a business standpoint, you want to sell to your customers, as much as possible. This is just a reminder to the sales guys, "Hey, don't let any sales opportunities slip through your fingers".
Don't get me wrong, MS has been Very Bad on many different things, but I fail to see how trying to sell their product should be considered some kind of Evil Act (tm).
It hurts when I pee.
I just think it's funny how he's already telling us how the unfinished "independent" surveys will turn out.
WWJD? JWRTFM!!!
doubtless, this is the title that's going through rational people's minds.
/., i expect better of you - stop trying so hard.
not that MS can't be discredited in various other ways, but this story reeks of grasping for straws.
besides - the register? *shakes head*
come off it and get with it.
i'm amazed that i survived - an airbag saved my life.
If this is real, the line at the end is a reference to a previous mail about Linux that was supposedly leaked to the Register and was linked here.
Nothing to see here, folks.
I agree with that, but for a different reason. As Valentine says here (supposedly), "Now that the whole world knows we are taking Linux seriously based on the leak of my last email... Wait -- stop there -- since when did they think we weren't taking them serious?!? Did they think we are not going to build the best products possible? Did they think we were going to just be fat, dumb and happy and not continue to win business? Did they think we were going to forget about taking care of our customers??? NO! "
I don't get why we're supposed to fly into a rage because Microsoft decides that paying attention to customers and giving them what they want for a better price is a good idea. As Linus said a few years ago, "when that happens, we've won."
What I'm listening to now on Pandora...
Gee, it's not like the Linux crowd has been trying to do this to Microsoft for the past 10 years or anything.
The ironic part being that this illegally obtained or (more likely) libelous story is a perfect example.
I think you're right; it was used as a scare tactic towards the clueless non-tech people who don't necessarily have the technical background to filter out the hype from the truth.
Back to my original point, I still think it's a hoax. Maybe it's just my cynicism shining through, but I can't believe that Microsoft is really focusing that much attention on Linux. The hype surrounding Linux in the media has died down, Linux companies are going Chapter 11 left and right... Unless the Xbox is more of a flop than I anticipated, I can't believe Microsoft is that concerned with Linux. I could be wrong, though...
Always consider that leak is intentional, and that you have been specifically targeted as part of a disinformation campaign. Ask yourself what purposes might exist in getting you to buy into the message. Be skeptical, it pays off. My own impression is that this message was too convenient and is attempting to convince me to underestimate Microsoft, or to misdirect me away from where their real efforts are. Just look at the opening lines - it's practically _begging_ to be "leaked". Of course, that's just my opinion...
Windows/MS bad/evil/not right==Insightful commentary
Linux Bad==FUD
This is an important point. Considering that they view Linux as the big threat in shops changing from legacy Unix systems, it would seem to me that retraining for Windows will be more necessary than retraining for Linux. This goes for both people and (porting) applications. I may be talking out my ass but it has got to be easier for a Unix shop to move to Linux than Windows.
We had better be vigilant and ready to call them on this when their reports say otherwise.
You can track emails, even if someone prints it out and mails it, rewrites it by hand (with a pencil), or even speaks it over the phone. It's called Steganography, and it hides information by subtly changing the punctiation and spelling, or by changing the text (omission or inclusion of various words/sentences). For all we know, the sent line "Sent: Wed 1/2/2002 1:14 PM" indicates that employee #114 leaked the info.
Incidently, it's just barely 2 pm here the US east coast... sure, this is a worldwide email, but in Redmond it's still 11 am, not 1:14 pm.
HIV Crosses Species Barrier... into Muppets
It's clearly a fake, and a clever one at that. You want reasons? Alright.
It is setup with a "man I hope this doesn't get leaked again" and ends with a mindless left-field "I used to run Exchange so don't leak this or...else!" intended to fool the reader into believing it was truely internal.
The purpose of the memo by the AUTHOR is to grab the reader with a flashy idea (MS memo leaked!) and then promote Linux from within. Read the center sections, they're an ad for Linux. Very clever, really. This gets the Linux community more press than if they just released an ad themselves.
The supposed "MS author" tells his employees how to ask about Linux, further giving examples of how and where Linux would be useful.
Just a prank intended to serve as promotion. Kudos to the author, but don't be fooled into thinking this is actual MS material.
------
Today's Top Deals
When I read the Netcraft study, it said the Linux folks were there and left when they couldn't get the system running fast enough.
Also, didn't Linus later say the results were valid and useful for improving Linux.
It sounds like the Netcraft study is used for FUD by both sides.
BTW, I wonder how Slashdot would react to VA Linux or Redhat memos being made up or leaked.
this is not a sig
Did you notice the URL's in the middle there? I think it's pretty funny that they have a directory named "sundown"....
Well... that's the nature of the beast, isn't it?
I've been on the inside of stories hitting various web news outlets before. It lead to some discussion amoung my co-workers, but nobody commented in public... even when such forums were available. What I knew could have shed some interesting light on the story... but it could also have cost my job. You never know how management and/or the legal department (not to mention PR) will react.
Because of this, its pretty obvious that verifying a source will be difficult. At best, the reporter breaking the story might have some idea of their source. But in this day of less-than-thorough reporting you can hardly expect this. And even if the reporter could be trusted to do some background checking, their job is likely to be difficult. We've seen plenty of legal action recently that should cause any legitimate insider / whistle-blower to hide their true identity.
Having said all that - I do agree with the overall post. Skepticism is good. We should look at any anonymous source carefully. I remember an April Fools joke from several years ago that took much of this community for a ride simply because the community believed anything put in front of them. But at the same time, we can't immediately dismiss anonymous information simply because of its anonymous nature.
Eh. I don't find this as particularly odd. First, I've seen the "CompanyName Confidential" moniker included in emails from other companies. And the bit about tracking forwards actually rings true. All this "confidential" and "tracking" speak sounds just like the Secret Squirrel games I've seen non-infosec people play. And it works.
The horrid truth is that even within the most technically advanced organizations... there are still a cadre of very technically limited users. And they tend to be found most often within Sales & Marketing roles (I know, I know... that's a broad brush I'm using. Not every individual in sales fits this. But my experince shows the generality tends to hold true).
It does not suprise me such wordings would be found in a legitimate internal memo. It would not suprise me if it was fairly effective. And it certainly wouldn't suprise me if there was an individual with the minimal technical understanding to circumvent these precautions / threats.
Anyone looking to see if all those Linux folk are still zealots w/r/t Linux v. Microsoft would only need to measure the response to a story like this. Do you hear that sucking sound? That's the sound of many fine folks wasting their time and energy on bashing Microsoft, their products, their practices, their religions ...
It doesn't need to be like this, folks. Speak with your wallets, speak with your advice to people who seek out your opinions, speak with your civil rights as a citizen of a free country (whichever country that might be!) Don't buy Microsoft products if they aren't any good or if you have ideological reasons not to (this is always your dime, as people say). If you're asked for your opinion on technology, recommend Open Source products if applicable or products produced by competitors of Microsoft if they are better, or if you have ideological reasons not to recommend Microsoft products. Write your senators, representatives, school board members, and city council members about your opinions. Propose alternatives to Microsoft packaged solutions. Maybe your solution costs less, maybe its more reliable, maybe it just makes the point of not supporting a company found guilty of anticompetitive practices, whatever.
Summing up: who cares what Microsoft thinks of Linux, don't waste your time on fruitless flames, trolls, op-ed, etc. that merely 'sings to the choir'. Do something that counts or don't do anything at all. Perpetuating the opinion of others, that all folks involved with Open Source are anti-Microsoft zealots doesn't gain us favor in areas that might provide some of us Open Source advocates money in the future. Its all about impressions when dealing with conservative (or even just fiscally minded) executives. A sure thing is always going to be better than the latest underground trend.
So now even if the leaker was going to simply forward it from their @microsoft email account, he/she now knows to either cut and paste it into some web based email instead or even copy it to a floppy and mail it from some off-Microsoft-campus site instead.
I think that what he was really saying was "Look, I know you're going to leak this - see how dismissive of leaked memos I was at the top of my message? Go ahead and leak this one, but don't forward it from our servers. If you do that, I'd be able to track you down, and all those statements I threw in about this being internal only mean that I'd have to fire you to maintain respectability. So leak my memo, but be smart about it, so I still have plausible deniability."
thats only because (surprise!) apache+openssl was illegal until the RSA patent expired. which means that SSL sites run apache+RSA's bsafe libs and show up as stronghold, redhat secure server etc etc etc
There is a mailto:lnxteam in there. Send a mail to lnxteam@microsoft.com, see if it bounces. It doesn't necesarily mean the email is real, but it will debunk it if it's not.
I'm more than a little skeptical of this message, as well. But it's almost too strange to be made up. It's just the kind cross between executive-speak and stupid user tricks you get from management types. The broken URLs are typical and you can't poke a pointy-haired IT manager with stick these days without him blurting out "server consolidation!"
What I found interesting is that a Google Search verifies that there is a "Kelly File" working for Microsoft, but he's not high enough profile that you would expect some Linux geek to pull his name out.
So would someone care to drop a line to kellyfi@microsoft.com and see if bounces? I mean, the guy evidently wants to know if we're using Linux, right?
It all depends on what you ask for. "Give us a report on how Linux costs more, in real terms, than Microsoft" and that's what you get, and it will all be true. Oh, it'll be estimations, and specific scenarios, and all that sort of stuff, but it'll be true, and it'll be internally consistant. Say "Give us a report on how Microsoft costs more than Linux, in real terms" and you'll get, again, a true, accurate report that tells you just that, with all the same caveats. Folks, for some of these projects, ten thousands for OS licenses is NOT a factor. Having a custom-written support contract, with phone numbers you can call at four o'clock in the morning that WILL be answered by YOUR technical account manager, who's ONLY PURPOSE IN LIFE is to keep you happy with his parent company, however, IS a factor. In other words, Microsoft really isn't targetting the microsoft shop who winds up running a BIND server because they can. Sure, they'd like to stamp that out too, but they don't care. They're going, as the mail says, against Sun and IBM in the server market.
Vintage computer games and RPG books available. Email me if you're interested.
Zing!
That's what I was thinking. To me, the first couple of paragraphs smell really bad.
There should be a moratorium on the use of the apostrophe.
Max V.
NeXTMail/MIME Mail welcome
Actually, if you turn on logging of 'attacks' on obsolete apache vulnerabilities, you get a startling number of attepted attacks that would only work on Pre 1.0 versions of apache. In fact I get more scans for apache vulnerabilities than I get for the lastest IIS worms. I really don't understand why people insist on using exploits against several year old long since fixed bugs, but maybe there are a lot of servers out there using unpatched pre 1.0 apache... Which seems crazy but then apache does have the market lead and is bad for changing the configuration file around so that they have to be manually tweaked between minor revisions.
Come on, Microsoft is commissioning an "independent full-blown cost-analysis comparison", the final results of which are not going to be available until May, yet they already happen to know the results will be a huge boon for their sales team? Talk about a load... The Register got it exactly right saying that MS had commissioned the study by the "'we'll-conclude-anything' whores DH Brown."
It's not enough to bash in heads, you've got to bash in minds. - Captain Hammer
The media hype surrounding Linux may have died with the various high-profile linux company's stock prices but that doesn't mean Linux has stopped making inroads.
An example of this would be Java. When Sun released it everyone was shouting Java this and Java that and how it would change the world yada yada yada. Sound familiar? Well Java news has been pretty slim in the non-geek world (or at least from what I've seen.) However, Java has been making big inroads into the back-end systems that don't get much media converage. One might assume Java had gone the way of many a dead language without realizing it's at work behind the scenes and growing.
man RTFM
No manual entry for RTFM.
It seems that knowing the results before the "independant consultant" performs the survey is ... strange.
I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
If you read carefully it looks like the study's intended to compare the acres-of-beige-NT box scenario versus the consolidated server scenario (the IBM/Linux ad case now being seen on TV).
That's not anti-Linux per se. Remember that the previous e-mail supposedly leaked by this guy included some rough numbers comparing an IBM solution with a PC/NT solution. IBM may not charge for Linux but they charge a lot for hardware and service...
When I mention problems I've had with various Windows systems, I'm simply dismissed (in most cases) with something along the lines of "sounds like you don't know what you're doing." Hello? I thought that, for Mom & Pop to have an OS that's Ready For The Desktop(TM) that Mom & Pop should be able to be drooling idiots and still check their email. Now we have to have fairly sophisticated knowledge of Windows to be a desktop OS user? Yet Linux On The Desktop(TM) has to 1.) support every known piece of hardware without requiring any computer skills or even any user interaciton 2.) have replacement apps for MS Office apps that support 100% of Office docs, 3.) an interface that's 100% identical to Windows, 4.) allow the rooling-idiot Mom & Pop to go buy Windows (and hell, Mom & Pop sometimes accidentally grab Mac apps; IMHO, if they do that, they really don't need a computer) apps at Babbage's and have a.) the CD automounted b.) have WINE run autostart.exe (or whatever it is; I've not use Windows for a while) and c.) have 0% problems running the Windows app? Oh, and if it's not too much trouble, have the same level of support for MacOS apps, in case Mom & Pop can't be bothered to read the label (or section headers in the store)? 5. Make it so easy to install, a trained chimp could do it.
Folks, if those are the criteria for an OS being ready for the desktop, not even MacOS or WinXP pass. Sorry.
Stating on Slashdot that I like cheese since 1997.