Slashdot Mirror
Meet Martin Taylor Of Microsoft's Open Source Test Lab
securitas writes "Martin Taylor was recently appointed as Microsoft's open source and Linux strategist and is responsible for Microsoft's open source and Linux test lab, mentioned on Slashdot last week. Taylor says his goal is to change Microsoft's competitive strategy by pursuing a fact-based approach instead of continuing the previous discredit-and-undermine strategy that was characterized by calling open source and Linux software 'a cancer, un-American and bankrupt' among other things. Taylor says he plans to focus on (and fund) studies that 'will highlight Microsoft's advantages in areas such as security, feature-completeness and total cost of ownership.'"
.... you're an idiot, but I repeat myself.
/. We got rid of Jon Katz I'm hoping you're next.
Why don't you stop posting crap and go and write some code? Oh wait a minute I forget you can't write code. Instead you post trolls for articles. How sad, even sadder is that you're still working for
Go on on my karma can take it.
Let's see. I'd say Microsoft telling the truth about security would be:
ISO Common Criteria (CC) security certification for Windows: "Moderate to High" security
ISO Common Criteria (CC) security certification for Linux: "Low to Moderate" security
And Linux was only certified with one specific SuSE distro on specific IBM hardware. I'm guessing it isn't Microsoft who should be saying "Please, don't buy our product."
We now leave facts behind and return you to the usual Microsoft bashing.
Why would they possibly do otherwise? They're a *company*, not a *charity*.
Yes, and for all that is right in the universe a For Profit Entity cannot CANNOT be excused with playing fast and loose with reality. The REALITY is that a Lab would be an entity who's purpose would be unbiased analysis, simple pursuit of truth.
For MS to declare thier new f'ing PR department a "LAB" serves only one purpose, to co-opt the ideals associated with the Scientific Method, thereby polluting its original notion.
DO NOT reply with "MS never said this was a research institute or unbiased lab, it is not important. MS's motivation is to play the linguists game... propaganda pure and simple.
If MS wants to build a new FUD/PR department they cannot simply chooose to call it anything they'd like under the guise that their propaganda is removed from honest discourse just because they are a "company". I say sucks to you nsample.... and sucks to you MS... you stinking liars.
This is illegal at Microsoft. Their contract implies that the software they write on their own time is actually Microsoft's. They can't GPL it because they don't own it.
As far as Open Source winning in open debate, it already has. Don't you see? The fact that Linux is as successful as it is means that Open Source software is superior to proprietary software. The fact that Apache powers the internet, that Bind is all but the standard, and that it all created a huge industry, attests to the fact that proprietary software is lost and done for.
The radical sect of Islam would either see you dead or "reverted" to Islam.
God, I LOVE competition.
There's not much of a contest because MS is a monopoly.