Compiling a List of Funny Anti-Linux FUD?

An anonymous reader writes "I am in the process of trying to compile a list of at least 100 anti-Linux FUD statements, preferrably the ones that came from one of the big-shots in the computer industry. I am planning to use it in a multimedia project of mine. I did some searching on the net, including Slashdot, but the information overload has slowed my progress down to a crawl. Could you please assist me in compiling such a list?"

Comments

LINUX is obsolete

[__past__]

Don't get me wrong, I am not unhappy with LINUX. It will get all the people who want to turn MINIX in BSD UNIX off my back. But in all honesty, I would suggest that people who want a **MODERN** "free" OS look around for a microkernel-based, portable OS, like maybe GNU or something like that.

Andrew Tanenbaum, 1992

LINUX is obsolete

[sICE]

I still maintain the point that designing a monolithic kernel in 1991 is a fundamental error. Be thankful you are not my student. You would not get a high grade for such a design :-)

-- Andy Tanenbaum (to Linus Torvalds in the LINUX is obsolete thread)

Here are some

[MrHanky]

Old, but good:

Linux is i386 only. It is not portable to other platforms, like MIPS, Alpha, PPC, etc. Windows NT is a modern, portable 32 bit operating system.

Linux does not support SMP. The Linux hackers are just kids with too much time on their hands, and they will never be able to afford serious hardware.

Linux is obsolete. The monolithic kernel is a joke, and will never scale past the level of a play-thing. In a couple of years, most people will run the GNU Hurd on 64 bit Sparc CPUs.

I can probably come up with some that are still true, but right now I'm too tired. Oh yes: The Gentoo Linux Installation Manual is sure to create some Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt among those who want to look into Linux as a replacement for their pre-installed Windows.

Megan McArdle

[brennz]

link

Remember everyone, she is a "technology consultant"....

"I have to admit that I was never much of a believer in open source. Maybe my business school coursework rendered me blind to the glorious vision of a "gift culture" in which people contribute their work to a decentralized development project like Linux for honor instead of money. Or possibly I'm just too thick to understand how cutting off a multi-billion dollar revenue stream from software sales, without putting anything else in its place, could be good for the software business."

"The outcome of the Windows/Mac showdown seems to indicate that the company that owns the corporate desktop owns the marketplace."

"Those who saw open source as the inevitable revolution concentrated only on the value propositions that Linux could offer on price and performance. They weren't paying as much attention to other considerations, such as indemnity, that might be even more important than performance to the marketplace, because after all, what open source developers are good at (and interested in) is technological revolution, not liability planning and insurance premiums."

Open Source Software May Offer Target for Terroris

[__past__]

From http://www.adti.net/html_files/defense/opensource_ pressrelease_05_30_2002.html. Unfortunatly, the "study" itself is no more available.

Thursday May 30, 12:29 pm Eastern Time
Press Release
SOURCE: Alexis de Tocqueville Institution

Open Source Software May Offer Target for Terrorists, According to Study by Alexis de Tocqueville Institution's Committee for the Common Defense

WASHINGTON--(BUSINESS WIRE)--May 30, 2002--Terrorists trying to hack or disrupt U.S. computer networks might find it easier if the federal government attempts to switch to "open source" as some groups propose.

"Opening the Open Source Debate", a soon to be released white paper by Alexis de Tocqueville Institution details the complex issues surrounding open source, particularly if federal agencies such as the Department of Defense or the Federal Aviation Administration use software that inherently requires that its blueprints, source code and architecture is made widely available to any person interested - without discretion.

In a paper to be released next week, the Alexis de Tocqueville Institution outlines how open source might facilitate efforts to disrupt or sabotage electronic commerce, air traffic control or even sensitive surveillance systems.

Unlike proprietary software, open source software does not make the underlying code of a software confidential.

"Computer systems are the backbone of U.S. national security", says Fossedal, chairman of the Alexis de Tocqueville Institution and its Committee for the Common Defense, which will release the study. "Before the Pentagon and other federal agencies make uninformed decision to alter the very foundation of computer security, they should study the potential consequences carefully."

Contact:
Alexis de Tocqueville Institution
Ken Brown, 202/548-0006

kenbrown@adti.net
www.adti.net