Slashdot Mirror
Linux Today Founder Calls for Boycott of Linux Today
dave writes "I founded and managed Linux Today in 1998, bringing it up from nothing into the most powerful and large Linux news website in the world, in less than a year. I am now calling on the Linux community to boycott my creation until its current owners stop accepting money from Microsoft to publish blatantly anti-Linux/pro-Microsoft ads."
I was shocked to find the very same ads mentioned in the article on this site a while back. I've always thought of
01000001 01011001 01000010 01000001 01000010 01010100 01010101
I thought they were satirical editorial cartoons!
I founded and managed Slashdot from its inception to the present, bringing it up from nothing into the most powerful and large Linux news website in the world. I am now calling on the Linux community to boycott my creation until its current owners stop accepting money from Microsoft to publish blatantly anti-Linux/pro-Microsoft ads.
--CmdrTaco
Are Linux Today's readers too stupid to think for themselves?
DrLunch.com The site that tells you what's for lunch!
Jesus Christ, we should be giving these guys a medal!
Every year during my review, I just pray the words "slashdot.org" aren't mentioned.
glad I don't have to deal with this.
do they pick the ads or are they through a service? i am not sure if it makes it any better.... but for example if you get ads from google and are a tech related site i am sure you will be hit with M$ ads as well as whatever else.
And then does that mean that we should boycott /. because they often display M$ ads? Or maybe anti-Linux people should boycott Windows-centric sites when they feature advertising from RedHat or Sun.
Seems to me like the best option to take would be to urge LinuxToday to not support M$ advertising if they are indeed given a choice on what they advertise, instead of just boycotting them out of anger.
...here.
I sympathize with his points, and it's not just LinuxToday. I received the July 2004 (odd enough, that) copy of Dr. Dobbs Journal and thought "wow, it's really getting to be pretty thick". Then I realized that the middle 40% of the magazine was a long Microsoft advertisement. After ripping that out, there wasn't much left - except for 4 different articles on Java-to-COM-and-ActiveX bridges. Crikey.
The Army reading list
In any case, it doesn't bother me if Microsoft throws money at a Linux-oriented website. I can ignore or read a Microsoft add and I won't melt in anycase.
Sounds like a bunch of hot air to me. If MS wants to run an ad with their (biased) study of TCO vs Linux, let them. Trust the readers to be smarter than that. Linux represents choice and freedom, not censorship or religion.
So hey, I'm already supporting your cause!
I want to delete my account but Slashdot doesn't allow it.
These same ads are often the ones in the top bar of slashdot.. Occasionally there's a vertical one on the main page that's pretty much the same thing.
- Give a man a fire and he's warm for a day, but set him on fire and he's warm for the rest of his life.
Sure
I'm just wondering ... how effective are Windoze adds on MS-bashing sites ? IMHO it's more of a problem with the advertising company, not linuxtoday.
The Raven
I read nothing in the complaint to suggest that Linux Today's content has been compromised by these adverts. Instead, the entire complaint seems to be purely that Microsoft advertises, and the advertising itself is Linux-hostile.
That's fine. And I expect most readers will ignore what Microsoft has to say, but be delighted they're funding Linux.
You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
Let Microsoft spread all the FUD Propaganda they want.
It only shows how they are shitting their pants about the inevitable Linux domination.
To blog is sublime
....except, like, if they gave coke away for free... and it was a superior product, but pepsi paid the coke crowd to advertise for them...
...why is Linux Today's founder no longer with Linux Today? Don't mean to flame or anything, I was just wondering.
You found a good place to complain. Slashdot runs Microsoft adds about how "mainframe Linux" is so much more expensive than Windows. The adds even site a study that was thouroughly discredited in slashdot news stories.
OSDN also display same ads. BOYCOTT DevChannel, freshmeat, Geocrawler, IT Manager's Journal, Linux.com, NewsForge, Slashdot, SourceForge.net, ThinkGeek, Animation, Factory, Mediabuilder.
Boycott never worked (except for Gandhi) and will not work. Silly
Get a life.
People can trash Microsoft all they want, but oh GOD! teh EBAL! if someone, especially Microsoft bad mouths Linux.
Welcome to the real world, if you can't stand the heat, stay in your parent's basement.
Ok, boycott LinuxToday. Gotcha. I'll add it to the list so that hopefully, just like my MPAA and RIAA boycotts, it will succeed in causing the target to change their policy.
Slashdot has the same exact anti-Linux, pro-Microsoft ads. I've tried bringing this up, but was rejected.
Imagine if it read like this:
"I'm now calling on the Linux community to boycott Slashdot until its current owners stop accepting money from Microsoft to publish blatantly anti-Linux/pro-Microsoft ads."
I personally would call upon the community to click every Microsoft ad they see. They get cheap advertising if nobody clicks on them. And they're not going away if you don't. Microsoft is definitely the high bidder on most of our sites.
It's money for your rag.
Seriously, so what of Microsoft is anti-Linux. The Linux crowd has been anti-Microsoft for a hell of a lot longer. MS is just trying to catch up, and surprise: they're throwing money your way while they do it.
"Times have not become more violent. They have just become more televised."
-Marilyn Manson
I'm running mozilla with popup blocking and no flash plugin. The site looks like it always did to me.
Michael
Slashdot is the wrong place to advocate a boycott of Linux today, tomorrow, or any other day!
In any case, michael should look twice at those headlines before posting them - "from the doh department" indeed.
Boycotts don't work. If it's hits they're after, it's hits they'll get. I'd never seen that site before today... and had after I'd read the boycott request. ;) Oops...
They're a little melty, but damn are they exquisite!
Wonder why the editors posted this. Wouldn't want to be giving us ideas about uprising against MS ads here now would you?
Whenever someone steps up to turn down money from M$, that's a ballsy move. I'd give him credit.
Now we just hope he's not accepting some other gifts (cough...) porsches and ferraris instead of money.
...are more than capable of laughing off pro-M$ adverts. Infact I think M$ would be suitably peeved that a pro-Linux site is being funded by Microsoft!
I've noticed that everyone who is for abortion has already been born - Ronald Reagan
People still see ads in their web browsers? How 1997!
Anything worth doing is worth doing badly -- G.K. Chesterton
Quick! Everybody boycott Slashdot! They run Microsoft ads and stories on Microsoft Technologies! Run! Don't you see how they turned all Slashdotters into unhuman anti-linux zealots! Run!
They should only take payments from companies to put out anti-MS/pro-Linux ads only.
Yes lets boycott freedom of press!!
If we are to boycott, how are we to know when they've stopped displaying the M$ ads?
I want to know if this guy has even got in touch with Linux Today in regards to this "controversy." He doesn't mention anything about talking to them, asking them rationally to do something about the Windows ads. It just looks like he's flying off the handle irrationally, and that really detracts from the point he's trying to make.
So, if /. has these adds too (which they do) should we boycott /. too? As I am typing this I am reading a M$ ad on the submit page.
Evolution or ID?
I don't see any ads with FireFox.
Mike http://thenextgenerationofradio.com
Why, post it on slashdot of course!
since i never went to that site EVER. i will now boycott it starting right now.
replace their lost ad revenue yourself? At least offer them an alternative before you start deriding them for doing something. Oh, and where the hell do YOU get off selling your creation and then acting as if you have a say in it after that, you dont, you gave it up for money so dont preach to me.
Not that I wouldn't have also...
I am very small, utmostly microscopic.
-----------
WAP news
Almost everybody knows what slashdot is about, but what is amazing about this story is that, the person who complains about this situation or the editor who posts it all know the fact that slashdot itself (and OSDN of course) all accept the same ads. I understand the general mood of slashdotters, but how low can you go?
Sure, some people will boycott. But now thousands of people will see it mentioned on the front page of Slashdot...
Why in the bluest blazes of hell would we stop reading Linux today? Why is eveything so, "Linux or bust" I personally use them both and I like them both. Linux has its uses as does Windows and for some things I like using Windows more. Get a life its advertising as the previous readers have said the readers will decide for themselves what they want to use.
Exactly. If their content is unbiased journalism, who cares who's advertising? If a person doesn't like the advertising they see, spend the money to put something else up there.
of the term 'sold out'. Once you cash the check, ya gotta hand over the keys.
Is it me, or do people pretty much don't care? If Microsoft wants to advertise in their competitions magazine, then let the Magazine decide if it's good for their products or not...
A Boycott will work just like the do not buy gas this day works...
"Is all that we see or seem But a dream within a dream?" -Poe
we just /. Linux Today?
Seriously though, I think this is a problem. The people who *run* LT are obviously trying to make money, but this is a bit of a sell-out.
Wer mit Ungeheuern kämpft, mag zusehn, dass er nicht dabei zum Ungeheuer wird. --Nietzsche
...but I was horrified by the AOL ads! Boycott now!!
Seeing as the same advertisements are on the Slashdot banner I find it quite amusing that the poster came here to make his case....
I
After constant use of image blocking in Mozilla I hardly ever see ads.
UNIX/Linux Consulting
Want Microsoft to run pro-Linux ads? What do you expect!
Hmmm.
You could block just that ad or all the ads....
Absolutely. The last thing you want to do is 'sink to their level.'
Lets face it, if people want to move to Linux, usually they are fed up with MS, so I don't think anyone is harmed if you see an ad for something you already know is a polished turd.
Good quote, too many chars. Seriously, the slashdot 120 char limit sucks!
"SearchEnterpriseLinux: Windows, Linux to Win War Over Data Center"
Linux is UNIX. Shouldn't this read "Windows, UNIX, to Win War Over Data Center"? Oh, wait, who does that leave?
"CyberIndia Online: Linux Does Not Depend on Microsoft's Failure"
Well, sorta. It does depend on Microsoft failing to squash Linux like a bug.
First Ad: Intel
Second Ad: AOL
Third Ad: IBM
Fourth Ad: IBM
HOW DARE THEY ADVERTISE AOL!
Feed the need: Digitaladdiction.net
Silly stuff, this. Linux is an operating system, not a political or social movement.
If he wants to run a publication by turning away legitimate ad revenue, let him.
If he does that, he probably makes sure every article has its quota of bombast and pseduo-ethical open source mish mash.
-- Slashdot: When Public Access TV Says "No"
Most readers visiting your site have used computers long enough to laugh at Microsoft claims of security TCO and stability. Linux grew and became strong because of grassroots support not because of directed propaganda, biased websites and censorship of the likes that you want to see implemented.
If Microsoft pays for the high bandwidth of your website, all the better.
"Give orange me give eat orange me eat orange give me eat orange give me you." -Nim Chimpsky
...and I call for a boycott on stories about Linux Today.
I would have been a lot more receptive to this article if I hadn't had to sit through "Magazines Of Our Lives" here on slash a couple months ago over the whole domain/content/whatever business, which had all the maturity of a playground fight. Or if Slashdot wasn't accepting MS ads, and other ads that generally insult my intelligence, for that matter (I especially liked the 133t-speak ads about MySQL vs. PostgreSQL; the "you'll loose your job if you don't read ITManagersJournal!" scare ads trying to play on my fears surrounding job security are particularly offensive).
Please help metamoderate.
believe anything that MS puts out in its ads? I think it's OK for MS to fund a pro-linux site that way so long as it does not affect their editorial policies.
"Do the Right Thing. It will gratify some people and astound the rest." - Mark Twain
"Do the Right Thing. It will gratify some people and astound the rest." - Mark Twain
Seriously, who reads those ads? I say take Microsoft's money and run. If they are handing over the cash, the income will outweigh the loss of a few morons who are swayed by lame advertising on random websites.
how about we just slashdot it instead?
You could just encourage your users to use a browser that can block certain ads, so in this case, just block the Microsoft ad. This is great because you still get money for the ad impression, and Microsoft gets nothing for their ad. Given enough time, when Microsoft realizes that advertising with your site is useless, they'll simply stop paying for the ads and leave. So, I think this is a pragmatic way of sticking it to the man rather than applying censorship.
"There is no spoon." - The Matrix
/. has ads?
I seem to have trained myself to not notice them anymore.
-----
Pretty Bad Privacy (PBP) Public Key
6
Someone who browsed LinuxToday was actually going to go out and buy a Microsoft product?!
If LT is gets hits on a click-through basis, I say we /. them so that at least Microsoft will be spending some money to support Linux.
I mean, what's the harm in taking money from Microsoft? Wasn't that what Linux advocacy was all about in the first place?
The society for a thought-free internet welcomes you.
You click on the link and it takes you to another linux Today page, with slightly more clipping (WTF) . Only when you click the second link, do you get to see the actual article.
Two clicks to visit a External Article, No thanks.
for the last time people, I am "frodo from middle eaRTH", not "middle eaST".
I've seen a lot of these ads. Their comparison between windows servers and linux servers is really stupid. It's the same tricks that many companies use: compare with different hardware specs, unoptimized kernels/applications, and don't take into account viruses and other related issues. It's not right and I really do get sick of seeing them on OSDN and other networks.
That being said, I understand that OSDN and other sites do need revenue. I also think that most linux users realize the ads are bunk. Rather than a boycott, I'd like to see pro-Linux advertisement in the same way (with real stats) that shows the advantages of linux over windows.
How about graphs comparing: Infection rate, loss due to downtime, webpage serving stats with optimized machines on the same hardware, etc?
I have seen MikeRoweSoft advertize on XBOX hacking sites. Who are they kidding? Like anyone there would actually buy software.
That's no troll, friend, that's a flame. Pedantic, yes, but true.
...but unfortunately they tend to only read headlines. if the headline is a bunch of microsoft FUD, then it makes your job just that much more aggravating.
I try to avoid conversations like this:
PointyHairedBoss: "Why are we using this Unix crap!?"
Me: "Because, you stupid wanker, it has been up for 745 days without crashing and without any problems. And big woop if I cost a little more if your systems are stable and secure!? Now get outta my server room!"
01100111 01100101 01110100 00100000 01101111 01110101 01110100 00100000 01101101 01101111 01110010 01100101 00101110
Way back in the 90s, my brother banded together a bunch of his friends to start a company and put up a web site. It eventually became one of the leaders in it's field with millions of hits per day (it's a sports site that is now run by one of the big television networks). My brother's a big proponent of open source, he's got an ultra-low Slashdot ID (less than 100), the web sites he's built have all been done under Linux and Perl, and has contributed to various open source projects pretty extensively (eg, xemacs, mysql). When the web site was just big enough to attract advertising, they made a $2000 booking from Microsoft, and I admonished him for doing business with the devil. He replied, "yeah, but the money's flowing in the right direction."
Who among us wouldn't rather money flow from Microsoft rather than to them, especially when the recipient is an open-source advocate?
Put my fist through my alarm clock with its ding-dong death inside my ear. - The Blackjacks.
Dave needs to get himself a fresh install of FireFox.
I know /. is a very pro-Linux site, and I am an avid supporter and user of Linux myself. But surely some of you realize that Linux and Microsoft are mutually beneficial in some respects. While many of the features of Windows are horribly insecure and/or badly designed, many of the ideas for improvements to Linux comes from seeing somethng that can be improved on in something else... and Windows is a big something else. Linux is also helping Windows by finally giving free competition to the Windows environment. Yes I am aware that Windows and Macintosh have been competitors for some time, but they both cost roughly the same in the long run. By providing a good, actually great, operating system for nothing, the operating systems that cost money have to be much more convincing to continue sales. If they don't eventually someone is going to ask, "Whats the point?" I personally have two computers, one runs Linux while the other runs Windows. I hate crashes on Windows, just like all the rest of you, but it [Windows, not the crashes] does have a few good points, especially when you see the good ideas from microsoft find their way into the Open Source community.
As far as advertising goes, if Linux Today wants to get funding from Microsoft, and Microsoft is willing to grant it, great. But I don't think Microsoft has any right to limit what gets published on a website that they are merely buying ad-time on. But, if Linux Today is volunteering to start limiting whats being published in order to get more money, then they deserve to be boycotted. I don't know what everyone else thinks about this situation, but thats what I think, and since this is a somewhat pro-Microsoft post, I expect I'll soon find out what other people think.
The stupidity of your average American is just about the same as the average European, we simply show it off better.
Ads? Ads? i don't see no ads?
oh that's right... i just adblock
The Neo-Bohemian Techno-Socialist
I've gone to Linux Today, clicked around a whole lot, and I've yet to see any Windows ads. Gateway ads, AOL ads, Centrino ads, but no Windows ads. Where are they?
Boycott never worked (except for Gandhi) and will not work. Silly Montgomery Bus Boycott. Worked fairly well for what it's goals were.
Install free, OS Adblock and you will not see any (well, almost) ads!
I tried to RTFA but it's dead.
Are these ads specifically anti-linux? Just because they are an MS ad doesn't mean they are anti-linux. MS is just another software company.
Now, if they *do* list negative things about linux specifically, then yes i would question that as well.
It's just that sometimes the Linux Zealots fly off the handle too much lately. I'm trying to help things stay in check.
Disclaimer: I use Linux.
do() || do_not();
so you don't have to see the ads.. You do subscribe, don't you?
"Do the Right Thing. It will gratify some people and astound the rest." - Mark Twain
"Do the Right Thing. It will gratify some people and astound the rest." - Mark Twain
Interesting to see that someone no longer associated with a site that's championing *free* software should be acting in so *proprietary* a fashion toward the rightful owners of the site.
I know Linux is distilled anarchy, but even so...
--- Bill
Slashdot stopped suckling at the teat of Microsoft long enough to say "What! How did that news story get through?"
set softtabstop=4 shiftwidth=4 expandtab nocp worlddomination
Here is the text:
I founded and managed Linux Today in 1998, bringing it up from nothing into the most powerful and large Linux news website in the world, in less than a year. I am now calling on the Linux community to boycott my creation until its current owners stop accepting money from Microsoft to publish blatantly anti-Linux/pro-Microsoft ads.
Back in 1997, prior to the foundation of LWN.net and LinuxWorld.com, good online daily Linux news sources were non-existent. As a result of the growth of this community, news websites were inevitable. The first one that I am aware of was Three Point's Linux News, founded, managed and published by your humble editor.
Within a year, that website was relaunched with the cooperation of Dwight Johnson as Linux Today, and a new era in fast-faced Linux news was born. With the help of myself, Dwight Johnson, Marty Pitts, Paul Ferris, John Wolley, and others, it provided hourly news, information, reviews and editorials to an information-thirsty community. The rest of the story is, as they say, history.
Today, the original Linux Today team is no longer a part of the that website, and it is operated by the good people at internet.com (Jupiter Media). internet.com has been good to the Linux community over the years since they acquired it in 1999, continuing to operate the news site and giving resources to it so it could continue to serve this Linux world.
When they started added popups and animated banner advertisements for all kinds of irrelevant things, the community looked the other way and continued reading their site. These ads, while irritating, have been largely useless and harmless to the community.
Recently, however, Linux Today has added a new client to its list: Microsoft. Not only are Microsoft-sponsored advertisements appearing on that site now, but the ads are downright anti-Linux.
Today, there is a flash ad on the top-right hand screen that is a case study of the convenient store 7-11's TCO study between Linux and Microsoft. Ultimately, Microsoft won the study and the CIO of 7-11 is quoted (in the ad that is running on Linux Today!) as saying: "...the TCO for the Windows Server System approach was 20% less expensive than Linux." The fact that this ad is appearing on a cornerstone Linux community website is an absolute outrage.
On the same page, without reloading, as a text ad that says: "Attend a Microsoft(r) Executive Circle Webcast and get guidance from industry experts..."
Reload the page, and you might see another flash advertisement that says: "Weighing the cost of Linux vs. Windows? Let's review the facts." The following frame shows a bar chart with a Y-axis representing cost. Linux's bar is 10 times higher than Windows'.
Here are my points for the Linux community:
1. Do we want to continue to support a Microsoft-friendly (and anti-Linux) website by continuing to read it daily?
2. Would we be comfortable sending our boss and/or other decision makers in our company to this website for Linux-related news and information?
3. Can we continue to trust this website with unbiased news, now that we see how close to Microsoft they are?
It's easy to say that these are just ads, but the truth is, Linux Today is now being sponsored/funded by Microsoft, and they are cheerfully placing blatantly anti-Linux advertisements on their home page. This is an outrage that must be stopped.
If internet.com will continue to treat the Linux community with the same level of respect that it did a few years ago, then they should rightfully enjoy any profitability that comes its way. If, on the other hand, they continue catering to Microsoft and other enemies of Linux, then I can't imagine that the Linux community will allow it to happen.
Firefox + AdBlock = No more Ads! Thanks for giving more some more ad addresses to put on my blacklist!
Linux doesn't have to "dominate." Microsoft's needs for cash developed while they hold 90+% of marketshare. Even a little loss, to perhaps 80% say, would send terrible ripples of shareholder uncertainty and anger through Mircrosoft's share price.
Linux users can smell blood in the water all they want; it's when the shareholders smell it that it gets ugly. Or funny.
I really don't get upset by the M$ ads in Linux Magazine or on Linux Today. (GWB's negative tv ad's for his re-election irk me more).
Let Bill bankroll Linux web sites and magazines with ad's that Linux people will just laugh at. If they are foolish to take out a centerfold magazine ad, use it to wrap fish!
NIGGERS
... that linuxtoday.com is currently /.'ed.
:wq
Nothing like getting your page Slashdotted to start a n effective boycott. When will they learn?
Ya know, as far as I'm concerned, I think it's a great idea to put the MS ads up.
Think about it. How many access "Linux Today" without SOME skepticism toward Microsoft? If the ads that I would guess 98% of the reading audience discard as the usual MS Spin Fluff help pay for the more productive pro-Linux site, isn't that a good thing?
Maybe put some disclaimer above the ads:
"The idiocy expressed below is a paid advertisement. Pay no heed to it."
Now LinuxWorld has an IBM add for their xServer! This is an intel-inside box! (There's even an official intelInside logo on the ad!) Clearly LinuxWorld is biased by accepting advertising from the original cause of the whole Wintel phenomenon - IBM! After all, you can't have PC-compatible without PC!
WindowsTomorrow? I guess it's kinda like Burger ads in McDonalds or Toyota ads in BMW's show room, but still sounds like sour grapes to me
"Look Lois, the two symbols of the Republican Party: an elephant, and a fat white guy who is threatened by change."
I asked OSDN people about a certain pro-Linux OSDN site why they're showing M$ ads while at the same time acting all pro-Linux.
No answer.
I'm inclined to reach the conclusion of "to hell with them", but I'd like to give them a bit more time to respond. It's been some weeks now already, so it's not looking good.
Ads? What ads?
I don't see any ads.
Mozilla dosn't seem to show me any ads. (hahahahaha)
Hummm... I guess I will have to launch IE once in a while just to see what I am missing. NOT!
Every wrong attempt discarded is a step forward - T. Edison
when will we have the option to moderate submissions. This one should get a -1 troll.
But seriously! why?
Can I be a Luddite too?
Boycott a site because it runs ads (likely served by an outside provider) that you don't like?
I realize it's a sore subject when you bring up capitalism within a community that shouts FREE from the top of its lungs, but your request bothers me. Are you afraid that LinuxToday users are going to convert to Windows because of a banner ad? Or that Microsoft is going to influence those masses of Linux users?
I browse w/ Mozilla FireFox. I block ad servers religiously, and I have the FlashBlock extension installed, which prevents flash from playing w/o my explicit consent. As far as my browsing goes, Microsoft is dumping revenue into a pro-Linux news site for content that /I never see/.
I thought the "Free" in "Free Software" was meant as "Free Speech"? Now there's a boycott effort in the free software community to try and limit MS's freedom of speech?
Ok, so I'm no big fan of MS either, but I must conclude that anyone who takes part in such an effort has lost any moral argument about "free software" being at all about "free speech".
My
Should I worry that there's a "Anti-Microsoft bias" since there was no linuxtoday link in the story?
:)
Not that I care, but Linuxtoday hasn't been slashdotted yet.
Boycott never worked (except for Gandhi) and will not work. Silly Montgomery Bus Boycott. Worked fairly well for what it's goals were. God I have to stop and check my posts.
Microsoft is paying to have ads displayed on a site where ads of the M$ variety will pretty much be ineffective anyways. I AM assuming this because people who goto a Linux news site already decided M$ isn't for them anyways. They are paying into the revolution against them, aren't they?
I'm wrong alot, someone clear this up for me.
"It'll destroy you if you try to make it mean anything to anyone but yourself." - Henry Rollins
Buy Anti-Microsoft/Pro-linux ads over at windowstoday.com, the most powerful and large Windows news website in the world. Fight fire with fire.
"There is no spoon." - The Matrix
Which one do you think has more credibility, an article in a pro-Linux magazine saying "Linux is x" or a slick Microsoft advertisement saying "Microsoft is more x than Linux will ever be"?
The CTOs believe what they're told.
Microsoft is the enemy. They are currently responsible for the oncoming death of the consumer home computing, they offer nothing more than enabling technologies for various forms of spyware, adware and other malware. Is that what you want your mom and pop to use at home? Don't have anything to do with Microsoft! Do not support them. Do NOT accept their advertisements. Let people know of the alternatives, and let the evildoers disappear by their own bad merits.
it lets me block images from certain servers. So I ask... What ads?
a) The advertisements make up the main body of a magazines revenue. When the primary advertiser could withdraw funding and effectively end the magazine
b) Or when a sponser attempts to use their position to influence a magazine.
c) Something else that I will remember after I click submit.
In the new corporate age, this does become more worrying. Generally, most paranoia I believe is unfounded, but when an organisation shows previous attempts to control media then sometimes paranoia is healthy.
If the advertisements are misleading, then I agree they should not be shown.
The same kind of 'conflict of interest' problems exist within the media, that can exist within government on a local national and international level.
If I boycott ThinkGeek, I'll have to go to work naked. No one wants to see that.
"A man talking sense to himself is no madder than a man talking nonsense not to himself."
Sorry, I just couldn't resist.
This space intentionally left (almost) blank.
I think it's great that Microsoft likes to support pro-Linux magazines and web sites.
And thanks to Mozilla, I don't even see the ads. It's like OSDN is getting free money.
Wait a minute, I'm sure we've all seen the M$ ads here on slash. I know that the OSDN dosen't specifically get M$ money, but they're through doubleclick.
So maybe we should start boycotting slash too?
No man is an island, But if you take a bunch of dead guys and tie them together, they make a pretty good raft.
You founded the company, then sold it, but want it to keep to the vision you have for it. Why did you sell it / relinquish control then?
Slashdot: Failed Car Analogies. Amateur Lawyering. Anecdote Battles.
...and the Catholic Church wants it's censorship back. The world is flat and opinions otherwise may jeopardize belief in God!
The truth is that everyone should realize that their are too sides to every story. For somethings Windows in better; for others not. Anyone who believes otherwise is in for a boat load of trouble. Should we all boycott television because Downy ads are objective when comparing fluffiness of Snuggle? Face it, advertising is never honest, everyone knows that, and the OSS world needs all the money it can get to keep it going. It's the lesser of two evils.
Your CPU is not doing anything else, at least do something.
I would never send a decision maker or prospective Linux users to a slashdot link. Therefore, I don't mind Microsoft running anti-Linux ads full of misinformation, distortions, inaccuracies and outright lies.
LinuxToday on the other hand is a site where I might have once sent people who are interested in Linux. Now that I am aware of these ads, I will have to reconsider ever doing that.
If I do resume reading LinuxToday at some point, I might point decision makers or prospective Linux users to the news sources that Linux Today links to, without mentioning Linux Today.
I'll see your senator, and I'll raise you two judges.
If you don't like what they say, go elsewhere, but trying to force upon them what they may say is decidedly uncool.
What does it say about freedom if Linux Today excluded Microsoft from advertising on their site? I think Dave has a right to be upset, but no theological or moral ground to stand on. We can't have it both ways. Freedom has to be for everyone otherwise it's just a private club that talks about it.
... that this gets posted this to Slashdot, which will probably cause everyone who reads this article will to go over to the Linux Today site to check out the offensive banners for themselves, thus generating ad impressions and revenue for Linux Today. =)
Boycotting is speech and democracy combined.
You hit it on the nose.
OK Mr. Gates^H^H^H^H^H 'er "Dave", we'll boycott a Linux site. I'm sure that's exactly what Microsoft won't expect!
Microsoft provides LinuxToday with money.
Which do you find more effective is getting people to choose a platform -- LinuxToday's content or the ad banners?
May we never see th
Seriously, though, from the article:
Recently, however, Linux Today has added a new client to its list: Microsoft. Not only are Microsoft-sponsored advertisements appearing on that site now, but the ads are downright anti-Linux.
How long has it been since Slashdot has been displaying Microsoft ads? I mean, what the fuck?
Today, there is a flash ad on the top-right hand screen that is a case study of the convenient store 7-11's TCO study between Linux and Microsoft. Ultimately, Microsoft won the study and the CIO of 7-11 is quoted (in the ad that is running on Linux Today!) as saying: "...the TCO for the Windows Server System approach was 20% less expensive than Linux." The fact that this ad is appearing on a cornerstone Linux community website is an absolute outrage.
Yes. It is, isn't it? I see the exact same ads on Slashdot all the time. OSDN takes money from "evil" Microsoft all damn day, and the frothing posters seem to be none the wiser, or look the other way to bash Microsoft some more. If a website is going to bash Microsoft yet take money and display their ads, I will declare that they have lost all integrity.
"Sufferin' succotash."
I use Links, a text browser. This is the best way to read news sites. Fast, snappy, readable, no font problems, no advertisements, no pop-up crapware...
M$
I'm calling bullshit here. This guy sells his site to someone else to generate a profit. He then proceeds to bitch and moans when the current owners sell add space, also for a profit, and an add apears that the he doesn't agree with. It's complete and total bullshit.
If he really cared about that site he wouldn't have sold it. Instead, he sells out to some corporate whore and then has the audicity to bitch and moan when said corporate whore, acting as all corporate whores do, sells out by selling add space to some other corporate whore who spreads FUD. Newsflash buddy, you sold out just the same as the current owners are selling out.
I have no problem with people who start something and then sell it. It's called capitalism baby, but don't bitch and moan when whoever buys it does something you don't like. You sold the thing, if it was that important you shouldn't have sold it, but you did, so shut up and move on.
Flame me all you want, but things like this tick me off. Oh and don't give me this "but the spirit of the site is being violated" crap. If he cared so much about the spirit of the site, as I've said over and over again, he wouldn't have sold it.
I knew this day would come. Emperor Gates has foreseen it. Together we can rule the empire, father and son.
It is your destiny *breathes heavily*
From my experience it is very unlikey that someone could do a media buy without revealing the client to the publisher. However it is possible to rotate dirrent ads through the buy. Personally I think this boycott is silly. If MS wants to waster thier money to what amounts to the opposite of preaching to the quior then who cares. I highly doubt the linux community is influenced by these ads so why not let the linux websites earn some money from them?
meep
You also have to tell them that you're boycotting their product, and why. The best link I could find was to contribute a news story to their site.
I'm a writer, a poet, a genius, I know it. I don't buy software, I grow it.
I thought the "Free" in "Free Software" was meant as "Free Speech"?
Yeah, that's ONE of the two meanings, the other representing "Free Beer". And until Bill Gates buys me and my pals a beer or two, I don't like him.*
*Oh my god, I just realized how easy I am to buy off. I sicken myself.
I'm not normally an irrational zealous dickhead, but I figure "When in Rome..."
Pro microsoft doesn't mean anti-linux. It just means ant-everythingelse. Same with being pro-linux... you're anti-everything_that_isn't_linux.
Don't worry, for every person who says they are boycotting the site I'm going to go click on that banner 3 times :)
Yes, I'm feeling evil today, MWAhahhahahahahha.
...that that an organisation is taking money from M$ and using it to promote something superior. One step closer to having M$ write Linux apps.
...
if the ads "don't work" then no one agrees with them and the advertisers are wasting their money. either way, what's the problem?
slashdot.org
Next thing you know, God's Little Children are going to poop all over the place.
Yes I understand sites need to have ads in order to survive, but I wonder how much of it is greed. I have run Linuxbeginner.org for 3 years ad free so why start now??? I don't want income I want to help the community. I thought this was what supporting Linux was about.
It's about principled leadership. Since Linux was founded to create a better system based on 1) technical merit and 2) the spirit of code sharing of the free software movement, it speaks volumes of a web site's real beliefs that they will take money from the highest bidder.
This is not about the current crop of Linux users. It's about all the future Linux users and managers thinking about Linux who will have some serious cognitive dissonance to deal with. They might as well think that if a Linux site believes that Microsoft has a lower TCO or is a better OS, who am I to question it?
I appreciate that this guy had the courage to stand up and say what was in many people's mind. Hopefully, Newsforge, Slashdot and the whole OSDN network will also get the hint that taking money from Microsoft is not exactly kosher.
I am sure that a lot of people will post to tell us how smart these sites are for taking money from the enemy. That, I believe, is the expected defense.
It's kind of like selling biological weapons to Iraq, standing by while they put them to use against Iran in the 1980s and saying now WMDs are bad, bad, bad... That would never happen. Wait a minute...
And then assuming that they still had them, without any real evidence, against the will of the international community, launching a preemptive war against that country to disarm it, surely THAT would never happen either...
Summary: Kids, the world is full of hypocrites and liars. If you let them get away with lying to you the first time, don't expect things to improve. Eventually, one day, they might say: "I thought you knew were in it just for the money. You mean to tell me that you take any of this shit seriously?"
Linux was built largely by selfless giving of those that dare to dream for a better tomorrow and work to make it happen. Marriages of convenience, with Microsoft or anyone else, will do us no good.
Pragmatism as an ideology is not particularly pragmatic in the long term. Keep it in mind when you dismiss Free Software
How would it limit their freedom of speech? They have no *right* to have their ads put on somebody else's website.
Anyone who boycotts Linux Today over this has the right to do so. Should Linux Today decide to get rid of the ads, they have the right to do so, because it's their website and they decide what to put on it.
It's a shame, but I have my ad blocker on, and could not see the evil adverts anyway! haha!
Don't, for a minute, though, imagine that the fact that "the people have spoken" (via boycott) justifies anything. There is such a thing as the "tyranny of democracy". The Federalist #10
However, if Linux Today presents itself as a linux-oriented news source (which it seems to do), then it would be absolutely inappropriate to censor based on politically incorrect content.
Why would I want to read news from a source that only tells me what the majority of readers would like to hear? I think I'd prefer to hear everything and decide for myself what's crap and what's good.
At work I use Windows XP. At home I use I use slackware-current. My wife uses Windows 2000, and dreams of owning a Mac. Though it seems some people would have you believe differently, I tell you that you don't have to join the cult to use the GNU operating system.
"Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, it doesn't go away." - Philip K. Dick
Everyone could just block the ads with firefox, and let LinuxToday take money from MicroSoft for ads that no one will see. :)
t_t_b
I'm on PJ's "enemies" list! Are you?
Most people who read this stuff realize that the Microsoft ads are bull anyways. Microsoft is just helping to make sure OSDN webpages stay here and make sure that they dont need as much support from people like us. For those of you who have read the the ads, did it change your thinking in anyway to help out microsoft? I doubt it. Look at it this way. It makes microsoft look dumb and "unsportsman-like". And it helps to fund OSDN. Now, if Linuxtoday is really becoming biased then I would agree there is a problem that needs to be acknowledged.
I quit reading their stuff when they started printing articles From Giga Group, Gartner and Rob Enderle as straight material. Don't feed the trolls.
Help stamp out iliturcy.
we should all just click on these ads. many many times. after all, doesn't linuxtoday get the money? and if you're a linux user i doubt you'll be swayed by a ten:one ratio of meaningless vertical bars...
Do you even know what the hell you're talking about?
You sold out for the almighty dollar when you sold your rights to the "new Owners" of your site, and Now you want to bitch about the Owners selling out to Micro$oft... Get off your high horse, you sold out first don't blame them for selling out for more money than you recieved...
MacOSX, because making *NIX better is a lot better than waiting for Micro$loth to fix Windows
Let's boycott Linux. Today.
I cannot boycot, there is no link to boycot...
Funny that there is absolutely no URL that leads to Linux Today or any of the sites that are cited in this article.
well said
Moderation Totals: Flamebait=2, Troll=1, Redundant=1, Insightful=6, Overrated=1, Underrated=1, Total=12. (not mine)
Cat got your tongue? (something important seems to be missing from your comment ... like the body or the subject!)
LinuxToday has had ads from Microsoft running on it since before I was a full-time editor there, from mid-2000 to early 2002. Glancing at the calendar, I'm noticing it's been over two years since I last worked on LT, and Dave's just now getting around to noticing this and getting his dander up?
I always assumed the LT readership was smart enough to make up its own mind about the ads and their sponsor, and most readers who troubled to write me with their concerns agreed once I put it to them like that.
Michael Hall
mph.puddingbowl.org
I think people can read a website and judge the impartiality of the news on their own.
/. can, but it takes time and effort to be discerning.
Would that it were true. Most people here on
Attempts to provide "solutions" to this could easily be worse than the initial "problem", though.
It would be nice, at least, if websites saddled with ads they'd rather not run would place that key sentence you quoted, from the Legal Notices, in (a) much more conspicious place(s).
<grrr>
Somebody is smoking something if they think that any slash-linking to a website that is supposed to be under a boycott is going to do anything but generate an excess of hits.
Are there adds on Linuxtoday? I never noticed them.... I manage to ignore most web adds.... I say, keep M$ money and promote more Linux!!!
If I did not want someone to check out a site, I would NOT put it on Slashdot. I am relatively new to linux, and have never been to this site you speak of, but now that you have mentioned it I have this great desire to check it out! It seems likely they will now be getting more hits than EVER before. Or is it just me?
As the site founder, you think he has no leftover interest in how it's run and if they use pop ups or not? It's easy enough to enable pop-ups just to see what they are doing with the site. He may have been paid off, but when you see a nice simple, but well navigable side turned into the steaming pile of crapola it's turned into, it would bug me too. I would have stopped looking at slashdot years ago had they not allowed me to at least change my interface preferance to the bare minimum.
OK, I work for Slashdot, but am not writing in any official capacity :)
;)
- Slashdot takes advertising.
- Some of the advertising Slashdot takes is from Microsoft.
- Microsoft advertising is paid for in U.S. dollars.
- The editorial side neither sells the ads nor chooses the advertisers; whether the ad at the top is for Microsoft, Red Hat, or The Estate of Jonas Savimbi, I'm just as surprised as anyone else by the particular banner that appears.
Above is just to point out that the ad-choice decision is not one I make
However (But! Nevertheless!), I don't think it's all that important anyhow. So long as ads are respectful of your browser (I hate Flash ads, and it goes without saying that no one is friends with popup ads or other eye-pokers), their content doesn't concern me a whole lot. (Could there be exceptions? Yes. But the MS ads I've seen on Slashdot, for example, have been tame as a churchmouse. Most of them don't even rise to the level of puffery, more straight 'product exists' notification.)
Ads for Microsoft Visual Studio appear on Slashdot; a lot of readers use that or similar products in their work. Ignoring the possibility that readers use source-secret software would be dumb on the part of the advertisers; they would be ignoring a rationally valuable resource. I'd prefer that people use more free, Free software --and they will. But I'm confident enough that people will choose open source stuff on their own for their own reasons that I don't think advertisements for The Other Kind are a huge concern. What would it say if they were? (Solar and wind power is great; there are still ads for gasoline generators in the back of Mother Earth News.)
I like seeing IBM and other companies push their open-source agendas (parallel and connected to their other agendas) in ads and other forums, but here, too, I don't think advertisements matter except as an input; people will still make up their own minds based on multiple, sometimes ineffable factors.
As at least one other poster has commented, wouldn't you rather the money flowed this direction than the other?
timothy
jrnl: http://tinyurl.com/c2l8yr / foes: http://tinyurl.com/ckjno5
I think the adds are good. Money is moved from Microsoft to open source. MS legitimate Linux by making large anti-Linux adds. They take the position of an underdog by creeping to an Open source web-site with their adds.
I get a little upset everytime I see the adds, but then I relaxes back and thinks about how the world is moving forward. Now MS comes to Linux-land to try to find a marked!
Pål
- Guy creates website
- Guy raises website
- Guy sells website/leaves/whatever
- Website runs into trouble staying afloat
- Website turns desperate and runs ads counter-intuitive to what it promotes
- Guy who is opposed to ads on formerly his website asks people to boycott website until they stop running the ads which aim to hurt their own cause
What's next, boycott leading to lost revenue from unsold ads and then website closes? Does he really want the website to go out of business rather than serve offensive ads?And what does it say that Microsoft are the only ones willing to run Linux related ads? By boycotting Linux Today and ensuring it closes (which it probably will since thanks to less readers no one else will want to advertise there) won't people just be hurting the cause they aim to achieve?
And doesn't this guy realize that by this kind of outburst he's just promoting the "Linux Terrorist/Zealot" image?
Schnapple
Microsoft (theoretically) makes more than $2000 from that advertisement.
Are you sure? Advertizing bathing suits to Eskimos doesn't necessarily guarentee a return on that money.
The website for Linux Today is very blatantly about Linux. Linux users have a high probability of being anti microsoft.
While I think the chance of pissing off Linux readers is very high and thus losing readership, thus losing hits, thus losing money, I also think such an add has a very small possibility of dragging people away from Linux and towards microsoft's offerings, thus this is a mistargeted ad with little chance of making money.
"All great wisdom is contained in .signature files"
I say take their money. I mean what's the big deal? I'd rather drain as much money from them as possible. Sites peppered with MS ads which contain nothing but how great Linux is probably don't help MS that much.
"he drew his sword Ringil that glittered like ice... and he wounded Morgoth with seven wounds..."
What I find interesting is the Ad itself. I don't know much about the web ad biz - so perhaps someone can help me with the details. However, looking over Linux Today with Adblock, it appears they get their ads from Bluestreak and Real Media.
This is where ignorance gets dangerous. Save me from myself if I'm completely off-base here.
If these ad streams come from external sources without (much) editorial control by the sites that serve them, I would expect that the ads themselves are selected based on key elements of the site subject or text being viewed. That could suggest that Microsoft has decided that whenever Linux is mentioned in the online press, it feels compelled to throw out some anti-Linux marketing.
This suggests a few interesting points. First, Linux is appearing enough in trade press to warrant a strategy based entirely on its appearance. Secondly, Linux presents enough of a threat to warrant spending resources on addressing it rather than some other message that would benefit Microsoft.
This should come as no surprise to anyone. But its interesting to watch none-the-less.
Given the state of loathing for the ad-driven market today, how truly serious is this?
Do, or do not most people simply, mentally, tune ads out of their perceptions?
Besides, it's advertisment. What kind of a fucking numbskull suddenly expects advertisment to actually contain anything resembling the truth? That goes counter to the entire history of advertisment AS A WHOLE!
Chas - The one, the only.
THANK GOD!!!
Let me continue this silly thought...
"...I then sold Linux Today to internet.com for shitload of cash. I am told that they no longer lube the server transitors with tofu. I promise to donate the shitload of cash internet.com paid me for Linux Today to starving programmer / gamers in the inner-city."
"Who are in control, they are not in control of anything - they don't even control themselves!" - Glen Beck
I agree microsoft ads shouldn't be on the site but the aol want to make me puke!
But slashdot does that too!? actually i think its brilliant the way slashdot runs microsoft ads, take their money and show the ads to a bunch of people who dont give a shit! its like charging the baby to let you steal its candy :) Really how many non linux-converts are going to be reading linux today?
This comment does not represent the views or opinions of the user.
I worked for a company once that bought an award from them for an "award winning linux workstation". The same workstation that didnt exist and then had me design it after the fact. I trust very few magazine awards nowadays. I also saw internal memos at the same company which i posted on slashdot but noone seemed to bother to read that showed plain as day that HP was being pressured by Microsoft to kill their exchange competitor. (i dont recall what it was called). doesnt matter anyways, all the linux community does is bitch and moan in the face of an aggressor.
If Microsoft want to waste their money preaching to the unconvertible then let them. Whether it is Slashdot or Linux Today they might as well be pissing their money into the wind for all the good it will do them. At least this way, a Linux oriented enterprise benefits from Microsoft's desperation.
This guy has just started a new website in competition with Linux Today. Perhaps this is the motivation for his proposed boycott.
Why do you think boycotts are childish? It is a form of nonviolent protest, a very mature and sophisticated idea. It is the most powerful and persuasive tool at the disposal of the consumer. Your choices as a consumer are to buy or not to buy, patronize or boycott. If consumers not buying, there is something wrong with the product. It is a strong message.
If the publisher finds out that the advertisements are causing readership to slip, they will act fast to prevent loss of revenue. It is not childish to use the tools at your disposal to effect change.
ads? what ads?
pr0n - keeping monitor glass spotless since 1981.
These are paid advertisments. It has nothing to do with free speech, Dorko.
Once again you missed the point entirely. Slashdot is not a "Linux only" site. It is what they say it is, "News for Nerds". Linux Today on the otherhand is a "Linux only" site. It is just plain stupid and/or greedy to place anti-linux ads on a site that promotes linux and only linux, especially when the studies they cite are biased and FUD-filled.
Slashdot is corporate-owned; I don't think a lot of people realize that. The very day Slashdot stuck banner ads on their stories was the day it lost all credibility for me.
If Slashdot lost all credibility then why are you still here?
Time makes more converts than reason
This guy really must not think much of the average Linux user's intelligence.
Amazing magic tricks
Why should they refuse ads from Microsoft? Aren't the readers smart enough to make up their own minds about the benefits of Linux? This reminds me of a recent "outrage" when The Nation ran some full-page ads for Faux News. Most of their readers just laughed at Fox for throwing their money away.
I'd rather that organizations who sell ad space have less editorial control. For instance, Adbusters and the MoveOn PAC have repeatedly been denied airtime on network TV, even though they are able to pay for it, simply because the network execs don't like their message. This is a far greater injustice.
I think it has already been pointed out, but if you as an IT worker-bee are trying to educate your "superiours" ( bosses ) on Linux, *that* kind of advertising makes it unusable.
:-)
WB: Here is the link to the article I told you about on how Linux can save us some money.
PBH: OK.
WB: What did you think of the article? Can we try a pilot program?
PBH: No, I see from this ad on that website that the TCO on Windows is lower. We will stay the course.
Unfortunately, humans tend to put more weight on arguments that support their preconceived notions. I am *so* glad I am not a human.
I wonder if there are regulations on accepting / rejecting advertisements? I.E. If the guys at LinuxInsider *did* want to reject the ad, but legal issues prevent them from doing so... ( stop laughing, please. )
emt 377 emt 4
Dave,
Get over it mate.
Microsoft is a big company and they advertise.
If you strongly feel that their advertisments are making false claims then complain to the appropriate authorities. This isn't exactly the venue to make such complaints.
As has been pointed out you may as well call for people to boycott Slashdot at the same time.
If you follow this path then you'll have to boycott just about the whole internet, you won't be able to walk down any street that has advertising billboards, watch any commercial TV channels, or visit the cinema.
Really. Just read the post history. It makes my head hurt.
(time to go home...)
THIS THING CAN TURN ON A DIME, MACROSSZERO STYLE ALSO FUCK BETA, ~NYORON
LinuxToday who?
I'm linux fan/almost_guru. Have used it for quite some time. Never once read or seen "LinuxToday".
What do I care if they run Windows ads? If they need money to stay afloat and MSFT wants to flip the bill then all the more power to them.
I think though that some Linux types over estimate their pull. "Boycott this cuz I say so" fuck you jackass. I'll go donate 10$ just to spite you now motherfucker.
Someday, I'll have a real sig.
But first, let Linux Today set up a special agreement with all over sponsors to allow them to advertise for 1/4th the current cost of ads and then raise the price 400%! :)
After that, let'm buy ads to their hearts content. Let's face it: People reading Linux today aren't likely to buy into Microsoft's advertisements no matter what they claim.
now this is interesting. he wants linux today to censor the material it displays and has called on slashdotters to boycott it in order to pressure them into this censorship. is there something i'm missing?
char *mySig;
So Microsoft wants to kill off Linux... So they pay for ads on a Linux news website to help support it... This ticks off linux readers so they boycott Linux Today and have thus helped Microsoft strangle a well known Linux website, thus helping Microsoft kill off Linux.
Money well spent.
i dont see ads, so whats the fuzz about?
Putting Pepsi ads on IloveCoke.com site and say, "new discovery! Coke will melt your teeth!" is absolutely nonsense and ineffective. But as long as the content of the website won't be influenced by the presence of a sponsor for the sake of the advertisement revenues, I wouldn't mind having hate-linux ads by MS. That makes me wonder what percentage of XP retail price is going toward advertising.
As we have already seen in "TCO research(!)" and "you'll be sued by SCO(!)" campaigns, people in tech are more sophisticated than those who take pills without a doubt after watching a diet pill commercial. Readers of LinuxToday.com? hmm..., good luck MS.
Moreover, (though this is off-topic) in my personal opinion, most of TV and streaming video ads for MS products are corny and amateurish, low in concept and poorly executed. Ads are to influence people to buy products, but many of MS ads are simply too obnoxious and annoying. I rather forget by all means about two middle-age guys in purple butterfly costume dancing. Do you remember any of MS ads? I doubt you do. Only thing I can remember is the one called "1984." That one was cool. ... oh, wait...
eh so they run m$ ads. big whoop. i hate ms as much as anybody but still everybody should have equal opputunity to buy ad space. thats all it is, now if linuxtoday was its own company, and microshaft bought a controlling share of their stock, then id worry. much like when msnbc reports about the microsoft antitrust case, you cant help but wonder if that influenced their reporting a little, even with the disclaimer admitting they are owned by m$.... id worry more about stuff like google's IPO, i mean that just a prime oppurtunity for MS to do what they do best, buy out the competition.
sometimes, i wonder if i'm the only conservative on teh intarweb. ah well, back to mah hogs and warmongerin'....
..let me tell you, your true tastes never change. I'm always "at home" in Linux in a way I never am in Win (nn) | xx(n). I can understand the guy being upset, but he sold out. Get a life geezer. All your babylons are belong to me.
If Microsoft wants to advertise on a website with a anti microsoft stance, what does it hurt for that website to take the money?
It does no harm at all. I always laugh around election seasons when candidates start running radio ads. There is a local conservative station, and last election cycle Ellen Taucher (democrat) was running ads on that station nonstop. The radio station cannot say no to the ad, because politicians have written the law so you can't say no to their ads, and they get a cut rate too. Without going off on a tangent, the effect of these commercials were this.
#1 She spent a lot of money.
#2 She reached a constituency which was likely to vote a straight repub party ticket, and
#3 The conservative radio station made money.
My advice to you is to laugh. Laugh as you receive their funds, and laugh as they go into the bank. If Ford wants to advertise on a website catering to Die Hard Honda enthusiasts, why not take Fords money?
"Inattention makes clowns of us all" -Bean
Just curious why.
Apparently by using Firebird I was decreasing my TCO more than I thought!
Woot!
--"It's Bradford Company, slash your last name, dot your first name"
YHBT. YHL. HAND.
Love,
Overly Critical Guy (aka bonch)
All MS and other companies ads I see on sites I like and support, I usally click on the ads and follow a few links. Just so the sites I like have som cash income. End of the day, microsoft pays for supporing anti-microsoft sites.. and I still use Linux! :)
Just think about what you're saying. How much good will it do to boycott a perfectly good website (or group of websites) because they are running M$ ads. The only way these so-called 'independent studies' will do Microsoft any good is if your computer-illiterate boss reads them--and if he's computer-illiterate, he's probably not going to be on a geek website. |;)
-- Warning! Microsoft Windows can be hazardous to your mental health.
I'm not sure, because you are getting money from M$, and surely no one on LT will give credit to te ad.
We belong to an open world, we could not play as censors, everyone has rigth to say what they want. It depends on our desition to belive they.
Problem solved.
As has been said elsewhere, this is Microsoft money supporting Linux. Not only don't I mind, I love the irony.
"My country, right or wrong; if right, to be kept right; and if wrong, to be set right." --Senator Carl Schurz (1872)
I don't see any Microsoft ads at the site, all I got was AOL ads. So I signed up for AOL. It is optimzed you know.
Once again you missed the point entirely. Slashdot is not a "Linux only" site.
But it is absolutely an extremely pro-Linux, pro-OSS site. I don't see what relevance defining the scope of the intended subject matter has. The fact is, Slashdot is anti-Microsoft yet takes Microsoft ads.
"Sufferin' succotash."
Really, if MS wants to throw thier money away on anti-Linux ads in a pro-linux forum, LET THEM!
Do you think there's any chance at all of MS getting any benefit from those ads? Take the money and laugh at them until they wise up! Gawd, this is hilarious!
If it helps, think of it as a donation to the cause by Bill G himself!
This has come up more than once on Linux Today. The general consensus is that Microsoft is funding a Linux site, and that everyone Microsoft is trying to target on that site has already used Windows extensively and decided to use Linux instead.
No amount of Microsoft lies on that site will change that. I would have that that Dave would have spent more time on Linux Today, and would have already realized this. It's just free money for Linux Today.
How can anybody in their right mind support MS when that company provides bad quality products, breaks laws world-wide, pays most of it's employees, less than industry standard wages, endlessly tries to crush open source software developemnt while simultaniously wanting to talk to open source developers, supports software patents as a method of controlling the world of software developemnt, Ms is evil and the big problem is a lot of other companies world-wide have noticed how successful they have been and are now copying this behaviour world-wide. No wonder the world is in such a mess.
No I call you a windows astroterf ....
This story runs right on top of "Windows Users Fear Korgo Virus", the latest in a loooong list of Windows' virus alerts. Yeah, yeah, it's already been patched, only lusers don't update with patches, etc, etc.
The point is that there is something seriously wrong with Microsoft's "get it out the door without testing and we can always patch it later" concept. And the weight of their own incompetence will eventually outweigh any amount of money that they spend on advertising!
Has anyone online ever called a "boycott" that actually turned out successfully?
Calling a boycott is the new fallback insult of today. "Well, I'll just call a boycott--take that!"
Apparently we're boycotting the RIAA, the MPAA, software patents, Microsoft, and more.
"Sufferin' succotash."
I, Ray Kroc, founder of McDonald's, have recently discovered they are cutting their ground beef with sawdust. This outrages me and I call for a boycott until they return to their previous recipe of ground worm and kangaroo.
This is just some geek overreacting to something personal to him. Anyone who cares about an MS banner ad and what it has to say really needs to get a life. Or does every-fucking-thing in the media need to come with the disclaimer "The views in the following ad do not represent the views of this site/station/publication."
The real danger I see here is the possibility that Microsoft ad revenue might become so important to Linux Today (or Slashdot, for that matter, since Slashdot ran the same ads) that if Linux Today ran an article critical of Microsoft, Microsoft might turn around and threaten to pull their ads, and thus force Linux Today to tone down any anti-Microsoft content. Then Microsoft effectively gets editorial control of the site.
Do you honestly think that such Microsoft ads come with no strings attached? Advertising isn't just about buying ad space blindly, people.
Troll??? Did you crackheads even read the post before moderating it?
If you want to get nit picky, Linux is a kernel.
GNU/Linux is an OS.
And now it's a political and social movement.
I'm sorry, but denial is not the way to free yourself from economics, politics, or living in society.
It's not offtopic, dumbass. It's orthogonal.
Preaching to the choir would be running those ads here.
Douglas P. Price
Umh, I know that folks will complain that I'm taking money away from the sites that I visit, but I've been using Adblock with FireFox for at least the past year and I couldn't be more happier.
It's simple to fix most ads...just block "*/Ads/*", "http://ad.*", "*.doubleclick.*", etc...then when you come onto a new page, look and see if there's anything out of place (like a page serving something from a server at an "internet marketing" company)...
Sure it takes some time, but I have found that it makes pages load way faster. The only real way for any place to market to me is to use small, unobtrusive text ads (google adwords).
The message this sends to companies is simple...if you want me to listen to what you have to say, then don't be too annoying or I'll shut you out.
As long as sucking on Bill's teat doesn't create any issues with respect to journalistic integrity, I'm not worried, and find it rather funny that M$ is supporting the competition.
How about we take out an ad in some MS oriented mag?
Or even better how about in a counter suit against SCO/MS we ask for a full page sunday paper posting of the MS anti-trust findinhgs summary and teh SCO vs. Linux conclusion..... of course paid for by SCO....
I missed all the fuss on LT....
Don't you realize that this is all part of MICROSOFT'S BIG PLAN?
What'd Steve Ballmer say like last freaking month?
"It's my goal that you can't go anywhere on the internet without seeing a Microsoft logo."
Slashdot.org: Check.
Linux Today: Check.
Way to go team.
Netjak.com independent reviews of domestic & import video ga
I think we should promote linuxtoday MORE!
It offers some interesting news, updated quite regularly.
MS is going to spew their advertising, the money might as well go to a Linux site.
w/pointers to the halloween documents....online..
Some time ago, I had exactly the same problem with microsoft ads on czech pro-linux website www.root.cz. The Microsoft Czech corporation ads were about linux TCO of a database server and arguments were totally stupid.
I wrote to editors about I am not happy with that and from now, I am blocking all their ads in my mozilla. Probably was not alone, since I got response from the site owner. He wrote me something as "Linux users are not idiots. No one of them will believe those ads. If Microsoft wants to spend money on site dedicated to Linux and it helps to pay server costs, I am happy of that."
Certainly, this man has no honor. But on other side, his site is quite usefull for linux beginners. And, by it's action, even Microsoft is signalling they take Linux very seriously.
The situation with Linux Today is exactly the same.
For market analysts that means "Linux is serious because Microsoft are afraid of it". Should we wish more?
There you are, staring at me again.
Why does dave think that his creating Linux Today adds any clout to wanting to boycott it? If he's upset because he no longer has any control over the site, he shouldn't have walked away (or let himself be pushed away, whichever the case may be) from it.
To me, a similar scenario would be if Linus walked away from Linux and said (years later), "I don't like the direction Linux is taking, and since I created it, please boycott it."
Perhaps a better solution than boycotting would be to fight fire w/ kFire (or gFire or GNU\Fire, etc.) and let the Linux community purchase ad's on pro Microsoft sites. Or, maybe push IBM to refute the statements that MS has made by purchasing ad space as well.
For the record, I don't care that MS has ad's on a pro Linux site; I see it as a beauty of capitalism. Also, I don't have any money to contribute to the cause of purchasing ad space for pro Linux ad's, but I still think it's a good idea.
for maximum effect, the preceding post should be read monotone and at a steady cadence
Firefox with this code blocks most ads.
If these ads are 'pay per click' perhaps we can click microsoft into bankrupcy!
I wish i had mod points for you.
Agreed, I would love to see an extension that would incorporate the functionality of Adblock with this style sheet. I have used it for a while in conjunction with Adblock and have found that it is a good combination, but I find it lacks the configurability of Adblock.
This took me back to 1994, when SGI and MS ponied up for full page Wintel spreads in all the Mac-oriented trade rags, MacWeek in particular. Now, for the publishers of MacWeek/World/User, etc, ad dollars are ad dollars, and it didn't really matter if the net result is that a percentage of readers end up on Wintel systems. After all, the motherships all published Wintel (and other) rags in the same offices.
An exception was MacTutor (now MacTech), a Dr. Dobbs-like magazine for developers on the MacOS, and the sole product of the then publisher. Around about 1995, Microsoft placed a number of two page spreads advertising seminars, workshops, and tool kits for developers to migrate to Windows. One could argue that Mac developers were headed that way in any case, and MacTutor might as well suck up ad dollars what ever the source on their way down the toliet. However, that the premier - hell, only - Mac technical journal would host a series of such ads couldn't help but speed MacTutor's only customers out the door.
In the end, ads are propaganda, and if the message they contain doesn't jibe with the editorial goals of the publication, then the owner that runs them is exposed as strictly a whore to Mammon, and their "editorial stance" a sham. At least when I flip through Harper's Bazaar in a waiting room, I already know that their sole purpose is to shill for the ad clients. Giving me wood is just a side effect.
Luke, help me take this mask off
boycott linux today because they run MS ads (of /course/ they're anti-linux/pro-MS stupid)? Why, to try and convince them to run anti-MS/pro-linux ads? Isn't that a bit hypocritical?
The money Microsoft pays for those ads is just as green as everyone else's.
Don't become a regular here, you will become retarded. -- Yoda the Retard
It's very important to have the proper sponsors. Microsoft is not a proper sponsor in this case.
If they find the ads distasteful they aren't forced to view them. Conversely, the site has every right to show the ads. Both sides have their rights, and both have to accept the consequences. Viewers might miss some quality content, but you only piss off your audience so long before the go along with a bunch of advertising revenue.
Also, think of this: Microsoft has seemed quite assured of its superiority but how often do you see IBM ads touting Linux on a Microsoft-branded site such as MSNBC, MSN.COM, Slate etc? Or Sun pushing Java? Or Oracle boasting about their powerful databases? They aren't there with ads AT ALL much less ones that are critical of Microsoft's alternatives.
It has nothing to do with being unsure--it is not professional and looks like desperation (it screams "we'll take advertising money from anyone who offers it to us"). I can completely understand why people are angry.
The ads MS has on Slashdot and other sites are tolerable because THESE SITES DON'T SPECIALISE IN LINUX. They are for general-interest audiences. I don't even have a problem with MS ads on Linux sites if they were relevant (maybe advertising tools for interoperability with other OSes for example, or showing an XBox ad on a gaming or XBox hacking article.
The problem is the ads don't sell their product, they are focused on crapping all over Linux. There is no room for that kind of material on a Linux specialty site, not even in the ads.
LinuxToday should put in small letters under each advertisement (replacing version numbers as appropriate):
I like the Microsoft ads, though. It means that Microsoft is openly acknowledging that Linux is competition -- something they didn't do a few years ago. Plus they give me a good laugh every time I sit and watch one.
I've been sitting here refreshing repeatedly and I don't see any of these ads that this guy is complaining about. Did they stop having the ads or something?
Don't stop them from advertising FUD, it's not necessary. The replies seem to clarify disinformation quite well.
Mozilla Firefox doesn't let me view ads, so I never noticed. Thanks for telling me. While on the topic, does X10 still sell tiny wireless camera? Thanks Mozilla Team.
After sitting here and reperatedly hitting refresh (over 200 times), I have yet to see any MS ads on LT. Ive seen ads for everything else - Bellsouth, Rackspace, Netzero, Symantec - but not Microsoft. Show me these ads, I say, /then/ you can rant.
Who cares if an advertisement is shown claiming that Windows has a lower TCO than Linux? Whether that is true or not depends so much on factors like the salary of sysadmins and minimum hardware specs that you can't possibly make a blanket statement that anyone in business would believe.
On the other hand, compare Microsoft Windows XP (or 2000 if you prefer) to Windows 98 and 95. Microsoft has made many improvements to their software to keep it competitive. Sure, they've added some features that I don't agree with and they tend to be a bit heavy-handed with it comes to privacy, but I am glad to see them trying! And without Windows to compete against, Linux development might suffer as well - even though they are competing, Windows, Mac OS and Linux developers are all contributing ideas to the global development effort - ideas that eventually influence everyone, if they're good. And we all benefit from that.
So don't support this boycott, go to Linux Today and read your news if you are so inclined. And click the Microsoft ad, read what they have to say - you might learn something interesting and you'll send some money to a site you like, in the process.
-Elentar
The wheel it turns, around and around, with an ancient rumbling sound.
The founder of linuxtoday.com (at least according to the article) is Dave Whitinger. Not "linus". Seriously, what kind of rational people can't even LOOK at an ad? "Oh no that ad says that Windows is better than Linux, we had better boycot this site and anyone associated with it!!!"
Really. Get over it. Again - Linux is an operating system, and not a religon. If the only way it can compete with other OS's is through boycots and demagoguery then maybe it isn't a very good one? Why not just advertise on sites that are devoted to Microsoft's products? Why not be adult rather than knee-jerk reactionary zealots?
You have the wrong rant here.
Read Groklaw.
Their stories have been pretty terrible in my opinion, especially some about the SCO debacle...
This is not an outrage. Here are the reasons:
1. The site has to get its money from somewhere.
2. Anything Microsoft says is ignored by the Linux community. Look at
3. Most importantly, the particular ad mentioned here boasts a fair point, and I believe these ads probably provoke more anti-Microsoft sentiment than they stamp out. These ads are just as bad as Linux Today reporting that "Microsoft says this and that, oh no!". It should hopefully spur the Linux community to resolve whatever issue caused Linux to be more expensive to run for 7-11 than a Microsoft OS.
Really, you might as well resent ads for Microsoft products on OSDN. They're there, and as a Microsoft and Linux user who is entitled to his opinion, I like them to be there. It's pointless for Microsoft to advertise on Linux Today because the ads are probably treated with hatred and bile.
Also, Linux Today and the other sites run by internet.com probably use the same ad-cycling routines and show the same ads on every internet.com-owned site.
What I'm trying to say is, I don't read Linux Today and I, as well as most of it's regular readers, probably could not care less about this issue and certainly aren't going to bother to boycott it IF the information that Linux Today publishes is more valuable than Microsoft's dumb ads. If Linux Today publishes worthless articles, people will be happy to go elsewhere, but for some reason people still frequent the site. Maybe the author should not have sold out.
Are Linux Today's readers too stupid to think for themselves?
Rombuu, do you enjoy beating your wife? Come on, that's a really old troll. Ask a question that has no right answer and ignores clearly stated points. Here are those points:
All are legitmate. Microsoft adds are irritating and I hate seeing them. Besides being blatantly false, they are as visually annoying as any porn add. Running such garbage casts doubt on your editorial integrity and lessens the impact of your content. Worse, they might become dependent on M$ and join the long line of worthless Wintel publications ready to say anything. These are issues worth considering.
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
I've been seeing Windows ads in Unix/Linux magazines for years. Slashdot runs Vstudio.net ads all the time.
He doesn't like the ads and he would have rejected them. But he couldn't because he was not in the position any more.
There are sound reasons for every publisher to discard ads: too cheap, too offending, too late.
But if a competitor buys ad-space from you it always means that you are doing alright. Otherwise the competitor wouldn't mind spending money. Ads mean that a competitor takes you serious. And he's funding you without obligations.
I see lots of ads in Linux/Unix affine publications with Microsoft advertisments. I don't oppose that. If Microsoft PR thinks they want to spend money to have printed ads, pop-ups, banners or other (strictly seperated) forms of advertisment in a Linux magazine, it's pefectly OK as long as ads and editorial content doesn't get mixed.
Or does the submitter suggest that editorial content and advertisements are no longer strictly separated in this case? That would be a grave accusation indeed. And if he wants to raise only the slightest suspicion that is the case then he has to come up with citations, examples, precedences to prove his point.
People should be more concerned with things like those stupid smoking pot = terrorism ads, cause those are a waste (like the MS ads), but are paid for with our tax dollars! Frankly, Im more concerned with where my money is going than were Microsoft's is. Let MS give their money to Linux mags if they want, we should have bigger conerns.
Moderation Totals: Flamebait=2, Troll=1, Redundant=1, Insightful=6, Overrated=1, Underrated=1, Total=12. (not mine)
It's funny isn't it?
/. or Linux Today posted the Microsoft ads, but allowed comments on them? That would be a riot. In fact, you might even be able to work out a deal with the beast where their own people can post anti Linux comments to go along with the ads. It would be funny to shoot them down, and it would support the open source community.
I would personally take ads from Microsoft or Google, or anyone who wanted ads on any of my web sites. The more the better. It's not really an issue of integrity. It's an issue of getting paid. I like getting paid. It supports things like my smoking habit, and my patch habit, and my food and shelter habit. These things might not sound important if you're living with mom, but trust me. These are the things that matter.
Hey wouldn't it be funny if
It's all in good fun.
This signature has Super Cow Powers
Hello? Valid point!
(I am not the original poster but have read 0racle's posts before which are hardly pro-MS, n fact quite the contrary.)
"I would never point a decision maker or prospective Linux user to a slashdot link. I might have once pointed them to a Linux Today link."
I agree, DickBreath. The goatse link ruined Slashdot for me too.
---
"Sorry, but according to [the tests that make "/." mom friendly], you are trying to post from an open HTTP proxy. [ZIP IT UP BEFORE YOU EMBARESS YOURSELF!]"
If it's bullshit, why would you publish it? Editors owe it to their readers to filter obvious frauds. Claiming that Winblows cost 1/10th what free software does is an outright lie and everyone knows it. Publishing such nonsense is close to taking money from Nigerian Oil scammers. That the lie is so detectable makes the publisher look that less informed or honest.
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
DAMN MICROSOFT, DAMN THEM TO HELL.
The audacity to pay you to express their opinions, and not only that, but opinions that say mean things about your favorite operating system!!
When will the madness end.
Seriously, you don't have a right not to be offended, and being offended about the OS wars is about the lamest thing evar. As long as the ads are clearly labeled, they should be accepted. Rather then calling for a boycott, write articles explaining why the ads are misleading. M$ will probably pull them themselves if you do. If there's editorial pressure to change the content to better suit the advertisers, then there's a problem. And that should be the problem discussed.
Slashdot runs Microsoft ads, there are lots of people who like working on both windows and Linux (shock, horror!)
Oh well, whatever. I have a suspicion that this boycott will fail miserably.
autopr0n is like, down and stuff.
How sure is he that he didn't sell out to a subsidiary of Microsoft? It's not paranoia. Other companies in the past have bought in to competing companies to errode them from within. Microsoft isn't above using that tactic. Billions are at stake if Microsoft even looses a small market share.
There's an ad for "AOL high-speed, surf the internet 5x faster." on there now. How many sys-admins are still on dialup...
autopr0n is like, down and stuff.
"Linux Today Founder Calls for Boycott of Linux Today"
It's pretty bad style to use "Linux Today" twice in a 9 word headline.
the byproduct of years of oppression by the white man
I guess you don't keep up with current events.
VA Linux is no more. They became VA Software years ago, changed almost all of their internal systems to Microsoft, and only hawk proprietary software (SourceForge).
IIRC, VA Software has little or nothing to do with this site anymore.
I have something in common with Stephen Hawking...
For example during the 1970's Cesar Chavez (who is for hispanics what Martin Luther King Jr. is for the blacks) led the nation in boycotting grapes. The effect was great enough to force the land owners to renegotiate favorable terms with the migrant land workers.
But you are right that in most cases the issue really isn't a big enough deal for people to bother. Also in this case the supporters did a very good job bringing things to the public eye, handing out flyers in front of grocery stores, to get people thinking about it right before they made a decision. Much more effective than posting in your blog, or a stupid chain email.
ads2.osdn.como ads.osdn.comd s.osdn.com
fmads.osdn.com
gcads.osdn.com
ge
k5ads.osdn.com
lnads.osdn.com
sfa
ssads.osdn.com
toads.osdn.com
Help Brendan pay off his student loans
Are you sure click through is how the advertiser gets paid? It's a method that's easy to defraud, as you pointed out.
In any case, DON'T DO IT. Regardless of how M$ is charged, people will count the click through. It makes the website, the advertiser and M$ think that people really have an interest in M$ cruft. People make real decisions based on that kind of information. You don't really know if you are harming them, and you really are helping them everytime you click.
The best way to make Microsoft go away is to ignore them.
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
Shell and Brent Spar - they still suffer.
Look here or there for a more complete overview.
Presumably these were the last days when those well trained in the late sixties/early seventies were still fit. Hmm.
CC.
TaijiQuan (Huang, 5 loosenings)
No, you are detracting from the point he is trying to make without knowing anything. That's not good to do to your friends. There are many more flattering scenarios.
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
This is a frustrating situation. Of course we have the right to boycott. But asking for a boycott on Slashdot generates huge numbers of click-throughs, and makes the microsoft ads appear like a great idea to the management of Linux Today.
...And if those bastards say ONE thing that's actionable as fraud, try to sue them till their posteriors bleed.
And of course Microsoft should be able to say what they want, and say it wherever they want to and can. John Stuart Mill in "On Liberty" says that speech _against_ something makes it stronger, and he's right. We need Microsoft to cook up lies about us so that we actively defend them, and that makes us smarter, faster, better.
But, in this case, it's destructive, because Microsoft has uneven access to the media and uneven credibility. The PHB's believe them, not us.
I remember a wall in a stairwell leading to the library, when I was in collge. It was painted white, and graffiti began to accumulate. Some of it was nasty: anti-black, anti-female, anti-jew, and anti-white-males. All of it would get scratched out/obliterated pretty quickly -- All except that against white males. Presumably because white males don't CARE. They have power and credability and don't give a heck about what others say. I (a white male) found that stuff funny.
So the question has a twisted side: do we exert our power of boycott (or others) to squelch Microsoft, or do we assume the position of the Powerful, and let 'em say what they want, when they want, and just make OURSELVES more heard and more believed?
That would be the bigger solution. And someday, Microsoft will be the marginalized group, and they'll be trying to silence us. But that's not today.
So we scratch out the stuff that bugs us, in fear others will believe it, or because it just plain offends us. And since we're weak, and they strong (media spending-wise, at least) maybe that's the best thing for us for now?
Sticks in my craw either way.
I'd like to err on the side of being big, though.
It sounds like boycotting Apple adds in a PC magazine.
-- I don't buy it, I grow it.
I'm sorry. I use firefox. I block images that don't come from the original server. I didn't see any ads.
People who visit LinuxToday most likely know about Microsoft's bullshit. Why not leave the ads there, and encourage people to click them. I know whenever I see one of Microsoft's ads, I click it, so the web site gets some more advertising money from Microsoft. Surely this is the sensible way to deal with Microsoft, as it keeps the money flowing into our favourite web sites and doesn't cause any harm.
I sometimes wonder who is having one over on who. Is it microsoft laughing all the way to the bank when they realise they can pay a few dollars to cash-needy open source related websites to bend over and voluntarily ram a large microsoft ad up their anus, or is it the cash-needy open source related websites laughing all the way to the bank when they realise microsoft will actually pay them to run ads that their audience will obtain valuable comedy gold (tm) from as uninventive flash animations repeatedly proclaim that windows is cheaper than linux, forgetting to mention the part kazaa has to play in this?
So what do you think of advertisements that make blatantly false claims like Linux costs 10x as much to run as Winblows? That's the heart of the matter here. Shouldn't there be some editorial feedback when it comes to stuff like that? Publishing a lie is wrong.
By the way, the advertisements were also of the "eye poker" flash type.
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
They have no right? Of course not, who said they did? Linux Today has a right to put them there though and you have a right to boycott, but you better start boycotting Slashdot while you are at it or you will be philosophicly inconsistant.
/rational/ people use multiple OSes for multiple reasons and don't have emotional ties to such things. Trying to segrigate OS visibility smaks a bit of... OSism? :(
The real bottom line is,
Contrary to popular belief, coding is not all free blow-jobs and beer. Those things cost MONEY!
This is for those who have been saying that Slashdot being 'anti-microsoft and pro-linux' should not accept microsoft ads.
/. and they have varying opinions. Maybe some are pro-linux and anti-microsoft, but some others are just the opposite and many others have no strong opinions about either.
1. Slashdot is not officially anti-microsoft. There are thousands of readers of
Just my tuppenies.
2. (considering that these are news websites) Saying that we should not accept ads from those whom we see in the opposing side, is like being part of a dictatorship. These are not propaganda websites, these are there to disseminate information. The tendency to blare one's own opinion while drowning out the other's opinion is not in the spirit of democratic speech. (Yes, these principles should be applied everywhere in life)
"When the only tool you own is a hammer, every problem begins to resemble a nail." - Abraham Maslow (1908-1970)
I mean seriously...
Damn, I guess you're right.:-)
What?
A) You shouldn't have sold out.
B) It's free-as-in-speech, baby. Suck it up.
Yes, it has worked before. If you recall back to the civil rights time frame there was a bus company in montgomery alabama that got boycotted by black riders. Basicly, in the end, they stopped riding, bus company almost goes broke and finally compiles, black people could sit wherever they wanted and didn't have to move if someone else wanted to sit there. Atleast that's the jist of the story. So to answer your question, yes, boycotts work, it just requires people to stick to it.
Jisho - A Japanese English German Russian French Dictionary for the rest of us.
I'm sympathetic, but not overly so.
Websites cost money. The cost for the time of the folks who code them and supply the content; they cost for the server reources that host them; and they particularily cost for the bandwidth they use to provide access to them. The more popular a site gets, the greater that last cost becomes.
Where does the money come from? In most cases, advertising. A few sites have successfully implemented a subscription model for "premium" content, but most rely on ads.
Microsoft has a *lot* of money, and can afford to advertise on half the websites in the known universe. It's no surpise they should make a big push on Linux oriented sites, since Linux is thier principal OS competition.
Personally, I'd hold my nose and take the money. The folks who visit sites like Linux Today are usually sophisticated enough to see through the hype, and not be swayed by MS FUD. Those that aren't sophisticated enough are probably not good candidates for conversion to the First Church of Tux in any case.
The alternative for purists may be that the site goes under, because MS ads made the difference between enough revenue to keep going, and losing your shirt.
______
Dennis
which show the true TCO of Linux vs Microsloth I'll,aggree with the people who advocate M$ FUD on a Linux news site. IT is not just the ad's that spew M$ bullshite. Lately Iv'e noticed the main stories are producing M$ tripe.
Red eye's at night, Hackers delight. Red eye's in the morning, Professors Warning.
Are Linux Today's readers too stupid to think for themselves?
No kidding. Those MS ads are, to the average Linux Today reader, just like humorous Monty Python-esque interludes. All they are missing is the big foot.
http://www.finnvik.com/irony.jpg
I visited the site and hit reload more than a dozen times, tried several arcticles and I just get AOL and phone system ads. Great in a world full of commercials, I can't even get one when I want to see one instead of ignoring them.....
I looked furiously for an ad on the given website....and 2 hours later figured out that PithHelmet was enabled...
It would appear that the person on the most recent cover has a flashlight shining out the top of his pants.
... except Windows and Office. Everything else Microsoft does is at a loss. Were it not for the monopolies, Microsoft's blatantly poor management and arrogant gambles would have driven Microsoft out of business a long time ago.
Might as well let Microsoft spend its money supporting Linux.
Personally, I think the boycott call is a plot to create controversy to call attention to LinuxToday. And guess who took the bait!
I think a VAX fell on them.
Douglas P. Price
I don't care! I am not going to boycott Linux--not today, not ever! For me it is clear that I should use Linux even though people like Darl McBride want otherwise. I just don't care!
Sincerely,
Pan Tarhei Hosé, PhD.
"Homo sum et cogito ergo odi profanum vulgus et libido."
Where are the ads can't see any MS-ads?
Where are the ads can't see any MS-ads?
I mean, I refreshed it 10 times now (is it my mere bad luck)?
Obviously it was a fluke and they removed the add already!
The Linux community is a very moody one (rightly so) -
do you think any Linux-business will play with the community like that?
Linux is short of being a religion.
Another non-profit organization funded by Microsoft ;)
-1 Uncomfortable Truth
And until Bill Gates buys me and my pals a beer or two
Which is exactly what Microsoft did, if you think about it. Microsoft bought Linux Today a proverbial beer or two, and Linux Today agreed to run ads that its core readership would see as satirical.
Or "block certain-sized elements" in Opera at work, I might agree with you. As it is, I, unfortunately, never had a chance to be shocked by those ads.
... that's the proof that there's no money in so-called "Linux-Business". lol
I would personally take ads from Microsoft or Google, or anyone who wanted ads on any of my web sites. The more the better. It's not really an issue of integrity. It's an issue of getting paid. I like getting paid. It supports things like my smoking habit, and my patch habit, and my food and shelter habit. These things might not sound important if you're living with mom, but trust me. These are the things that matter.
a) don't lump in Google and Microsoft, one has a sound ethical policy and the other is a convicted criminal
b) many of us are well paid software engineers but still manage to live ethically, so please don't patronise with the "living with your mom" jibe. You may be morally bankrupt but don't lump us decent people in with you. We're not the same as you.
Phillip.
Property for sale in Nice, France
You are all missing the point.
MS is pouring money into competitors so that one day they stop cold turkey and POOF! away goes everyone like the internet bubble.
It's too obvious.
So just use some of that wasted screen space to offer equal time to the opposition.
Indeed. It's not like Microsoft is going to convince any of us to actually buy their products. If they want to support the Linux community, they can go again.
Those MS adds have been running for close to 2 years now and nobody has complained. I stopped buying the magazine based on this. I also stopped buying SysAdmin "The Journal for UNIX and Linux System Administratos" mag because of the MS FUD that was packed inside (some issues contained MS CD's as well).
While I contimplated complaining to these publications I left them alone instead assuming that if enough people got fed up with the FUD that a boycott would ensue. Oops, a boycott.
Whenever you read this sig someone's refrigerator light turns on.
Which ones are you talking about? I have adblock on ;)
Find a job you like and you will never work a day in your life.
While M$ ads on /., LinuxToday, and even the rest of the OSDN website are there, does that mean we have to believe them? I dont think that the primary readers of any of these sites would buy from M$ simply based on a small ad. We are too smart for that. If M$ comes out and said "We have the answer to all your problems, period. We have invented the software that does your taxes, keeps your girlfriend very happy, and makes you a god", most of us that actually make decisions to go buy stuff would go and RTFA.
If M$ wants to advertise to the competion, thats fine. Most of us here are not PHB's that take ads ( even pro linux ones) at face value.
SPC Gruhn
Keyboard Infantry since 2002
Actually, privoxy doesn't work that way.
Privoxy is a web proxy, not a browser plugin. That means it slipstreams itself in between your browser and the server. When using privoxy, your actual web browser never actually directly requests anything from the web site itself. All of its requests go through privoxy, and (crucially) privoxy does not actually pass all of the incoming requests through to the remote server.
The result is that when you go to slashdot's home page and there is an ads.osdn.com banner at the top of the page, privoxy doesn't work by first downloading the ad from the server and then preventing you from seeing it. Instead it works by recognizing ads.osdn.com as an advertising site, and not even sending the HTTP GET request at all.
Now, it is true that privoxy has a second, independently functional ad-blocking mechanism that does rely on post-processing the ad after it is downloaded, but ads.osdn.com is well known enough that privoxy can (and does) already decide to eschew even the initial GET request based purely on the URL input.
We're all for freedom of speech... until you say something we don't like.
It's an issue of getting paid. I like getting paid.
You know 3 years ago, it was getting laid that was important. Now it is getting paid. Funny how times change.
"If the devil pays let him stay." :)
When's the last time you actually looked at an advertisement? My mind doesn't even notice them anymore, be they in magazines or online, much like the pink mountain in HHGTtG.
Heheheh .... done !! I never read it anyway.
Most publications have advertising standards. They will not accept advertisements which do not meet these standards. You can get ad space in The New York Times to promote your product, or to set out your political position, or to call for a boycott, or to celebrate your wedding. You cannot get ad space in The New York Times to call someone by a derogatory racial epithet. You cannot get ad space in The New York Times to propound a claim that the editors know to be maliciously false. You cannot get ad space in The New York Times to advocate violence against women.
I suggest that a useful outcome of this controversy would be for Linux- and free-software-related Web publications to adopt strong advertising standards. These standards need to embrace not only basic standards of respectable public conduct (as in the examples above) but also a clear respect for the free-software and open-source world. They should refuse any advertisement which is, at its core, an attack upon free software and open source. It is wrong for publications which derive their livelihoods from free software to allow their visibility to be used to harm it.
The FS/OSS world is closely coupled to the public discourse about software. Many free-software developers are motivated not by profit but by art, personal need, and the perceived interests of their fellows. Public and professional discussion about software has always informed free-software development. We see this in the early discussions of software freedom and the rise of Project GNU. We see it in the collaboration which brought forth Linux -- collaboration mediated by discussions on Usenet and mailing lists. We see it when projects today fork (or merge) on the basis of public statements of animosity or admiration. Software is speech (as was confirmed in Bernstein v. United States) and the open-source world is uniquely close to this fact. This is why we hate lies about our work: because our work is about information, and spurred on by meaningful collaboration; deception is the opposite of these things.
It's not just us, either. Professionals in any field are revulsed by misinformation about their field. Climatologists have expressed little but disdain for the movie The Day After Tomorrow. Medical doctors hate quackery. Lawyers mock bad law advice. Sex educators despise the myths which lead teenage girls to try douching with Coca-Cola to prevent pregnancy. How much more is this in a case in a field whose lifeblood is information itself? An innocently false statement is a bug; a lie is a deliberately planted backdoor.
Advertisements which present falsehoods about open-source software should not be accepted -- not by Linux Today, not by Slashdot, and not by any other publication which lives by free software. It would not be too extreme, I suspect, to banish any advertisement whose focus is an attack on any piece of free software / open source, or one focused on attacking the idea of free software itself.
Sure, Mr. and Ms. Open-Source Publications, take ads from Microsoft. Take ads promoting a new version of Windows; or the latest Xbox game; or the C# language. But don't take ads that mislead, that say "Windows is cheaper than Linux"; don't take ads that propound SCOX's libels, even by sulfuric little hints; don't take ads that harm the community whose existence and whose contributions make your publication possible.
please don't patronise with the "living with your mom" jibe. It's what we call a joke, around here.
----geppy -
Hey wouldn't it be funny if /. or Linux Today posted the Microsoft ads, but allowed comments on them?
I once considered making a website that was just banner ads with comments on the banners. But a) bannerfarm.com was already taken, and b) I didn't think I could draw enough visitors to get enough comments to make it interesting. But I still like the idea.
[100% ISO 646 Compliant]
SVM, ERGO MONSTRO.
What about boycott Slashdot, Linux.com, Freshmeat, etc. until all those sites removes all and any Microsoft advertising. In fact, when I click on the this story comments link I got an offending Microsoft advertising... All you talk too much but when you see money you sell the soul to the devil... this isn't the way to create a strong community over a competing product. You go to, for example, the Ford Motors website and will never see a Chevrolet advertising. Start being serious. Linux.com and Freshmeat et al, talks about open source and GPL, free software, etc. but what about releasing their website's source code to the public... Oh! no! Open Source and free software is just to make money, the "free concept" is for others...
whoever pays the piper calls the tune
I highly recommend adblock.mozdev.org for all your anti-Microsoft marketing needs.
And it was funny.
Some people have no sense of humor.
EOM
I'm not dumping on you or the moral elite Phil,
We live in a free country. You can be as stuffy as you want to be. You can even get a gun and move to the hills if you have the resources and inclination to do so. That's the beauty of it really.
But when you run a web site, especially a community supported one that does not produce that does not produce a tangible product that can be sold, resold, or otherwise generate recurrent revenue, there are certain financial and mathematical realities that come into play.
When you're talking about money, real tangible money that you earn by providing valuable ad space on your tangible web sites to tangible sponsors, you are receiving something you find valuable in exchange for that space, which otherwise would not generate any revenue.
That is the key. If you do a cost benefit analysis on a site like this based on real world factors and common sense taken into account; you will find that the time spent developing and maintaining such a site is directly proportional to success and usefulness the site. No one, is going to run a web site like this or Linux Today full time, if it doesn't make financial sense to do so. We all need to make a living, unless of course we're too good to work.
Sure, it would be nice if people who had the resources chose to do a neat little out of the kindness of their hearts, and some do, I'm not knocking that either. So you can reign in that high horse a little.
Ideally, you want to refrain from offending your user base through pop up ads or spam, which aren't very useful to begin with considering that most of us block that anyway. So what does that leave you with?
Banner ads. Lots and lots of neat little banner ads, and those odd shaped rich media ads.
Now Microsoft may be a convicted felon. I'll concede that.
You may be interested to know that convicted felons are everywhere. There are literally millions of them. They usually work lower paying jobs or start businesses for themselves. Many of them live perfectly honest life styles after paying their debt to society. That's how it works.
There's no ethical way around that, nor should there be. And there's nothing ethically wrong or illegal about dealing with said person or entity if you choose to do so. And if they're not posting anything illegal, profane, or obscene on your web site, there really shouldn't be any ethical problem at all.
You need to lump Google and Microsoft together, because they are both asking you to do the very same thing in this case. They are asking for that tangible ad space that you need to make money with. It's that same space that they would like to use to sell their product on. It's not your fault that Microsoft's marketing department has a sense of irony, and can afford to throw money out the window on advertising that is not properly targeted at a useful client base.
This signature has Super Cow Powers
OSDN along with a whole bunch of other supposedly "community"-oriented websites Sold Out the Community a long time ago when they started to take Microsoft's money to critisize the very "Community" which they supposedly serve.
I like getting paid. It supports things like my smoking habit, and my patch habit Do we need to pay to patch our computer these days ?
... is that it's your fault for selling out.
Has anyone concidered this.
/etc/hosts or c:\windows\hosts.sam file (changing the name to hosts to make it work) and put in the needed line to block adds like:
Adds generally pay per view. If it doesn't get seen the obligation is not met. Sooooooooo
Edit your
127.0.0.1 ads.spammaven.com
Then use Mozilla or firefox and turn off popups.
voila. Page after page loads at lightning speed and they don't make any money off of the add. Of course then eventually the site loses it's advertising pull and is offline. But heh....
I'm sorry, I'm to tired to be witty at the moment so this message will have to do.
I've seen how this can work.
Years ago when Mother Jones magazine was first established and struggling, they asked the charter members if they wanted higher subscription rates or advertising-we voted advertising.
The result - a full page Ford Pinto advertisement across from an expose on the Pinto's penchant for bursting into flames in rear collisions. Truly Rich!
I can be found @ 127.0.0.0
I called for a boycott of a company threatening to sue the maker of Spybot S&D. The person had been running the site www.spybot.com for years without doing much with it.
One day last year, he trademarked the word "spybot", then sent threats to Spybot S&D's maker in an attempt to make him stop using the name "spybot" while he sold a commercial product under that name.
A few days later, he gave up and even agreed to transfer the trademark to SSD's maker. It wasn't the boycott so much as the bad press, but either way it worked.
All of the details of this are at http://www.spywareinfo.com/articles/inboxcop/
Only on
I haven't seen an ad on the internet in months.
www.floppymoose.com for users of safari or mozilla,
proximotron for IE users.
Block ads, pop-up and other anoyances.
I am amazed when I use someone elses computer at the volume of crap that pops up when using the web. On mine is is perhaps more bland, but definitely less noisy.
Learn how to spell "betrayal" at reference.com.
bus company almost goes broke and finally compiles,
:-P
I just love the replacement of perfectly good words with "techie" words
I've looked at linuxtoday every day for the
last 3 years. However that stopped 2 weeks
ago when I switched over to lxer
It's a little broader and much less noise.
Try both over 56K modem to really see what I mean.
Don't you guys see the elegance in having Billy Bob and his Micro$haft fund the spread of Linux? This is almost perpetual motion, or reverse energy consumption.
Any press is good press. Linux awareness, coupled with mature product, is all Linux needs. We have the awareness, and the attractive price point is driving business to assist with the product.
The next generation interface will win the day, not the best OS, server, or application.
I wouldn't want to support a cancer victim support site with any advertisements! The examples you gave should not be accepting any ads, whereas Linux Today is a magazine! Magazines regularly take competitor's ads, and it makes no difference to the actual content.
"Science is a way of trying not to fool yourself." -Richard Feynman
How is displaying blatant lies for money not a compromise of journalistic integrity? :/
I had the RSS feed in my Evolution now deleted.
It's just wrong.
Say whatever but it's not only about greed and fruitless commerce, it's about lies.
LinuxToday is a whore.
MS funding is one short of MS-extermination.
How many visitors go to Linux Today would be swayed by an anti-Linux Microsoft ad? Probably somewhere around zero. So let them support Linux Today and we can all snicker at the irony.
This boycott thing is really the most stupid thing I have ever heard. Those Linux advocates that support such a boycott must grow up.
Unfortunately, Microsoft will continue to dominate the market until Linux becomes a superior product. Microsoft is well within their right to put ads out that say such. By putting them on Linux sites, they hope to turn businesses away from Linux by persuading the people who are investigating the usage of Linux on those sites. Linux Zealots will be the only people outraged by such ads.
I use LinuxToday way too much to just _stop_. It's kinda like Google for me. Or slasdhot, maybe, even.
/.er, Microsoft bad, Linux good. And Microsoft is paying out the ass for these ads, and they have tons of money to burn on it. Think about this. The money itself is going to support OSDN practices, and develop Open Source Software. All the while, we, as OSDN-participants understand the insanity of these ads (Lower MS TCO), and those of us who are confident in the inability of these ads to sway our crowd, can laugh.
As for the ads themselves, I find them funny. Like, I see it the same as any other
So it's like a stand-up comic, throwing wads of cash at us, and telling us to spend it on ammunition to fire at him.
*shrug* That's all.
Informatus Technologicus
No, you don't. It notices that the embedded IMG link goes to a listed server (or more precisely: is caught by your filter list) and stops mozilla from loading the image.
HAND.
As usual, you failed to answer the question: If Slashdot is no longer credible to you, then why are you here?
Oh, that's right, you're here to troll and karma whore. Silly me.
...why are you still reading Slashdot?
CAn'T CompreHend SARcaSm?
Honestly, what in the holy hell is this supposed to mean?
Does anyone use preview anymore?
You had a great point and utterly decimated it with your lack of composition skill... Doesn't that embarass you?
a) don't lump in Google and Microsoft, one has a sound ethical policy and the other is a convicted criminal
That's his point - he'd take ads from both.
I think its great. Every time I see a microsoft add on a Linux web site, I right click open in another tab in the background, so I don't have to see it and make microsft pay for the add. I cracks me up, by running the add microsoft is forced to sponsor my favourite Linux web sites and the more I see the more I click. If every Linux users does this it will mean more money for Linux and we get to nibble away at microsofts advertising budget (I know it's only small amounts but I can't resist).
Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
It's an issue of getting paid. I like getting paid.
It is curious how this ultra-liberal ideology of "let the money flow where it wants" is popular.
Do you consider that if Linux today or OSDN has a significant part of its income comming from Microsoft it is likely that this group will be able to make pressure to change their editorial style?
You suggest that comments on ads could be fun. But what if your client advertiser doesn't like those comments, how will you choose between this fun and your shelter habit?
Greenpeace for instance never acepts ads in its magazine. Do you think it should?
Hey, I founded a site too it's called:
http://www.suckmyballscausenoonegivesashitaboutlin uxtoday.com/
It's a portal to bullshit syndication sites, like Linux Today and LXer.
Lame, Lame, Lame