Slashdot Mirror
Yankee Group Slams Linux 'Extremists'
AvatarofVirgo wrote in to mention an article running on ZDNet in which the consulting firm The Yankee Group goes after folks in the Linux community who have been questioning their objectivity. From the article: "Laura DiDio, an analyst at the Yankee Group who has been at the receiving end of much of the criticism from Linux advocates, claimed the radical elements of the community could damage the reputation of open source software."
claimed the radical elements of the community could damage the reputation of open source software
/.
Could? Looks a little too late for "could".
Picture
Picture
Picture
Furry Teeth
RTFM
GOAT
Could damage the reputation of open source???
LOL
She's not too far off - Everytime I see a story on Microsoft and Linux - I see the extremists belittle, spread FUD, and incorrect information. I've long maintained that if the best you can do is tell me FUD about Microsoft as a reason to switch - then there's no reason to switch.
One of the prime examples of winnowing me away from I.E. for instance, was that someone finally sat there for a moment and told me what Firefox could do - 10/15 messages back and forth - not a word or mention of IE, and I switched.
I'd like the same about Linux, but always get belittled for asking.
_ _ _ Go for the eyes Boo! GO FOR THE EYES!
She's a prime example of how pro microsoft extremism in the course of her job has decimated her credibility. Her. O'Gara ( for SCO). Enderle. No one believes them any more.
Learn your lessons well.
You say
Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't "Yankee" a derogatory term for American colonists whose political views were considered part of the "extremist fringe"???
Laura DiDio
There's an extremist fringe of Linux loonies who hang out on forums and are disrespectful and threatening because you disagree with them...That can hurt the Linux community.
On SLashdot?
Say it aint so!
Try to hack my 31337 firewall!
I'd rather people be excited about something they believe in (ie, Linux), rather than just another Microsoft-funded puppet.
DBA? Software Engineer? My company is hiring! Click
The reputation of GNU/Linux advocates suffers because the concept of all software being free is too hard for many of today's computer users to grasp. A lot of businesses make their money by hiring developers and selling software. This is a business model many of us would like to see die.
The big FUD statement we always hear is how is FOSS profitable if it's all being done for free? I always cite the Linux kernel itself as a model for the future; most of the people working on the kernel are paid developers. Companies like IBM sponser FOSS development. If every company which needs software to use worked in the same manner, the world would be perfect.
There are simply too many people who can't shake the idea that software is a "product" to be bought and sold. I've seen some pretty nasty things said to FOSS advocates. I've even seen some of the conservative opposition refer to FOSS as "Communism" and "Anti-American". Facing blatant ignorance and bigotry every day, it's no wonder that *nix people can seem condescending at times.
You're right, I wouldn't steal a car. But if it were possible, I sure as hell would download one!
Here on Slashdot, every time some mention of new commercial software being released for Linux hits the front page, the zealots start up whining that, in true RMS style, it's "not free enough". Even if it's being given away as freeware.
Which is the problem, since it's "not free enough", the zealots simply dismiss it, and lets face it, the zealots are the ones helping spread Linux usage. It's stupid and it needs to stop.
By summer it was all gone...now shesmovedon. --
Only they're in high level management.
There are always bad apples in every bunch. While I highly doubt YG's concern for FOSS is based in altruism, having Ms. DiDio in their employ hurts YG's credibility far more than some linux/FOSS zealots ever could. Nothing to see here.
A-fsckin'-men!
she's pissed off because they call her DiDiot and her last name is DiDio? A 3rd grade schoolyard taunt gets to her? She complaing because she gets phone calls at 11pm. She lives in the public eye (whether she likes it or not, that's where she is) and her phone number is listed?
Tell me about death threats or stalkers and I'd say you've got extremists. Tell me about name-callers and heavy-breathers and I'd say you've got the nuisance equivalent of script kiddies.
"I'd rather be a lightning rod than a seismometer." -Ken Kesey
n/t
I went to the forums at dotnet and asked them to read me the documentation for Windows to convince me to switch from Linux but all they did was belittle me.
... maybe she want to have the record on damaged reputation by own writings.
My point being, that the analysts damage whatever they're paid to damage nowdays, if you've been following things at all lately.
C|N>K
"The kettle calling the pot black?"
EvilCON - Made Famous by
This statement was dismissed too quickly by Ziff-Davis:
The fact is that major analyst firms earn their revenue in two ways:
1. Selling reports and consulting services to customers (IT businesses in this example) that describe the market, the vendors, and who's doing what.
2. Selling consulting services back to the vendors to help them position their product for various markets.
It's tough for the analyst firms to remain objective because sometimes they make more money from the latter business than the former. And in that case, the vendor can exhibit tremendous pressure to make sure that no negative remarks are made about their products or even steer analyst reports in the direction they would like.
(Investment firms had a similar problem until recent regulations required them to maintain a split between the side that provide investment advice and the side that does IPOs for firms).
Does this mean that Microsoft has paid Yankee Group enough money that they are saying negative things about Linux? Not necessarily. But it does call into question DiDio's statement, "I don't take any money from any vendor." I've seen at least one top-tier analyst firm (though not Yankee specifically to my recollection) who reported favorable market results for firms that paid a lot for their consulting services. And Microsoft has been known for exerting some pressure on companies it works with.
Any time you have an entity expected to be "objective" but who's existance depends on the largess of the firms it is supposed to be objective about, you must be wary of these conflicts of interest.
Just like how it's dubious to suggest the mainstream media is going to seriously bite the hand of the Republicans that feed it (read as, interviews, embedded reporters during war, or bigger media-consolidation regulation), the industry analyst firms can be just as susceptible to strong-arm tactics of vendors.
I couldn't care less if they disagree with me I simply take issue with the fact that they are for-sale and claim to be objective.
They are high-tech hookers, for-sale to the highest bidder. Their opinions/results have no meaning under such circumstances.
Get a little professional integrity and you'll get the respect you seek.
A survey of senior executives was recently completed in which they asked the various senior executives how the quality of the food in the cafeteria has changed over the last year. The results indicate that the quality of cafeteria food has improved.
A survey of cafeteria staff was recently completed in which they asked the various staff how often senior executives eat cafeteria food. The results indicate that senior executives NEVER eat cafeteria food.
"As the study was carried out independently, DiDio said she had no influence on the results."
-1 Uncomfortable Truth
echo $MS_COMMENT | reverse
Them damn yankees!!!
This process works samewas as to buy senators. If you treat these "analyst" with tickets to conferences, expos games at tourist locations thay will listen to you and will acept whatever you say. But with OSS there is no such company, organization or lobby. All thay have volunteers. Thay have this way to reach "Analyst". IT is WRONG but if message is right then "analyst" should accept it and rectify the issue.
...then stay outa the kitchen. The market has changed and people will no longer stand by when pundits / reporters / analysts start talking smack without proper, logical, untainted research to back them up. Didiot was one of the people who signed the SCO NDA to 'see the code' back when the FiaSCO started and toed Darl McBride's corporate line. She gets no sympathy from me...
Please allow me to introduce myself,
I am an analyst of wealth and taste...
DaGoodBoy
My God! It's full of Voids!
DiDio feels she has been unfairly criticized on open source forums, including being nicknamed DiDiot
Reminds of the kid who stands up in class in front of everybody and complains that the kids are calling him "dick face" or something.
It ain't helpin' yer case, kid, so siddown.
There are people who follow linux with a fanatical bent. There are people who believe Windows is the greatest thing since sliced bread. My boss falls in the latter camp (even as I reinstall windows xp on his machine for the 3rd time in a month after he managed to screw it up... yet again, but that's another story). If they're not on a microsoft pay, show us the books. Prove to us that in fact you're not influenced by anything more than the facts (and your own personal judgement). Oh, btw, if you're going to be a public figure, get a thicker skin.
"The bass, the rock, the mic, the treble. I like my coffee black, just like my metal" - Mindless Self Indulgence
Her last name is Didio and DiDiot is the worst she name she got called...I'd have thought at least someone would have come up with Dildo.
Sounds like a nice group, I want animals to be happy too. Then one day they came around a KFC in my neighborhood and members yelled at families going in for dinner, calling them murderers and supporting animal concentration camps. They had a bucket of fake blood they threw on someone. Instantly, nobody gave a damn about their group. More importantly, people would support the opposite side just because they hate PETA.
Same think could happen with Linux. What got me interested in Linux was friendly people who really liked it, and wanted to share what they knew about it. What turns me off, I went to a Linux group meeting and had a dual boot machine, Windows 2000 and Debian. Someone gave me shit for having Windows on the laptop. Another dork, and I use the word dork because I think nerd is too nice; anyways, another dork starts laughing and saying how Windows sucks and how easy it is to hack into. I had my machine hooked up to the LAN, and these idiots decided they wanted to try and hack my machine. They even asked me to "ipconfig" and tell them my exact IP address. They thought I was an idiot. After 5 minutes I left. Fuck them.
Rosco: "If brains were gunpowder, Enos couldn't blow his nose."
Sorry, I didn't realize that upset you. I'll work harder to call later, when you couldn't be expecting any other important calls. How about 2 AM? What's her phone number again?
Proud neuron in the Slashdot hivemind since 2002.
Firefox is Free (as speech, as beer).Do you apply that same logic to Microsoft?
If Microsoft publishes some FUD, do you immediately switch to an alternative?
Let me explain where I disagree with her and most everyone else
"It's just software."
It's not just software. It's technology. Technology changes everything. This is revolution, one way or another. Free Software advocate are the ones fighting desperately for democracy.
In Mexico the press was controled for years by the fact that the government made all the newsprint. If you printed something the government didn't like, the government stopped giving you newsprint.
If you have to agree to a license set up by MS, IBM, or the US government before you can use the medium of the day, your rights to free speech are gone and so is your democracy. This is not just about software. This is about wheather technology will be increase freedom or destroy it.
The article says:
I guess compromised servers are just as reliable as uncompromised ones?
-- Terry
Bit of discussion at LWN.net
http://lwn.net/Articles/131114/
"claimed the radical elements of the community could damage the reputation of open source software"
Too late, the radical elements have already done the damage. But the damage in reputation is not to the open source software, it's to the community itself.
... and harassing this poor analyst instead of spending your time making Linux better?
Note how earlier today, the story on Microsoft creating software for police to crack down on child pornography was greeted on slashdot with paranoia and conspiracy theory. How it is purely a move by Microsoft to do marketing. It doesn't matter what Microsoft does, it's always a conspiracy with you guys.
How about Mono? Mono is an amazing piece of OSS. But because it was based on something Microsoft did, it's considered a fringe element in the OSS world by the linux guys. You can read about what Miguel thinks of pleasing the Microsoft haters in a recent interview -- he basically draws a bell curve... and that pleasing the hatas on the fringe isn't worth his time.
I agree with the Yankee Group and will add a point: Just quit with the bashing and make Linux more accessible to the masses instead of posting on slashdot claims of how much better it is.
"I've had these nut jobs calling me at 11 o'clock at night,"
I don't know about you, but that sounds a lot like breakfast time for a Linux zealot, especially a developer...
Maybe if Yankee Group asked the people doing the work and not the PHB's (who usually admit to not understanding the technology anyway), they would have gotten different answers. Perhaps its the frustration of the professionals who see their work summarized by higher-ups who don't understand it that is leading to such harsh criticism? DiDiot's pretty funny, too.
If brevity is the soul of wit, then how does one explain Twitter?
This lady is absolutely right. There are crazy zealots out there who hurt Linux while trying to help it. These nutcases are usually the types who have no social skills, no friends and no lives. It's very frustrating for them to know they are, and be, technically correct (Linux IS a better operating system from a CS standpoint) however at the same time have people not listen to them because they present themselves at nutcase shitheads.
It reminds me of the other day in the subway when this crazy old guy was yelling about the trains running on different lines. He was actually correct, but nobody listened to him because he was a crazy old guy.
If we could somehow shut up these zealots and let only the presentable and friendly members of the Linux community do the talking we would be much further along. But I guess that's not the way its going to be.
The GeekNights podcast is going strong. Listen!
Lawrence Person (lawrencepersonh@gmailh.com (remove all "h"s to mail)
http://www.lawrenceperson.com/
"Nutjobs" have been doing this stuff to Linux critics for about 10 years now. If any damage were possible, it's long been done. Instead, Linux has grown steadily and rapidly in respectability. It would appear the market has the ability to distinguish between enthusiasts and the thing they're enthused about.
Football-team fan maniacs don't detract from the respectability of the team itself, for instance.
Calling people at home with abuse is way over the line and certainly nobody should approve of it. I think anybody who imagined they could speak for the "Linux community" and apologized to her would be doing so on behalf of 99% of Linux enthusiasts, certainly including myself.
But you know, oddly enough, few criticize more organized bodies corporate - you know, those profit-taking ones with shares and offices - when they sue the daylights out of somebody for "maligning" their IP. Frequently, they force apologies and settlements out of those who offended them, even when the criticism was perfectly correct.
Compared to that, Ms. Didio may have gotten off lucky...well, sort of.
that is like windows zealots like dido hurting windows
Generally, when Linux is used, it is because someone wants to use it. This immediately puts people on the defensive when criticized about their decision. When Windows is used, it is usually because someone has to use it or does not care.
In many ways, this makes their zealotry a simple defense mechanism which will cause them to become unrealistic and unobjective for no reason other than they see criticism of Linux as an attack on themselves.
Why does Linus Torvalds hate America so much?
Just kidding! Didio is a paid shill and all, but there's a bit of truth in her current criticism of the fanatics.
One of the most important parts of any propaganda war is the concept of defining the terms of the debate. Usually, if you can define the terms of the debate, you win the debate. This is why the neo-conservatives are so good at winning propaganda wars, despite their positions and politics being so sketchy.
Here's an example: Politician A says, "My opponent supported a bill that would increase the number of kill shelters in their district. Therefore, my opponent supports the killing of puppies." Then, an asshole blowhard radio DJ who's probably in the pocket of said politician (although you can't prove it) gets on the air waves and screams "Politician B enjoys killing little puppies! His party is the cult of puppy death!" over and over again.
Politican B spends a good chunk of time refuting this charge, saying no, he doesn't actually support the killing of puppies, that he's very pro-puppy actually. But nobody cares, the debate has been framed, and in such a way that Politican B was destined to lose, unless his strategists are god damn geniuses at getting out of this predicament.
One of the ways to keep this from happening is to not allow your opposition to frame the debate. When they do, don't fall into their traps. When Pro-MS people go crazy saying "The Zealots! The Zealots Are Killing Linux! You Will All Die At The Hands Of The Zealots!" don't play their game and argue as though this were an actual issue in the movement, because it isn't.
I see a lot of people here falling into this trap, and saying 'Yes, they have a point, some people are too pro-free software.' This allows the opposition to frame the debate, and it takes a lot to undo the damage that it does.
As much as sections of the free software movement disagree with each other, it's important that we have unity, because exploiting these disagreements is part of the strategy of framing the debate. Basic divide and conquer. We'll be attacked for the elements among us who are less compromising in their belief in free software, because this is seen as a weakness among us. Not those people or views specifically, but the disagreement between the different factions.
So, all I'm saying is, before you post a big rant about how big of a problem these RMS types are, recognize that your words will be used against all of us.
I'm a huge OS X fan, and its done my heart good to see more and more acceptence of OS X at the enterprise level, but problems still exist, and until they are worked out, I wish the extremists would just shut up.
Chad Dickerson writes a column for InfoWorld, and a few weeks back he mentioned some issues he has with OS X. He had the nerve to mention that perhaps OS X wasn't meant for everyone and got a firestorm of hate mail. His blog offers more detail:
http://weblog.infoworld.com/dickerson/001225.html
Like when the in-house Linux guys always use "M$" when referring to Microsoft in internal mails, then wonder why they and Linux are not taken seriously in the organization. Higher ups see the "M$" then say to themselves "Oh god, another anti-capitalism freak", then proceed to tune-out any valid arguments that might follow for Linux adoption.
"I've lived through the Unix wars -- none of them reacted in this way," said DiDio. "It's just software. This has got way out of proportion."
It's not just software, it's a philosophy and a way of life.
Because linux is free (in some part speech, but in this case mostly beer is relevant) it's been able to develop a huge following of users and supporters. Any time a group of any sort gets that large, you end up with a more perceptible concentration of idiots.
To quote Twain: "The pitifulest thing out is a mob." The democratic nature of OSS development gives strength (in terms of control) to anyone who wants it, but you have to work for it. Anyone can contribute to the linux kernel, but only a couple thousand do. It takes a lot of work, and it's not an easy way to earn respect.
Criticism, on the other hand, is easy. It doesn't take to much effort to tare someone down. Especially if you do it in an internet forum where you don't even need to look them in the eye.
The only silly thing about the article is that these groups are somehow surprised that the internet is mostly full of idiots, and that the people with enough time to flame research groups are teenagers. You'd think they'd have done their research... well, we won't get into that.
DiDiot, would you prefer if I called at 2am? Okay then.
Platinum Networks Hosting www.platinum-networks.com
Remember, -1 troll is the new 5, insightful!
I'm as anti-Open Source as they come, but come on man. Maybe if you actually secured your network properly, the students wouldn't be able to install the crapware in the first place?
I will never use that peice of crap, Eclipse. This was a year or 18 months ago, but I had a PIII 600 machine with 384 megs and Eclipse could make the system stop. It is like being on a freeway and having three lanes merge into one. You stop, then drive 5 mph, then stop again.
However, Visual Studio worked just fine.
With "alternative" tools, you often get once shot to impress a person, then they go back to what they know.
Rosco: "If brains were gunpowder, Enos couldn't blow his nose."
From the Wikipedia article on DiDio:
"The thing about Linux is, you can talk about a free, open operating system all you want, but you can't take that idea of free and open and put it into a capitalist system and maintain it as though it is some kind of hippie commune or ashram, because if you can do it like that, at that point I'm like, 'Pass the hookah please!'"
"I'm all for open source, and competition serves everyone's interest. But if Linux is really to take its place alongside Windows... then the vendors in this space cannot act like a bunch of hippies in a '60s commune or ashram. There really is no such thing as a free lunch."
She has a definite predisposal not to like open-source, right down to rejecting its philosophy and its ability to exist in a capitalist system... yet claims to be unbiased when her organization concludes that an open-source product inferior. She hates name-calling... but calls open-source developers communists and hippies.
As far as I'm concerned, she's getting what's coming to her.
God, "DiDiot". That's rough.
I had someone pissed off at me post thousands of messages accusing me of pedophile rape. There's people who go out of their way to hurt folks online, including finding their friends and employers, trying to get them fired, and in some cases succeeding... over the most trivial things. I don't know of anyone doing it because of their choice of OS yet, but Microsoft sued a kid for selling his copy of Windows and Office on eBay because he couldn't take them back... and that kind of action generates a lot nastier responses than mild name-calling.
There's a lot of really screwed up people on line. No matter what you do, you're eventually going to run into some of them. If you can't handle that, stay off the Internet.
And for proof of that, check out her video here. Now, Laura, tell us again how objective you are again. (I could use a good laugh.)
CUR ALLOC 20195.....5804M
Pointy-haired closed-source commercial software people are no different. They will categorise others as GNU/Hippies as the will. It's the way of the world.
It's "us" and "them" whoever "us" and "them" are, even if we're all individuals.
Welcome to the crapness of human nature.
Stick Men
The article is a little misleading. It seems to imply that Didio was first harrassed by zealous linux supporters with her TCO survey.
1 09 12770.html?oneclick=true
She doesn't mention her quick involvement in the SCO case, where she was one of the first and only Analysts to sign the SCO NDA and claim publically they had a solid case. She wasn't all to forthcoming to her 15 year friendship with everyone's fav marketing vp, Black Stowell either.
http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/06/09/10550
Quickly after that initial report she produced a report that critized Linux vendors for failing to indemnify customers, the exact same line Darl McBride was telling.
http://www.ecommercetimes.com/story/31252.html
Then she produces a TCO report on Linux vrs Windows development that uses BEA and Oracle on the Linux side vrs IIS and SQL2000 on the MS side and reports MS is much cheaper then the linux solution. Which i belive is the one the article mentions.
So to say Didio was unfairly attacked because she objectively came out with reports that critize linux is quite wrong. She was questioned because of her seemingly permament bias against Linux.
If the source of this is not monetary, I'd hate to know what some Linux developer did to her to make it so Personal.
It often degenerates into FUD. Like one of the most common ones I hear for why to switch to Linux is that Windows crashes all the time. Well, ok, maybe for that Linux user it did, I don't know, but for me it doesn't. It basically never crashes, even app crashes are pretty rare.
Now when someone starts off with accusing your chosen thing of having problems it doesn't, you begin to think they are full of shit. Maybe they aren't making it up, maybe their experience is different than yours, but they need to base their comments off of your experience, since you are the one they are they are trying to convince.
Another problem I find is trying to dismiss every problem Linux has, or somehow spin it into a good thing. Linux isn't perfect, nothing is. So when someone points out a flaw, and the Linux enthusist just tries to spin it as being nothing, or even a good thing, it again makes them sound full of it, and makes the rest of what they say sound less sincere.
So it's not a matter of never mentioning the other side, it's a matter of finding out what the person wants to do, and talking to them about how Linux would be a good solution for that. Sometimes that may involve pointing out things it does better, but you do that in a constructive, not a demeaning way. Also when a flaw is noted in Linux, acknowledge it, don't pretend it's nothing.
Generally I find that Linux people who are trying to convert someone take such a fanatical view of how cool Linux is and such a demaning view of Windows (complete with immature names like M$ and Winblows) that it's no supprise most people percieve them as extremists with no clue.
Well, you could say the same about a small group of extremists making a whole religion look bad. They are, just as in the case above, a small minority of the whole group. A vocal, very loud (in actions or words) and very noticeable minority, but dwarfed by a majority of basically decent people.
De gustibus et coloribus non est disputandum
Developers have different goals to users.
Developers have their own community within the broader FOSS community, we need to discuss the ethics and technical merit of our tools, licensing and the products we develop for users.
Users need a community to discuss and clarify what they need and feed this information back to developers in the form of CONSTRUCTIVE criticism, bug reports, maybe even some volentary financial support for developers.
The user community can see the internals of the deceloper community, and cant understand what the developers are going on about or why, this should be expected, they are users, not developers.
My advice to users who complain about the way developers achieve their idealistic goals is to go away (notice i said it politely) and concentrate on doing something positive for the user community.
Stop trying to undermine the developer community, if you win you have nothing.
Still, Linus Trovalds has his head on his shoulders. He seems to think open and proprietary software can get along just fine. So does IBM, who are strong supporters of the movement (more, I'm sure out of self-interest than feelings of public service).
I think it will be elements from the corporate world which will drive this "radical movement" forward, based on a mixture of self-interest and altruism. To define the open source community from the most socialist of the personalities is a mistake.
I can say that whenever I needed help, I went to their forums and someone would anwser my question. Maybe the extremists are out there, but they were not at justlinux. Or they had really good moderators that removed garbage that I never saw it.
Rosco: "If brains were gunpowder, Enos couldn't blow his nose."
If the Yankee Group in general, and Laura DiDio in particular, are worried that their credibility is being questioned, perhaps they should improve their research methodology so that it is beyond reproach. The first thing they need to disclose is how much of their revenue is derived from Microsoft and/or from corporations that are strongly tied to Microsoft. To be fair, they should also disclose how much of their revenue is tied to Linux companies, or companies strongly tied to Linux such as IBM, but I'm guessing that number is $0.
I should know. The court appointed Psychologist told me I'm a nut job. She said that was the technical term for it...
IANAL... But I play one on
A bunch of rebel extremists whose ideas would cause more harm than good.
...
You judge the results, ignoring the current Soviet-style regime (a throwback)
Laura DiDio is the one who agreed with SCO if I recall that Linus stole millions of lines of Unixware code and warned CIO's to stay clear from it.
Just take what she says wiuth a grain of salt.
http://saveie6.com/
I work for Microsoft, but I'm a tech-enthusiast, and I love to install bits of everything (Windows CE/XP/etc., I own a Mac, have some Linux boxes, blah blah blah).
I used to be heavily into Linux/OSS, even going so far as to write a textbook on Linux for a local vocational school, but eventually lost interest when I realized that some very vocal members of the "community" were more interested in bashing Microsoft than in furthering Linux. I just didn't get it.
Most recently, I was reading Linux Magazine when I read an inflammatory letter from the editor in which he did *nothing* to promote linux, but spent his entire monthly column talking smack about Microsoft.
Where's the value in that? As an MS stockholder, it doesn't help me out any to say this, but there's enough interesting stuff going on in OSS land that people shouldn't have to resort to MS bashing to get people excited.
Not only that, but if one of the points of something like Linux Magazine is to drive adoption of Linux/OSS, it seems like a stupid move to do anything that will alienate *any* potential customers/users, keeping in mind that softies can play with Linux when they get home, too.
For anybody who's interested, I provided my response to the editor here: "Dear Linux Magazine"
It's such a messy world.
- Rory [Microsoft Employee] | Free dirt: neopoleon.com
Not that I'm saying that you are full of sh*t, but if it happens "every time," I'm sure you could provide at least one link to someone complaining about something not being free enough?
- None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
From TFA- "I don't take any money from any vendor," said DiDio. "Yankee Group paid entirely for the survey. We use an independent survey house."
Discuss, refute, or support. The person who wrote TFA was too lazy to give any independent confirmation of this, so if anyone here knows anything concrete, please resond.
Interesting that she only addresses the matter of the survey, not Yankee group's relationship to the "vendor" in general. And, this was a survey, and as we've seen before, if you ask the right questions you can prove just about anything.
Don't blame me, I voted for Baltar.
All you have to do is list all the shit you have, that no one's ever seen, and how you'll do what they want, give them more stuff, and most importantly some of their time back. That's how firefox wins. Not the worm from the blue, but popup blocking, tabbed browsing, their plugin architecture. And it's why I use Konq, which if it could do just a few more things, like ACL's, sudo for directories, multi-selecting links/copying links with smart batch-naming, would actually make me cream my pants.
Must be cutting pretty deep for her to be squealing like that.
And if this is the article I read yesterday, don't you find it interesting that she says "she takes no money from vendors." Of course she doesn't - she's paid by the Yankee Group. The correct question to ask her would have been "Does Yankee Group get paid by vendors?"
I think we all know the answer to that.
What it does is format the information in a package that the recipient is willing to accept.
Some people are not willing to look at the information if it hasn't been pre-packaged and sweetened for them.
I believe that this because of a number of reasons:
#1. Ego (a): THEY are not going to waste THEIR valuable time learning something new. But YOUR time and effort is insignificant.
#2. Ego (b): They have an emotional commitment to their current setup. They will ignore any suggestion that other systems may be more efficient for their uses.
#3. Ego (c): They know their current system and they don't want to be the newbies on a different system. You have to feed them enough information for them to get over the newbie phase before they will consider changing.
#4. Intellect: They simply cannot understand the material. You have to break it down into pre-digested chunks.That's primarily the Ego (b) response. They have an emotional reaction to someone saying that their current system is LESS functional than an alternative.Simple. You never mention IE. You talk about how they surf and tell them about the features that Firefox has that make that experience better.
Do you ever click on links in a page and the new page breaks the back button? With Firefox, you can open the new page in a new tab and still keep your old page open. That way, badly designed pages won't stop you.
Have you ever clicked on a link and it brought up a registration page for a news site? Firefox has a cool add-on that will fill in that page with info that will NOT result in you getting more spam.
Some pages load too many ads. Those ads can slow down the page. Firefox has a cool add-on that will completely block most of those ads. The pages will load faster if the ads are blocked.
And so on. Salesmen do that all the time.
The question is, why is anyone trying to "sell" someone else on using Firefox (or anything Open) when it is free (as beer) to download and try?
And why does anyone need to be "sold" to try something new that is free? If they're not into upcoming technologies, then that's fine.
Maybe if you did your job correctly and restricted installation rights on those machines or better yet placed GoBack or some ghosting program on the machines to wipe them clean between users you wouldn't have to worry about losing $5000.00 a week.
Just a friendly message from one sysadmin to another.
Oh, I probably should disclose that I use both Firefox and Thunderbird at work.
In politics, the first rule is to define your opponent. It really doesn't matter what your are about, it matters how you get others to percieve the opponent.
This works as corporate marketing as well. Ads which are the most effective are ones that frame the competition as being idiots or ridiculous. The Coke vs. Pepsi truck driver commercials, etc.
This is strategy. Frame Linux advocates as fringe element types. Frame the open source movement as un-American, hippy idealism. Cast aspersions, and most importantly, PUT A WOMAN UP FRONT TO PLAY THE VICTIM ROLE.
Oh no, she's been flamed and horrible emails have been sent. Linux zealots are RUINING things. They are vociferously countering our FUD and constantly shedding light on our spin and half truths. We need to stop them!
This is a war. It's a war against a monolithic corporation which controls the operating system market with an iron grip, and is co-opting the mainstream press and buying favorable press. On the other side is the open source movement, now potentially aided by companies like IBM which will genuinely help it achieve legitimacy in the corporate and academic worlds. European and South American countries are realizing they get escape debt cycles by simply getting out from under the thumb of insane software license schemes.
In this war, you can expect every trick to be used. Linux users will be cast in the vein of the Simpson's comic book guy. Sarcastic nerds, nobodies, people who are wacko. People who hate capitalism and hate intellectual property law.
It's ordinary every day programmers contributing to something for the gerater good vs. Madison avenue types running bought and paid for marketing campaigns. You need to defy them by refusing to be defined by them. You need to recruit other people to the benefits of OpenOffice and OpenVPN and Linux and away from corporate juggernauts who will try and FUD this thing to kill it.
Get back in the kitchen and bake me some pie!
I'll start.
Linux: Soon you'll be wearing my sword like a shish kebab!
Microsoft: __________________________________ [your turn]
Laura DiDio and RMS? Yeah.. I think so.
The best education consists in immunizing people against systematic attempts at education. - Paul Feyerabend
This is a truly ironic post given that /. is breeding ground for a LOT of the open-source "extremism", hostility and FUD towards non open-source solutions (how about the "MS AntiSpyware blocks Firefox" article to cite but one example!)
http://66.102.7.104/search?q=cache:IYt6OxzGghYJ:ww w.mofed.org/Fried_KFC.htm+peta+kfc+%22fake+blood%2 2&hl=en&ie=UTF-8
http://66.102.7.104/search?q=cache:CeHAJqPY0sUJ:ww w.leftist.org/haightspeech/archives/000158.html+pe ta+kfc+%22fake+blood%22&hl=en&ie=UTF-8
http://66.102.7.104/search?q=cache:Rrv7BJw_ujYJ:ww w.peta.org.uk/at/summer2004/Summer04p10-11.pdf+pet a+kfc+%22fake+blood%22&hl=en&ie=UTF-8
http://66.102.7.104/search?q=cache:M6HTwcKo6SgJ:ww w.peta.org/feat/AT-Spring2004/Page16-17.pdf+peta+k fc+%22fake+blood%22&hl=en&ie=UTF-8
http://home.hamptonroads.com/stories/story.cfm?sto ry=84143&ran=196910
Rosco: "If brains were gunpowder, Enos couldn't blow his nose."
Ya never hear too much complaining about the Microsoft Extremists. It's apparently okay for the Microsoft Junkies to go off about the mighty greatness of Microsoft, and the feebleness of all other offerings that attempt to blindly compete with that with is Microsoft.
Can't find said article. Could you supply a link please.
Bitter and proud of it.
Laura, how have you been since we talked on the phone? I'm hardly a terrorist, I gave you my name and position in the open-source community when I called you, and you know as well as I do the reason for that call, but I will re-iterate it here. If you call us ankle-biting terrorist car-bombers, we can and will make this a self-fulfilled prophecy. My intent in calling you was not to terrorize but to ask you why you would say such things about a productive and creative community? While it may have been 11pm there it was 7pm on the west coast.
Stick to your analysis and don't preach, it makes you look ever so slightly less biased. SCO found this out, you found this out, do not fuck with a community of people who have put their talent, and their names on the line to write code, and support the community. We have a thin, thin tolerance of people publically abusing us for no good reason other than that you seem to feel like it. I wonder, was William Genevesse (arrested for stealing the winows 2000 software and reselling it) ever convicted of being an "open source terroist" or perhaps and "ankle-biter" (I might agree with you here).
Truth be told you were dead wrong and instead of waiting for LAW ENFORCEMENT to do their job and arrest the cracker responsible for this, you launched a slur campaign.
So you are going after people in the Linux comunity ...
- Yes
Because they say you are biased
- Yes
And you are not?
- NO, I am completely objective
So you are not going after BSD users or Apple users or any other users that doubt your credibilaty?
- Well, they are all with me
So the ONLY people who doubst you are wrong are people using Linux?
-Yes, that is what Bill Ga... Sure they are.
Thank you have a tinfoil hat.
-Hey the voices are gone
Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
fair comment.
-b
I'm sure they tell each other that. Particularly on
Or does that ONLY apply when the subject is Open Source?
If you're going to be biased, then don't complain about how others are biased. That's just hypocritical.
Which is the main problem with DiDio. She takes anything SCO said as gospel and discounted any contradictory evidence presented.
Do you need me to remind you of the "obfuscated" code that SCO was showing under NDA that she signed and then wrote about how it looked as if SCO's case was air-tight? Hmmmmmm?
From the article:
The reactionary nature of much of the open source community is something that DiDio claims is unique in the software industry. "I've lived through the Unix wars none of them reacted in this way," said DiDio. "It's just software. This has got way out of proportion."
I think DiDio is missing the point, it IS about a lot more than software. While it's true that people like Linux for its intrinsic value, what is really driving the debate and the adoption of Linux is its license. The debate is really over how the industry imagines itself:
1)Something similar to the scientific community, where knowledge and protocols are shared freely and published for all to see. Additionally (unlike science for the most part) a community where the means of production (in this case, OS, compilers, various tools) are in the hands of the community via copyleft licenses.
2)Code is hidden, software tools are not freely distributed but are for the most part in the hands of the major players in the industry. Writing code is encumbered with patents, high start-up costs, artificial scarcity is created for software tools, etc...
Take your pick (although it is likely there will continue to be a mix of both for awhile), but any way you slice it is about more than software.
...which is usually the case with ANYTHING.
I personally think the whole OS debate is retarded.
Sorry, you use whatever tool your boss tells you to use, and if you have a choice, you use the one that works for you (be it because you're familiar with it, or because it simply works). People will have their opinions, and regardless of how effective or more efficient one OS is on paper in comparison to another, it depends on the user.
If you think your flavor of Linux, or OSX, or Windows is the best thing for you, that's great, shut the fuck up and use it. You aren't going to win converts by telling someone their OS of choice "sucks ass" or how they're "stupid" for using it.
I for example, think Macs suck. I fucking HATE dealing with OS9, and to a slightly lesser extent, OSX. It's just not my bag. However, if it really DID suck as much as I thought it did, no one would be using it would they? It's my personal opinion, so I just keep my grumblings to myself whenever the painful time comes that I have to work on a Mac.
Slashdot is owned by OSTG, a company that makes money from OSS. I find it interesting nobody questions Slashdot's objectivity in the news that gets posted, or the way it is worded. The Slashdot editors are paid employees of OSTG. This site isn't run as a free hobby; it's a business owned by another business, complete with subscriptions and adviews.
Just saying. This community is hardly objective either.
I don't get it.
OK, so there are these cars called Ferraris. You can see that they are fast, powerful and sexy. One day someone wearing an "I love Ferrari" T-shirt walks up to you screaming that Ferrari are the only cars which should exist then smacks you in the mouth. How does that damage the reputation of Ferrari?
There are Ferraris and there are nuts. They are not the same thing, and having a Ferrari doesn't make you a Ferrari nut.
Deleted
I think it's more like vegetarians in general. There are lots of vegetarians in the world for a lot of different reasons. Many of them just go quietly about their day, ordering salads or whatever it is that they eat. There's only a small, vocal minority of them that don't eat meat because of a hardcore political stance. Of that small, vocal minority, there is an even smaller and more vocal minority of extremists who throw blood on people going to KFC.
It's true that the extreme faction of any group can make that group look bad; but you don't judge a group of people by a small portion of it. Until you've personally interviewed every vegetarian in the world, you should assume the vegetarians you meet are sane until they demonstrate otherwise.
Didio does not extend us this courtesy. My sympathies for her are marginal.
the revolution is dead; and nobody cares.
One of the greatest misconceptions about Free Software, especially among observers outside of the community, is that Free Software is "just software". It is one thing for an analyst to criticise a piece of software one writes for money either under contract or as part of a job, and entirely different thing from them to criticise software that is a labor of love. Free Software proponents can go to far, but in many cases it is because the critique feels far more personal than was necessarily intended. And for those proponents, who do not write code but merely advocate its use, being told that it is "just software" misses a vital element of why so many people support the movement; because it is FREE. This is a matter of patriotism, the defense of our liberties to run our machines as we see fit, free of interference from commercial vendors, is a political statement. When you criticise Free Software, for better or worse, you do not criticise "just software", but an entire ecosystem of ideas and beliefs that work in cooperation to produce what is possibly a better way of doing things. It may be religious, but in the same way that scientists are religious about science. And look how well evolutionary biologists react when attacked :)
Democracy, technology and freedom. Gets the heart pumping and the blood moving, doesn't it? The thing is, though, Linux is just an operating system. Open source software is just software. The majority of the world really doesn't care. Sorry, but it's true. You may care, because you're a geek and really into it... but that doesn't mean anyone else does.
It's like those long lasting light bulbs... why would anyone buy regular bulbs? It doesn't make sense. There are probably engineers at those companies who just can't believe regular light bulbs are still being bought by people... they probably point out the long lasting ones to people in stores when they see them going for the regular ones... but some people just don't care... and the guys looks like a loon.
So Windows vs. Linux. Here it is: people... real people... use Windows because at the end of the day it's just easy. It comes with the PC. It runs the software they want to run. They don't need to know anything. They can plug in printers, digital cameras, scanners... they can run Paint Shop Pro or Photoshop... burn CDs... play games. No user servicable parts inside. No intelligence needed... perfect for the masses.
Heck, my 75 year old mother uses a Windows PC - she first bought a PC when she was 72. She bought, installed and learned how to use the printer, scanner, download music and burn CDs. I'm 3000 miles away. She did it by herself. Linux...? LOL.
Linux is arse. All Unices are (except MacOS, because Apple know all about taking care of regular people).
Linux in the enterprise is a different matter. As a server operating system it, like real Unix, is very usable. But given the number and volume of obnoxious Linux zealots, who rant and rave about how Microsoft suck and Linux rules, it's easy conclude that all Linux advocates are ass-holes. Would you want to hire an ass-hole to run your IT department? Would you want to hire someone so closed minded to Microsoft technology... or any technology to be responsible for your corporate IT?
Microsoft builds the most successful desktop and server operating system in the world, with the largest commercial software base, and for real people and real corporations who need real commercial software, there's no other choice. Deal with it.
Linux is a free open source operating system. For niche environments it can work well.
To be respected, to be listen to, you've got to start talking rationally. You've got to start addressing the core problems and barriers in Linux, and you've got to let ISVs, IHVs, corporations and consumers warm to Linux over time. Over a long period of time.
And you've got to stop saying Microsoft sucks... And if you're still in school, stay out of it until you've developed some emotional control.
If someone called you up to harass/threaten you after some public comment you made, wouldn't you contact the local police/FBI?
Yet there is no mention of a police report or anyone being arrested for communicating a threat to her.
Darrel said similar things.
http://deseretnews.com/dn/view/0,1249,595047068,0
It seems to be a popular claim amongst a certain group of people (including McBride and DiDio) but, somehow, the cops are never involved or informed.
I find that to be very, very strange.
And the fact that it seems to be a pattern amongst these people.
You can't be too pro-F/OSS. But you can be too anti-Microsoft.
The goal here is to be pro-F/OSS without being anti-Microsoft. One day, Microsoft will change its stripes, just the same way IBM did.
Is she complaining about more competition? She seems to be doing a fine job on her own...
We're being baited here folks. They are deliberately try to get us to respond in inflamatory ways. I for one won't bite. I will simply say, there are numerous credible studies indicating that Linux is less expensive and more secure than Windows. There's plenty of evidence that Windows has security flaws intrinsic to its design. Virus writers prefer Windows. I can substantiate those claims.
Here's something you could try yourself. Find a feature as a company that you feel is an "absolute must". Now try to get that feature added to either environment. In closed source you probably might see it in 2015. In open source you could add it yourself tomorrow if necessary. It's flexibility plain and simple. It's where the power resides. In the hands of the corporation or in the hands of the consumer.
...kiss my shiny metal ass!
Reputation? I got your reputation right here, you shill!
Howard Roark, Architect
I believe in a Man's right to exist for his own sake.
If I had some mod points, I'd give them to you. Anyways, many of us would love it if we all used our *nix desktops, coded in FOSS languages using FOSS tools, collaborated with other people using open standards, etc. I work best using FreeBSD and a few other tools. However, this isn't how the world works. Yes we want to use the tools that we know and love for practical (and sometimes ideological reasons), but sometimes we have to just say c'est la vie and boot our Windows desktops and fire up MS Office and some other tools. We may not like it, but we're not in charge of everything in the software world. Not everybody cares about ideology and freedom; they care about getting the job done in the most efficient way possible. If those FOSS tools improve, they might switch over to them.
I love free software as much as the next Slashdotter, and I like the ideology and ideas of free software and the like, but we need to be pragmatic and "get real," too. If the boss/school/authority requires you to use a certain tool, well then, you must use it, or suffer the consequences. Blabbering about the tool's proprietary state and other issues should be saved for later, like when you're posting on Slashdot :). When you have some free time, though, start improving and contributing to the FOSS projects that you love; maybe when the FOSS tool becomes superior to the boss, he/she might switch to it.
There's an extremist fringe of Linux loonies who hang out on forums and are disrespectful and threatening because you disagree with them...That can hurt the Linux community.
I have no problems disagreeing with someone (we agree to disagree).
However, when mediocre person titles itself with 'expert' tag (and is obviously not an expert in that area) and starts telling crap - I have no respect, whatsoever, for such person.
Not when it comes to M$ vs Linux vs Mac vs whatever - not when it comes to any other matter.
It's FREE.. as in free speach.. NOT FREE LOAD
So they can dish it out, but they can't take it. Poor little babies...
Having invested so much in a heavy-handed SCO shill (DiDio), the Yankee Group finds it now has a huge credibility problem on its hands.
So now the Yankee Group wants to blame a nebulously-defined class of scapegoats ("Linux extemists") while it tries to recover.
Face it Yankee: Even Gartner did not make the same factual and ideological mistakes you did. Having your wagon hitched to SCO must be no fun right now and no doubt it is hurting business; THAT is the fault of noone but DiDio and her boss.
It's rather facinating that the article quotes some rather infamous sources. Mi2g's security analysis has been constantly criticized. Laura Didio's analysis of OS issues, and even the legality of code in the SCO case has also been under constant question. Google around; criticism isn't hard to find. It's not that the opinions of these analysists are unpopular; they're simply suspect.
It must be very convenient for them to have a few zealots around to distract from the question of the quality of their work.
You mean like the one after this one where RMS is intent on fundamentally change the GPL?
I guess the irony of you posting such a thing on such an article is lost on you.
War? Iron Grip? Jesus dude, It's software.. I think its funny that you said this:
you can expect every trick to be used. Linux users will be cast in the vein of the Simpson's comic book guy.
Funny because that is exactly how I started picturing you in my mind as I read your post.
I do not work for Microsoft or am in any way affilated with them.. I am an average guy who has used linux a little and didn't like what I saw from a usability standpoint.. I'll probably try it again in the future, but it really does turn me off to hear zealots bashing Microsoft about spreading FUD and they turn around and do the exact same thing.
I think that a lot of Linux "fud" as you call it is from average people like myself that do not simply know the capabilities of Linux. Trust me that there are just as many sitting in your camp that are exactly the same way. If you want to bring people over to your side, it definately won't be by erroneously bashing the competition.. (Honey, Vinegar anyone?) That may work on a few but especially when your the underdog, you might want to re-examine your tactics.
Linux advocates on Slashdot seem to forget that there are quite a few of us out here who are not Microsoft shills that support Windows solutions as ways to do business. Being inflammatory and derogatory to 'MS' IT people like us is not going to convince us.
Another point I do want to bring up is when there is a weakness pointed out in Linux, Linux zealots try to act like you are stupid for wanting it to be like that because the way Linux does it is better... Instead of taking an honest look at the problem and saying "Yeah your right, Microsoft handles it better in that area, maybe we should implement something similar in Linux"
Wow. Wished I hadn't burned all my mod points about the spammer. I've seen Bill Gates make presentations that are less enthusiastic about Microsoft or hostile to Linux.
The open-source community's basic problem, as far as Didio et al are concerned, is that it doesn't give the Yankee Group enough money. It really is that simple.
...damaged the reputation of Linux, then there's little chance they ever will. Linux adoption has increased every year for at least the last five years and the rabid voices were loudest in the early days. I don't see how they can halt the momentum at this point.
That's hysterical. Yankee is the 'techie' Gartner and both of them are so far up Bill Gates' ass, professionally and financially they're painting the employees like the Little Purple Pill for acid reflux.
Oh my, would not that be funny if a search for Yankee Group or Laura DiDio were to lead to linux.org!
For those who don't know:
Laura DiDio calls Linux code a "copy and paste" of SCO's code.
Laura DiDio is advising customers not to dismiss SCO's licensing offer. "The customers who received these 1,500 letters from SCO have been told this isn't going anywhere," DiDio told TechNewsWorld. "I don't think anyone should listen to such empty assurances."
"Joy is contagious," he said, peering into the microscope.
What a load of BS.
emacs is clunky. And vi is a pain to use. These tools work like something from the 1970s? Hello, its the 2000s.
Linux IDEs better? Hahahaha! Its your biased opinion. Every editor and IDE available for Linux is completely inconsistent in user interface.
The only reason people use these tools because they have the Linux "coolness" factor.
Is this a new distro?
It should be "XTreme Linux".
l337 d00d!
Dudes.
I've been a Microsoft freak all my life. Budget cuts came in. Had to cut costs somehow. We phased in Linux.
Training our staff was little or no issue at all. The only ones who complained was MARKETING...
On the books, our company has literally saved $200,000 so far. This is only 3 months in. AND GUESS WHAT! I'M GETTING A PAY RISE!! W00T
So I don't care that Yankee Doodle wore a hat riding on a pony, and that he shoved a carrot in his hat and called it macaroni!
is that the fat ass bitch on /. ??
Eh.... you make a good case, but I disagree. The analogy breaks down, because software adoption is not the same as a partisan political debate.
Most people who support parties or candidates have no idea of the substance of what they are supporting; rhetoric influences these people greatly, which is why politicians must "frame the debate" and play the rhetoric game. Not so with potential Linux (and FOSS in general) users. Businesses (looking at OSes for servers and desktops) and ordinary home users, as opposed to nerds like ourselves, will use what works easily and reliably.
They will be largely unaffected by the competing philosophies and rhetoric of Gates and RMS/other FOSS zealots. Almost no non-nerds see software in political terms.
And, for a different reason, that does mean that we need to clamp down on zealotry, because it can interfere with the "just works" philosophy that will ultimately win users over. Take Ubuntu for example. It's a fine Linux distribution, but it includes no non-free software. "But we need to be free, free, free to do whatever we want with EVERY SINGLE PIECE of code that we run!!" Not if you care about the average user--who depends on non-free Flash, Java, MP3 and video card drivers and would find reverse-engineered alternatives unacceptable. The first thing all the Ubuntu newbies ask in the forum is "How do I install [non-free package X]?"
This has little to do with debate. The real issue: the more extreme the rhetoric, the less pragmatic the software. And that lack of pragmatism needs to stop.
That's a more accurate statement. :)
The mainstream media is always trying to play everyone in the Linux community off of this rabid, fly by night, wide-eyed, geek-with-nothing-better-to-do stereotype.
The are a shill for whoever pays the most money.
GJC
Gregory Casamento
## Chief Maintainer for GNUstep
There's a new looking A&W behind the KFC! I LOVE A&W!
If they screwed around with A&W, there would be hell to pay.
PETA sets up this little booth near the Embarcadero BART station in San Francisco, and they try to hand out "Go Veg!" DVDs with their FUD on it. Even in SF, people just ignore them like the nutjobs that most of them are.
First of all, I support, use, and sell Linux in my daily work. I also do the same for Microsoft products, Novell products, and Apple products (whatever fits a client best). I don't really have an OS dog in this particular hunt.
That said, in my prior professional life I was a corporate-type IT manager. For two different companies over an 11-year period. During that time an old college friend of mine went to work for Computerworld as a reporter, and through her I met and occasionally worked with Laura DiDio back when she was covering the Novell beat for CW (old Google searches will probably turn up a quote or two from me in articles of hers). I can't directly speak of her attitudes now, because it's been a couple of years since I've spoken to her (I've talked to her about stuff since she joined Yankee, though). Here's my take on Laura, and where she's coming from:
Laura is not a tech geek like most of us are. She's also not specifically a fanboy of any particular company or technology. Laura's strength at CW was in insight - she did a good job of seeing through the fluff that companies were spewing and getting to the "real" impact behind it. Covering Novell back when Microsoft was first starting to take a big bite out of their business, she recognized then that it wasn't the superiority of the product that was winning the battle for Microsoft, it was the marketing. She also saw what Novell was doing wrong, but wasn't in a position to do much about it other than point it out in columns.
As an analyst, I'd say her work (that I've read) is usually solid. I don't agree with all her conclusions, but remember - her job is to figure out what mainstream business is doing and is interested in. It's not to rave about one platform or another. And since mainstream business is on Windows, converting would incur costs and complications that don't exist if they stay on Windows. Some companies would save money by moving to Linux - some would not. Sometimes it's worth it for a business. Sometimes it's not. And sometimes she's spot-on - sometimes she's not.
The folks who post flames about her and other analysts who say anything other than "Linux rocks and Windows sucks" regularly are giving Linux a bad name, Slashdot a bad name, and the whole open source/free software community a bad name. There are valid criticisms one can make of some of DiDio's work. Flaming the messenger personally because you don't agree with her professional conclusions - that's just stupid.
Even Rob Enderle deserves better.
OK, maybe that's going a little too far...
-- Josh Turiel
"2. Do not eat iPod Shuffle."
Yesterday, Brent Noorda posted an open letter on Groklaw Brent Noorda Sets the Record Straight --here's a key quote:
While the information provided by analysts like Rob Enderle and Laura DiDio weren't incorrect, their statements represented speculation more fitting to a daytime soap opera than to the business section of a newspaper.
this refers in part to DiDio's many inflammatory statements, in particular one from the SLC Tribune on March 9:
No one could say for sure Wednesday, although Yankee Group analyst Laura DiDio had some advice for those watching the fortunes of both Canopy and the Noorda Family Trust - two entities controlling hundreds of millions of dollars. "This is all about the money, and the ones most closely following the money are the Noordas' [four] kids," she said. "Who stands to gain the most? And what's the only thing that stood between them and the money?
"That was Ralph Yarro. So, good-bye, Ralph," DiDio added. "I don't think Yarro will be reinstated. I find that highly unlikely. . . They will just pay him off and send him on his way - but they won't countenance anyone who's a threat" to their monetary access.
People following the case know about Val Noorda Kreidel's tragic suicide a few weeks ago, and evidently, Brent Noorda felt compelled to address the out-of-bounds tactics of these so-called 'analysts.'
While it could be agreed that there are individual extremists among the pro-FOSS crowd, DiDio and her fellow neo-cons (Enderle, Maureen O'Gara) consider Groklaw itself to be a radical extremist site, despite the solid legal reportage done by Pamela Jones and company (so good, in fact, that SCO raided Groklaw's documents to seed their own prosco site).
While DiDio is crying harrassment, one could have a sense that the best defense is a good offense, as in she'd rather take offense than apologize for her own transgressions...
I encourage everybody who hasn't already, to check out Brent Noorda's open letter on Groklaw, and then decide for yourself who's the real extremist!
Gimme a break. This asshole has been spinning anti-Linux, pro-Microsoft BULLSHIT for several years now.
She's a PAID SHILL - nothing more. Do I mean she directly gets a check from Bill? Maybe not - but she knows which side her bread is buttered on and she "reports" accordingly.
This latest is nothing more than another attempt to run down Linux by running down its supporters - another tack that other MS shill asshole Rob Enderle probably taught her.
So who cares what she says?
She's no different than any Windows troll on
Read my HTTP, Laura.
Fuck you.
Richard Steven Hack - This sig is TOO GODDAMN SHORT TO DO ANYTHING USEFUL WITH! MORONS!
Seriously, all we're doing is sustaining her job, which, apparently, consists of testing out new lines of attack against GNU/Linux for her SCOcrosoft overlords.
Let's put a stop to this, she's attacked on a regular basis because she's a shill. Why on earth should anyone pay attention to her whining about it?
It was a joke! When you give me that look it was a joke.
In an excerpt of the tape released to mainstream news media, the leader of CLIT stated the following:
A spokesman for the Department of Homeland Security declined comment on the tape, stating that they were still trying to determine the authenticity of the communique, while an anonymous source at software giant Microsoft reportedly stated "See? See what I mean? They're nuts, I tells ya! Nuts!!".
k.
"In spite of everything, I still believe that people are really good at heart." - Anne Frank
Ummm, yeah. I'm sure that nobody thinks worse of the Oakland Raiders because of the "Raider Nation". Nobody at all.
Of course I'm speaking as a Philadelphia Eagles fan here, and before you say anything, he was a lousy Santa Claus. He deserved to be booed.
"Seven Deadly Sins? I thought it was a to-do list!"
You're absolutely correct on every point.
And that's why people hate these clowns like DiDio - because these clowns are fundamentally vicious assholes who think nothing of lying and stealing and using the state to crush their opponents.
Back in the 1960's, one of the Situationist International people made the point that the hot violence of mobs and riots - so often derided as mindless violence - was precisely the right antidote to the cold, malicious thwarting of human potential which the state and the corporations DELIBERATELY engage in for their own benefit.
And as Bush and his cronies have demonstrated, these kind of people will kidnap you, torture you, and kill you and everyone around you to get their way - and then smirk about it at press conferences.
Unfortunately for them, so will I (leaving out the press conferences). Worse, I'm willing to wait for the right technology to perform a "Final Solution" on their asses.
Meanwhile, you are correct that the appropriate response is to keep producing good stuff and show it to people. Things will keep getting better if we do.
And that's why, as someone else posted, DiDio is "squealing like a pig" - and so is Bill.
Richard Steven Hack - This sig is TOO GODDAMN SHORT TO DO ANYTHING USEFUL WITH! MORONS!
I upgraded the motherboard in my computer that was running Fedora Core 2 at the time. The new motherboard had all different hardware: network, video, chipset, etc. The upgrade process went like this:
- Remove hard drive from old computer.
- Install hard drive in new computer.
- Boot new computer.
No drivers to load or find. No configurations to twiddle with. No interaction required from me except to confirm to Kudzu that the hardware changes happened. I have never had a motherboard upgrade or fresh install of Windows go that smooth.
My brother-in-law upgraded his motherboard in a PC running Windows 2000 like this:
- Boot with new motherboard.
- Watch previous drivers attempt to load and crash the system.
- Reboot to Safe Mode.
- Remove previous drivers from Device Manager.
- Reboot.
- Watch "found new driver" messages come up one at a time and require a reboot after each one.
- Guess wrong on the network driver from the motherboard driver CD and have the computer crash.
- Reboot to Safe Mode.
- Remove incorrect network driver from Device Manager.
- Reboot and choose correct network driver.
- Reboot.
- Try three different sound drivers rebooting each time.
- No sound. Is hardware broken?
- Reboot Knoppix CD. All hardware works fine except for video mode. Sound works fine. Proved hardware works.
- Reboot to Windows and hunt for sound driver on internet.
After killing most of a Saturday, I sent him home with his sound still not working. None of the sound drivers on the included CD or that we found on the net would work. But it worked fine in Linux.
I chuckle to myself everytime someone says Linux is harder to install than Windows.
That's about as ugly as a woman gets and still get the label of "girl".
Oh...she is quite an MS shill.
And I'm not even a Linux fan.
isn't that true in any group? the fringe activists (militants, whatever) are always giving the group a bad rep. be it religious, political, ethnic, education... they always exist.
Power to the Penguin!
http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserversystem/facts /videos/didio_video.wvx
MS's top execs don't gush that much about Windows.
Watch it and tell us again how she is objective.
Objective my ass.
I think this is the second time this week that Laura DiDio has got top billing here, and the second time I've questioned why anybody bothers paying attention to her. She and her group are clearly shills for Microsoft and she is just needling, keeping herself and her opinions in the press by doggedly spouting nonsense that can be classed anywhere along the scale from bald-faced lies to half-believable double talk. This is a tactic that is used to great effect by your Republican-owned media in the US against liberals - needle them until they react badly so that they look like fools. You all need to ignore this woman.
Have you already forgotten the bitkeeper fiasco? The intelligent people that point out when software is "not free enough" eventually turn out to be right.
Also, you are confusing the two meanings of the heteronym 'free'.
Freeware has nothing to do with freedom, only price. A for-fee but free-as-in-freedom program is preferable in the FSF paradigm to a freeware but proprietary one.
So no, "it" does not need to stop. People need to educate themselves. Ignorance is not a virtue, and so should not be accommodated.
Akarsz Magyar Gentoo fórumot? Akkor
Yes, Ms. DiDio is doing a fine job in not baiting (nor biasing) either community as an objective analyst. Funny how people in glass houses ALWAYS seem to want to throw stones? Curious, that.
The radical ones of the group got Open Source where it is today.
Yeah, because we all know that the best metric for software isn't support, quality, price (or a ratio of the previous)...
It's bullshit political ideology, of course!
No, only some of us know that.
Akarsz Magyar Gentoo fórumot? Akkor
I should clarify what I mean by "I absolutely agree."
I agree that certain people make it hard to advocate Linux, because there is little content to what they say.
I disagree that Laura Didio is right in any way, shape, or form. Laura thinks that SCO has a case and might want to settle. I think that SCO might want to settle, because that would at least prevent the absolute embarassment that has been their side of the suit.
As for TCO. I don't know what it costs a business to run Windows. I would imagine that it's not cheap. As for myself, running Windows was free because I was given a license, as was running most of the Microsoft apps that I run. My understanding is that the MS software that I run would have cost me thousands of dollars had I not been given (legally) the licenses.
Running Gentoo cost me a couple hours of my life during compilation. Really, it's more like 30 minutes, and a couple hours of suffering without my notebook.
As for ease of use/installation:
GCC - Installation is a breeze, it's a freebie with most Linux installs.
Visual Studio - Installing Visual Studio is... an experience. It takes a couple hours, it requires lots of media. It fills your hard drive. Visual Studio is the reason that I'm going to have to repartition my hard drive, because I want about a Gigabyte of support software that I don't have space for.
OO.Org - Also simple
Office - A snap
Dell Truemobile Wireless (Linux) - A pain in the ass. Recompile your kernel. Recompile ndiswrapper after you recompile your kernel. Install Windows DLLs into ndiswrapper. Install a suite of wireless software. The first version I got was heaven! The second version I got froze my machine. The current version runs fine.
Dell Truemobile Wireless (Windows) - A snap, but under XP Home, Wireless Zero Configuration continually drops the signal. XP Pro doesn't seem to have this issue.
Security (Linux) - Pretty straightforward honestly. That said, people should drop the nonesense about it just being super secure by default. Linux is not invulnerable to viruses (I wish people would quit saying it is). If you are telnetting in, people are listening in. X-Windows also has a number of vulnerabilities.
Security (Windows) - I haven't a clue where to begin. I install the software that my campus network people tell me to, and run Windows update. I operate under the assumption that the install is fairly insecure, and life has little ways of telling me this is true.
Whatever. These consulting groups are nothing more than a bunch of losers, trying as hard as they can to get as much cash as possible.
"Laura DiDio, an analyst at the Yankee Group who has been at the receiving end of much of the criticism from Linux advocates, claimed the radical elements of the community could damage the reputation of open source software..." and continued "...unless we can get there first. Yankee Group has worked hard to become a world leader in damaging the reputation of open source software, and we'll fight to the death to keep those dirty commie hippie radical `elements of the community' from outperforming us in this area."
Didio is just trying to discredit her critics:
the issue *isn't* that open source advocates are attacking her analysis.
the isue *is* that open source advocates have discovered that:
1. she teamed up with a microsoft gold partner to perform the analysis
2. they sent the survey to subscribers to a microsoft publication (a completely biased sample)
3. the analysis & survey don't match up well - a considerable amount of apparently unfounded interpretation occured.
So, are open source advocates sometimes excessive? Sure. But more to the point: Didio's analysis was beyond flawed - it was deceptive. And that discredits her as well as Forester.
"There are valid criticisms one can make of some of DiDio's work."
I agree.
In fact, why don't you post a link to this solid work so we can all judge?
Linux Hippies make me laugh. They'll make any excuse to justify Linux - even though the Shit crashes all the freakin' time!
Black Screen of Death Forever!
My, that name sounds familiar. I remember her repeating SCO's unsubstantiated claims about Linux being stolen SCO code.
You mean people haven't been questioning their competence?
I think the problem that Yankee Group has is indeed that Open Sourcers are questioning their competence in inconvenient places like the offices of CIOs and CTOs, and if the direct customers for Yankee Group publications and analysis start hearing enough questions as to whether or not the products are a rational use of company funds, Yankee is likely to find their customers going to the competition or even bringing analysis in-house.
Yankee doesn't sell to end users, their only market is corporate/investor, and ALL they have to sell is their credibility.
They should concentrate on finding facts to analyze, not trying to spread more Linux-related FUD. The only credibility that sort of thing hurts is their own.
This isn't "Linux zealots hurting. . ." anything but Yankee Group. I'm sure the Gartner people enjoyed reading the article.
Tech Public Policy stuff
One of the quotes that helped Laura earn the name DiDiot:
"Within the open source community, there are a large percentage of tinkers and 'ankle biters' who are trying their hand at hacking. Some are even communicating with each other. So it only takes one or two of these groups sharing information to be able to pull something off. When you have this type of passion, it's hard to fight because these people are like virtual suicide car bombers."
If you can't stand the heat Laura, don't keep throwing fuel on the fire.
Even though Billy boy over there says that you can't get burned by being his shill, you might get an unpleasant surprise...
Brielle
Take a look at my recent post at bitpad.com (http://www.bitpad.com/). Before I saw the Yankee Group article on ZDnet and the Slashdot posting, I wrote a piece on my thoughts on why large IT groups may be tiring of the Linux movement and are back to chosing the safe Microsoft route. Ash
i thought that was her name, darn, and it sounds so good on her!
and i'm so pleased to know that such a one is worried about "our" reputation.
The "no keyboard" feature was introduced to ensure foolproof installation of the software.
And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
anything that the yankee group does I will always question and second guess.
wasn't it last year that she said windows tco was less than linux - but now they are equal.
well at least she's going in the right direction - maybe next year the report will actually have facts and truth in it instead of users opinions.
they probably interviewed EDI.
Now that is a first, serial killers maybe, but bullies? OTOH, we do have a habit of making girls cry and runaway.
"I'd like the same about Linux, but always get belittled for asking." - This is common among geeks. I can often be a sign of insecurity (or bullshiting). A geeks source of power is...well..."the source". If everyone can "look to the source" then the geek becomes powerless.
And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
Its latest survey, published on Monday, reported that Microsoft Windows Server 2003 is at least as good if not better than Linux, in terms of quality, performance and reliability.
The survey remains unpublished. All that Yankee Group has released is a summary of some results (aggregated oddly) and a number of unsupported conclusions.
When the Yankee Group decides (in June, according to their website) to release the actual results of their survey, this will be news.
Until it does, there literally *isn't* anything to talk about but the analyst's reputation.
She's engaged in nothing but argument by authority, so it is unstartling that the quality of her authority is up for discussion.
That's not ad hominem.
If you are English, then you are correct. If you are American, then you are wrong. In best fashion, Americans took the insult and turned it into a compliment.
I don't question DiDiot's objectivity, she has none. I don't question The Yankee Group's compentence for the same reason. I refuse to waste my time with either.
Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves.
Actually, it wasn't a great simile. A football team can whip up & encourage low behaviour from fan clubs, but "Linux" can't get Linux enthusiasts to do anything...
since the OSS is not a coherent unit to be targetted, there's strength in it being a fast, evolutionary business model(?) without parallels. or else, MS would've known where the jugular is and promptly throttled the whole venture. there in lies the catch for OSS too. there's no single headquarter or mouthpiece. any opensource consortitium is at best a collection of individuals - either strong or weak, and in no way a comprehensive unit that can be held responsible. so the OSS voice can't be heard from a single microphone - there's no single voice - its always the group. so, maybe the corporates and the governments have to get used to this. in a capitalistic world where everyone wants it as simple as possible to identify a target/competition - here's one that notoriously difficult. the governments have tended to notice it first and respect it too for socio-economic reasons, corporate being purely money-making machines cannot "see" through the OSS scheme unless it is the make or break stage for them - novell for example. my take - the status quo should prevail.
From Netcraft in a query of www.yankeegroup.com:
OS, Web Server and Hosting History for www.yankeegroup.com
http://www.yankeegroup.com was running Microsoft-IIS
on Windows 2000 when last queried at 3-Apr-2005 19:35:06 GMT
It seems yankeegroup.com puts their money where their mouth is.
Maybe it is not so bad that they use a security risk as an OS. Maybe the 500 technology leaders chose better than the rest of us. There must be something this lady can find that is positive about Linux. I never see her kind remarks for what is a favorite for many, many companies for TCO and reliability.
Rule #1 for Hardball politics:
Divide and conquer.
These Yankee Group pricks are better at intellectual dishonesty, propaganda and manipulation than you or I are... dont think for a second that they arent wise enough to inspire the community to attack their attackers.
Dont let them muddy the debate with this propaganda. They have been charged with biased analysis. And their response? From the article, to wit: "There's an extremist fringe of Linux loonies"
This is cut and dry nonsense.
Semantic Propaganda
Unspecified Adjective (sub-category of Deletion)
"The extreme views of many of the campaigners..."
Cognitive Propaganda
Labelling (eg repetitive name-calling; dismissing something via label, or emotional trigger-word).
"Terrorist", "anti-American", "appeaser", etc.
These types are INCREDIBLY sophisticated liars. Dont let them wiggle away from the charges with this nonsense.
> said Hall. "He said that if he asks a question
> [on a forum or mailing list] he gets lots of
> responses by the next morning. He told me: 'I
> give so little and I get so much.'"
Okay, here's a myth that needs to be correted
here and now. Many mailing lists for open-source
projects give only marginal support. I subscribe
to a mailing list of a well known open-source
GUI toolkit (because I develope software with
it) and fully 25% to 30% of the questions go
unanswered. And they are legitimate questions.
That's not getting "so much..." and it's not
good support.
the preceding was brought to you by weasel words and bs.
But it's ok. Just accept that you're afraid.
You can also find the information yourself, you know?
I was going to say all that!
Windows installs are VERY easy, but just like you said, unless it goes wrong. Which it can, and does quite often.
Not as much as your normal Linux distribution, I'll admit, but yea it's gotta a LOT better. Linux is really easy to install. Basically if you click one of the express-type install buttons like "This is a Desktop PC" then it will run through the install with almost no questions.
But I think the obsticle for most Linux distributions isn't the install. It's the addition of software after the fact. While things like YaST have made things easier, you're still limited by the packages available to your distribution unless you're an expert. Of course, there's a hell of a lot of software included with almost any big distribution. And this isn't a fault of the distribution, necessarily. There's a lot of factors out of the scope of this post.
I think we need a standard installer and installed software manager like Windows has.
- It's not the Macs I hate. It's Digg users. -
Without meaning to criticise you at all, I'm quite confused about why some people seem to be so intent on comparing Linux setup with Windows setup.
The vast majority of Windows users I know never have to install Windows anyway. They either switch on their new computer and it works, or an IT admin has already installed it for them.
Linux installation is an important thing to talk about for as long as most linux users will need to install their own system, but comparing it with the Windows setup doesn't seem to make sense. Comparing general maintenance of the OS once installed might be a little more useful.
>War? Iron Grip? Jesus dude, It's software..
>I think its funny that you said this:
> you can expect every trick to be used. Linux users
>will be cast in the vein of the Simpson's comic book guy.
>
>Funny because that is exactly how I started picturing
>you in my mind as I read your post.
This is because you're falling for the FUD. Read what you say, bringing people to "our side" and "tactics" are terms of strategy and opposition, but let me ask you...ever heard of a businessman reading Sun Tzu before? Well, now here we are in the middle of it. Where is the erroneous bashing? What do you think Microsoft handles better?
Instead of taking the average Slashdotter stereotype as your mark of the zeitgeist, try having some standards. I don't really see anybody talking about "us" and "them" except the status quo: Microsoft, Dildio, etc. who have entrenched interests that they perceive as being threatened. The overarching ethic in the Linux community is good, free software. Sure, the people who have 0wn3d the computer industry for the past 25 years would love to drag an adolescent into their ring, it's how they do business. This is what Dildio is trying to do: goad people who could care a whit about Microsoft's shitty software that has only changed in the past 10 years to the extent that they think the user should be controlled and mistrusted. But knowledge of this is not necessary to making good, free software. Linux has been written not as a feature-by-feature retort to the gauntlet thrown down by the master innovators in Redmond, but as an idealized operating system and set of utilities that better utilitize the hardware it runs on and the skills of those who operate those machines.
Fine, you can't get with the benefits of Linux. No one's forcing you to like it. However, there are those who would like to force you to keep using Windows. Realize that when you look down on us Simpson's Comic Book Guys that you're doing it from the luxury of entrenched power and social monopolies, the historical lynchpins of bullies throughout history. Anonymous Coward indeed!
When I was a kid, we only had one Darth.
Yeah, DiDio doesn't sound reactionary at all.
... and then they built the supercollider.
"Laura DiDio, an analyst at the Yankee Group who has been at the receiving end of much of the criticism from Linux advocates, claimed the radical elements of the community could damage the reputation of open source software."
That BITCH!
It is the 1990s all over again!
I signed up for the mailing list of my local area LUG (Linux Users Group), basically because I like sharing problems and solutions amongst like minded people. Mailing lists have always been educational and useful to me, especially when dealing with specific hardware issues etc. The best one I can remember was the old Cobalt RAQ list, which was nearly essential as the hardware became obsolete, and the OS was customised for the hardware.
;-)
Anyway, back to the LUG.... It soon became clear that this particular group was entirely focussed on a) Debian and b) the list maintainer. If it wasn't debian and he didn't like/understand/care about the problem/subject , then it wasn't worth a sensible response. It was however worth the odd flame.
For example, one poster asked how to remove old kernels from a redhat install, as he had about 6 still living on the hard drive. No response from anyone. Except me of course, having been familiar with rpm since the beginning of my linuxship.
Another example of the bad attitude came from someone who kept using FUD but had no idea what the term meant. When I pointed out her error, she claimed it was "her opinion" and so was valid, even though she obviously never even followed the explanatory links I posted on the subject.
There was also a tendency to try and "promote" linux use to the wider population even to the extent of making it seem more geeky than it actually is. I'm all for linux being publically visible, but ramming it down peoples throats is counter productive. The best users of any system are those who come to the subject of their own accord, and have to work through their own issues but know what they want. Most of the general Windows owning public just want to get things done, and they don't care how the underlying OS works.
The 2 things that finally caused me to cancel the mailing list subscription, were
a) they had a "discussion" about renaming the group to GLUG because of the fact that most of the software is GNU and linux is just the kernel. While this may be true, the only people who care are really nit-picking , and it would be irrelevant to newbies. Plus even though the debate ended about 50-50 the list still got its name changed (guess which side the list maintainer was on !)
b) I wrote a post concerning recent new adsl offerings by BT (UK) and compared these to other offerings available in our area. This was basically flamed and its title was renamed to [Offtopic] $title. Fair enough, but when the day before, some geek post links to pictures of his deconstructed computer, bits hanging off walls and in drawers while it was still running, the title remained unchanged, even though one of the pictures showed it was running Outlook !
All in all, their elite, university educated snobbery and "superiority" got right up my nose. So I quietly left the scene and carried on with my own life. God help any newbies who want help on anything other than debian, or who might have their own opinion.
I am quite happily still running RHE on my servers and have FC3 purring along on a box that, by using a combination of Apache, MySQL and VLC I provide a visual movie menu, in which, by clicking a movie entry (covershot), that movie is streamed (xvid) to the rest of the lan and out though a projector. I also run Win98se, XP on a laptop, RH9 on a workstation, and have about 15 live cds of various distros sat on my desk. I even have a FreeBSD server on my LAN, so I am not biased in any particular direction, but I do appreciate different tools.
All in all, sometimes the message is more important than the messenger, so if you don't like one persons style of advocacy, it doesn't indicate anything negative about the thing they are advocating. This assumes you are capable of independent thought of course
How the bloody hell do you Linux people know for sure you're not all compromised?
First of all experience. When people technically competent, without a direct interest in a given product (i.e. you can't believe Mr. Gates when he says Windows is secure) are in general agreement, I think you can trust what you are hearing.
MS has, in purpose, which is the more silly, made their OSes more vulnerable. By design they expose you to userland applications to do whatever they want, a sure recipe for disaster as experience has shown.
Linux, learning from years of experience of UNIX, separates userland from the kernel at the outset, and as time has gone by, fine tunning of userland applications have made the full thing more secure.
Also the way the two entities react to security threats is telling. MS tries to hide the fact that a vulnerabilty is found and has gone as far a hinting that people disclosing security problems should be somehow liable.
In Linux, the sooner a vulnerability is exposed, analyzed and understood, the better. This enables patches to be out there faster. The people exposing the vulnerabiliteis are praised for their skills.
Under this scenario it is very easy for me to know which environment I can trust more.
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
I can understand how it seems that the Open Source community is alway attacking anybody who says anything against it. There usually is vehement opposition to anybody saying that Linux/Open Source is weak in a particular area.
:
But, has anybody ever really looked at why this is the case?
Take a look at all of the FUD that has been constantly flung at Linux/Open Source for the past few years; most people coming against Linux have used the most desperate arguments to persuade people that it's not good (such as Linux is a cancer, and un-American). It seems as if Linux/Open Source hunting is the latest popular sport.
Getting the facts is hard. Microsoft's Website should be renamed "GetSomeOfTheFacts.com". We need FULL facts, not just a bunch of facts tailored together in such that makes one side look good.
Take this for example:
You have two cats, one gets twice as much food as the other. Which cat would you say was better off? The cat that gets twice as much food? Well, what if we later discover that the cat eating twice as much has such a bad case of worms that it's digesting less than the other cat?
Full facts are necessary, without them you can easily present a false report.
Analysts are being widely disrespected because of situations such as this
According to a new report, written by none other than DiDio herself, Yankee appears to have changed its mind and now there is very little difference between the cost of maintaining a Windows versus a Linux-based corporate computing environment. Can this be the same DiDio who last year told us that the total cost of Linux was three to four times higher than that of Windows. We wonder what has changed in the past few months to change her mind?
The word of an analyst certainly doesn't seem trustworthy. How can they get any respect?
Linux/Open Source/Anti Microsoft News
Big company grabs FLOSS project but it does not quite fit the bill.
Big company hires programmer, who needs to pay mortgage, to customize FLOSS project to their own needs.
Programmer gets paid, programmer pays mortgage.
Programmer, realizing that the more free software there is out there the more programmers will be needed, contributes to a FLOSS project, lobies company that just paid him to release the changes.
Pay per software will day out because it is banking on a stupid idea: to sell thought and ideas.
For as far as humanity has existed ideas have been shared freeley, it is only during the last 100 or so years that people have been trained to believe ideas can be sold.
We live in an abnormal era, programmers should forget about this nonsense and understand that the more ideas are available out there (in the form of sofware) the more work they will have.
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
A lot of businesses make their money by hiring developers and selling software
Most software is in-house, tailored software.
Software houses are in a diminishing minority when it comes to produce software.
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
thhe footnote after "nevermess with someone wearing leather" (or similar). The note was "this is the reason why people complaining about wearing animal furs thow fake blood over supermodels and not Hells Angels".
A priceless thought...
That is a moronic, defeatist view of the world.
I go and tell my boss why we should use Linux. Sometimes I am told to fuck off. Some other times we test a systems that eventually becomes production grade, or I get some people interested in using it on their desktops and after a while they don't need Windows anymore.
And in some contexts your boss could not give a toss about the technical decissions you are making, it is your own fear and inertia which make you reach for the "boss"
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
I have never met the types you are mentioning, but alas, the Linux people I meet move in business circles.
I am also tired about this notion that to be passionate about something is to have no life.
By those harsh standards somebody completely obsessed about music (Beethoven), Natural Sciences (Newton) or Mathematics (Ramanujan) did not have a life.
Having a life has many forms and shapes, people commited fully to one field of expertise have dcided to live in a certain way and frankly they should not be criticized for that.
As for social skills, they are overrated. Social skills are a matter of context, and nobody has the right social skills for all the situations.
Hackers and FLOSS advocates have the right social skills to relate to their peers, some of them (names please) may not have the skills to realate to *some* non tehcnical people.
Stereotypes are rarely true, I would not mod up somebody using them with such relish.
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
Their choice to use software they did not write without giving anything back when they re-distribute it?
Well, I can live with that. I have never liked freeloaders anyway.
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
As for Gimp and Photoshop, I just used both in the last 24 hours, both work fine for me. Having used Gimp more regularly, I'm starting to find that Photoshop is becoming harder to use instead of Gimp. The opposite was true in the past, as I always believed as many do that Photoshop simply had a superior UI. Now that I remember better where the tools are in Gimp, I'm starting to find that the opposite is true. And I'm finding that Gimp is using fewer resources on my Linux computers than on Windows. But that's just me.
The problem with Ms. Didio however is bigger. Are you aware that she has had more than just an analyst relationship with one of the SCO old timers, iirc? I'm not talking about a personal relationship ala dating. In the last few months, if I recall correctly, it came out either by herself or by another reporter that knows her that she has been in contact with Yarro for decades, and iirc, the relationship wasn't of analyst/exec, it was "friends" if I got that right. I don't remember the article verbatim, but the relationship to Yarro that was explained hit me like a bolt of lightening because it explained her bias about as well as Rob Enderle's relationship with Bill Gates:
Further, Ms. Didio has pumped out more than one "independent survey" that is a little less than independent. From exactly how the questions are worded, to using multiple choices that don't allow alternative answers, to using pro-Microsoft audiences as the target audience for the surveys:
Just read this thread.
"MySQL" and "PostgreSQL" are fine and dandy, and yes, they are tradmarks too.
MS has NOT trademarked the acronym 'SQL' or the word 'server' separately (e.g. it's "SQL Server 2003(tm)").
Still, never let the facts get in the way of your blind predjudice!
Laura DiDio == Rob Enderle in drag!
Now, I love a good slam against Microsoft like the next person; heck, its right up there with religious zealots getting pointed out for hypocracy and leaders getting sick, and dying on their death bed.
With that being said, the fact remains, the vast majority of users get their machines from the Dells, Acers, HPs etc of the world; they get the dinky little restoration cd, and it is simply a matter of slip the cd in the drive and away it goes.
Regarding GNU/Linux installation, it is no harder than Windows IF everything is supported out of the box, using that particular distribution - HOWEVER, when things go wrong, the go *REALLY* wrong. When you bugger up something in Windows, it can be undone via safe mode, with Linux, its a lot harder.
Very true. For a current example, look at the significant pressure (withdrawing advert) GM has exerted on the LA Times, for what seems to me stating the obvious: GM is in trouble. (Where else but LA would you get pulitzer prize winning articles on the auto industry?)
So rather than take the advice, make corrective action, they , having seem to failed in their efforts to muzzle the reporter, apply pressure by withdrawing their advert. Yes, I agree it's a fine line - why advertise in a paper that writes bad reviews - however the possible impact on the Time's objectivity, or any other newspaper, is important. GM to stop LA Times advertising
Bill Moyers, before retiring from NOW, said one of the most critical issues facing democracy was that increasing control of the media by just a few companies (Think Murdoch and the Fox Empire).
And what is the reputation of someone who sells opinions, and how is it connected with the soundness of their reasoning?
Whiners. "If you can't stand the heat..."
Get your teeth into a small slice: the cake of liberty
C'mon, follow the money trail -- Laura DiDio works for *BSD! She's been on that payroll for years; *BSD is now little more than a troll-house, since development has slowed to a halt. Soon they'll being going the SCO route, and try to say they invented the TCP/IP stack and demand royalties.
I, for one, welcome our new Antichrist overlord.
Add to that list the recent decree from on high that SP2 WILL be installed via Automatic Updates whether you like it or not.
"It's just software. This has got way out of proportion."
Way to understate the importance of the issue. I'm sure we can all agree software is the backbone of the modern world?
I still need -- thanks mostly to Adobe -- to dual boot.
Ever heard of OS X?
Yes, Laura Dido is thoroughly discredited in the SCO story, not because she is a blind fanatic of the SCO brand, but because she fell for their "look, our uncredited BSD code matches their code" story in the great SCO "smoking source" debacle.
But she appears (according to groklaw) to be unrepetant; she thinks they have a case and she thinks linux has a shadow hanging over it. She can't admit she was mislead/gullible/wrong, because it does the consulting group no good.
Apparently, in order to save a couple of cents, Dell has started to leave out the CDs, and place it all in a little hidden FAT partition on your hard drive.
We're not extremists...
she says.
*BSSSSST* wrong, it is not just software. If she hasn't figured it out yet that it is more then 'just software', she deserves nothing more but being called DiDiot.
On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero.
Do you really think it does Linux's image any good to have idiots burying her with flames...and *especially* phoning her house in the wee hours and harassing her? (Assuming that is true, of course)
That just adds grist to her mill about what a pack of wild eyed, unwashed fanatical hippies we supposedly are.
People here keep talking about how she supposedly has no ethics and her opinion is completely for sale, etc. What some of the dimmer bulbs among you are perhaps missing is that that could actually be useful to us...because assuming she really *is* that cynical, if we tried applying some diplomacy, the opinion she eventually ends up selling could be ours.
Microsoft have traditionally used people like Laura to communicate with computer laypeople, and in the past at least, it was very effective for them. If Laura's values really are for sale, we ought to try and recruit her ourselves...because every individual like her that we can convert, is one less such individual who's still relaying Microsoft's party line to the masses, and can actually be relaying a pro-Linux message to them instead.
Yeah, I know I sound like a disgusting, slimey American spindoctor here most likely...but the problem is, this shit *works*. That is the reason why Microsoft got where they did, and why despite the popularity of the GPL/GNU's *software*, RMS is currently battling impending irrelevance.
As far as influencing people's thought is concerned, Stallman's methods don't work. It's as simple as that. This has been proven, and it is being proven...Over and over and over again. RMS has been tried, and found sorely wanting. Given that, if we want Linux to continue to gain traction among the greater portion of the population, we need to abandon Stallman's ideas and attitude once and for all, and focus on methods which *do* work instead.
And please, any of his advocates are welcome to come forward and refute me on this, because it also doesn't mean that I'm in opposition to the entire paradigm of FOSS in general. Those of you who give Stallman sole credit for said concept's creation are chronically misguided.
Even apart from that though, I have one simple comeback for any of Stallman's advocates which I'm guessing they won't have an answer for...Namely, that they are an endangered species. RMS's amen corner are a tiny minority, and getting smaller by the day, from everything I've seen. The pat answer that Stallman himself gives to this, that the majority aren't interested in being right, also doesn't wash. Any idea can be effectively communicated if said communicator knows what they're doing.
The reason why I keep bringing this up is because I really believe that Stallman is an anvil around Linux's neck. Stallman can be held indirectly responsible for virtually all of the zealotry and pedantry that Linux users are at times accused of...because he himself is a zealot and a pedant, and his followers adopt his example. He represents a major diplomatic problem that Linux truly does not need, and the fact that other people emulate his fringe-dwelling behaviour means that the problem only gets amplified.
We get rid of Stallman, and trolls like Laura DiDio lose all their ammunition, as far as calling us extremists is concerned, more or less instantly...Because Stallman *is* both an extremist and an advocate of extremism. It's that simple.
yah its called freeBSD unix