Slashdot Mirror
OSDL Skeptical Of Joint Study with Microsoft
Jac writes "An interview with ZDNet reveals the low opinion Stuart Cohen, chief of Open Source Development Labs(OSDL), has of a recent Microsoft proposal to conduct a joint study on on deploying Microsoft Vs Linux. From the article: 'As far as working with Microsoft on a study, Microsoft could probably find one negative line on Linux in a 100-page research report that it would spend $10 million marketing while ignoring the other 99 pages...' An interesting follow-up to a recent Slashdot article.
Wont microsoft take this skeptism, and then spend 10 million in marketing to say that OSDL backed out of an open test because they know linux is inferior? FP btw
My Aurora : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o91ZsGwJYyg
FB : https://www.facebook.com/TanveersPhotography
I don't get it though. Why bother comparing the two? Use what works best for the job. I don't think that anyone should be using only one operating system all the time anyways.
~/.sig: No such file or directory
While I am biased to believe that Microsoft cannot be trusted to take an truly independent report at face value, the OSDL will be hard pressed to pass on this opportunity. If you doubt this, imagine the spin Microsoft marketing could put on the alternate headline: "OSDL declines Microsoft offer for independent analysis". Looking at this angle, I actually have to tip my hat to Microsoft; the OSDL will have to handle this situation perfectly to avoid exposing an exploitable weakness. Above all, I think this move shows that Microsoft has escalated their offensive, bringing the battle for business customers onto free and open source software's home turf.
Microsoft could probably find one negative line on Linux in a 100-page research report that it would spend $10 million marketing while ignoring the other 99 pages
Correct. You know, if it talks like a duck and it walks like a duck then go on. Why would any new campaign they do be any different than they did up to now ? Nuff said.
I am putting myself to the fullest possible use, which is all I can think that any conscious entity can ever hope to do.
Microsoft would like you to believe that it wants to share it's market with Linux in a fair and friendly way, and that they want what is best for the customer in every situation. The commercial interests of Microsoft are only an unintended coincidence and for that matter come a distant second. Excuse me while I go and barf...
What's in it for Linux? It's only going to say what everyone knows already - Linux is cheaper, TCO is lower but there are weaknesses in some domains such as desktops. It probably sounds fair and reasonable that Microsoft wants a chance a neutral report (instead of their usual tainted, biased, paid for reports), but you just know they're going to capitalize on the air of respectability of a joint study to report the same distortions and negative PR as they always do. So why bother?
In Linux's position, having MS wanting to go head to head might be a win win situation. I know if the product were mine I'd want to mix it up with the big boys.
"Academicians are more likely to share each other's toothbrush than each other's nomenclature."
Cohen
OSDL is absolutely right in that their business is not running some heads up knock down, who's better activity. That's better left to the Microsoft rags that gobble up anything they say an put it in print.
My karma is not a Chameleon.
I think it is pretty easy to pass by this study. OSDL has to pay the other half of a study they are not really interested in. So this study can turn out bad or good for any party involved, but it also eats into the budget.
My wife's sketchblog Blob[p]: Gastrono-me
In BIG letters : Microsoft is better, bigger, stronger, more secure 100% of the time.
In small letters : This survey was paid by Microsoft, Gates and Ballmer edited the results so it could fit in this report and your screen.
Also in the news, Santa Claus is retiring.
No sig for now.
...the results of a study on the supposed negative effects of cigarette smoking that was funded by a tobacco company? Or the myth of global warming as espoused by an oil company? Or the necessity of being ready for war as delineated by a weapons manufacturer? Or the lack of corruption in politics as found by it's own members? Or the utter impossibility of paedophilia within a church because of the pronouncement of some most holy reverend blah blah... If there is money and power involved there is sure to be lies as well. That's why it is such a good thing that GNU/Linux is *FREE*
Not from the company that called Google a one hit wonder?! How can you NOT trust them?!
// the momentum is decidedly shifting [...] it seems the market is moving towards a combination of the two
./ of GNU/Linux, and start hearing "uh, wait... I knew, I knew it... it's a kind of a toaster, is it?"
Er... actually it has been *Unix* on servers for two decades, and now instead of switching to GNU/Linux when need arises (where they should feel at home) a lot of them are switching to Windows[*]. We should ask us why. PR & Marketing is a truly important thing for "Fortune 500 & Co." pinheads.
So, in a different sense you're right: on the server market, we're moving towards a combination of the two AND IT SHOULDN'T HAPPEN.
Whereas, GNU/Linux gained some _little_ momentum in desktop, and so started being more talked about by people that don't even *know* what a server is (e.g. journalists that writes for big newspapers?). That's why you can talk outside
But let's face it: I use GNU/Linux only (and|because) I'm a FSF member, but how many of your non-geek friends do use it at home and have throwed completely away Windows? [**]
[*] Note: it's not that people don't switch to GNU/Linux (or *BSD) at all. It's the fact that not everybody do this choice.
[**] Please don't start throwing in messages like "why people can't use both? why they can't live on the same hd?". It's MY ethics, I ain't forcing you to see it the same way I do.
42.
Microsoft are pushing Software patents into Europe, the legal homeplace of Linux (I assume Linus keeps his legal entity there?).
The most telling point in Microsofts tactics
So blatant: look at this quite from that page, in H1 FFS:
Indemnification Becomes Open Source's Nightmare and Microsoft's Blessing
There is a linked PDF, also google brings up
Which is telling as well
Who funded SCO?
Microsoft
Who is pushing Patents in the eu?
Microsoft
Who is trying to get a litigation storm to damage and or destroy linux?
Microsoft
Who should probably get some more exposure about their bad activities?
Microsoft
But they don't, this kinda of cross-reporting (cause and effect) isn't done in mainstream media.
Everyone will say Linux is getting sued, noone seems to say Microsoft is behind this financially, and patents politically.
#hostfile 0.0.0.0 primidi.com 0.0.0.0 www.primidi.com 0.0.0.0 radio.weblogs.com
Or it might be over very quickly. Given MS's performance record at PR meetings, it might be just minutes before the MS test platform bluescreens or is trojaned or infested with spyware or malware.
End of review, everybody packs their bags and goes home.
One of the major selling points of GNU/Linux and the rest of Open Source Software is that it's FREE as in speech, not beer.
Harping on about TCO, in _money_ terms is not addressing some of the concerns that some big business' have about using Microsoft's (and other closed source) software. It's about vendor freedom, freedom to choose and change the software. Freedom to customize software on an organization's own terms.
As the City of Munich's decision demonstrated when they chose a more expensive Linux package over Microsoft's, it aint necessarily about cash!
OSDL analysis or not, favouring Linux or not, we might just find that TCO isn't all that relevant anyway.
I can see the M$ propaganda now: "Even Linux experts agree that ...some small negative thing blown totally out of proportion...."
The only way committed and respected Linux people should agree to cooperate on a report would be if Microsoft would agree to 'equal air time' for Linux people to reply to their allegations in subsequent exploitation of that report.
That's not going to happen - so just say 'No'.
Never take what the enemy offers you.
Words to live by.
Pepsi vs. Coke is a comparison over a marketable item that doesn't take much effort to change in your daily routine.
Linux vs. Windows on the other hand is "geek" stuff that would take phenomenal effort from standard users and businesses to switch to either platform.
Linux (and OSDL) are better suited to word of mouth and niche sectors of the market. Pepsi is better suited to TV ads and advertising slogans. OSDL should stay out of this comparison.
IT'S A TRAP!
but seriously this doesn't look good. why would someone talk to a competitor (or a virus that's plaquing the earth, whatever is your fancy) and say that they just want to have a friendly happy analysis?
Anybody remember the saying "keep your friends close, but your enemies closer?"
www.omglolh4x.com
Ummm- no. Go into most big corporations or small businesses (at least in North America) and find that most people 'know' Windows is the biggest, strongest, and best thing they need. They 'know' it works, 'know' it does what they want, 'know' it's compatible with their software, hardware, customers, and supply chain.
Most people don't see Microsoft's marketing as FUD anymore than they see Coke and Pepsi's marketing as FUD.
We are the Slashdot crew who whine about big corp squishing the little guy who just so happens to use Linux. Don't think for a second your views represent management and a large majority of IT people out there. I run into at least three a day who go on about how Windows and dot-NET are the only things they would ever dream of using.
-M
when you see the word 'Linux', drink!
OSDL is a development laboratory, has no products to sell, and thus no interest in participating in such marketing stunts. Microsoft should ask Red Hat instead.
How long would Microsoft drag out the negotiations regarding precisely what should be tested and the methodologies that would be used?
How long would Microsoft drag out the guidelines for interpreting the results of the testing that is performed?
What more productive things could the ODSL people be doing instead of being sucked into this quagmire?
I think the OSDL should politely decline the invite to spend... er waste good money on stupid research and launch a counter capmaign "Get the Right Facts" or some such.
Facts:
1. Microsoft is a convicted monopolist - Fact.
2. Microsoft has written software and spent billions - specifically to crush competition and reduce the user experience - FACT.
3. Microsoft fudged a demo during trial - under OATH - Fact.
etc.... instead of simply declining and being labelled a coward.
If you keep throwing chairs, one day you'll break windows....
Why the hell doesn't Microsoft just tell the truth? If they had a get the facts program saying that most of the programs available for Windows don't have a Linux equivilent, especially those that are a little obscure, and that the vast majority of games don't work on Linux, it'd be reason for home users and corperate users to not use Linux. There's got to be some people out there not taking this into account, and all the stuff they're saying now most people don't believe or trust. And if they were honest they wouldn't get such bad press about it all the time!
You are correct, use what works best for the job, but how do you know which is best for the job if you never compare the competition head to head?
r ing_the_gpl_to_eula.pdf
I personally don't like the "use what works" reasoning because in most cases its used as a cop out or excuse to maintain the status quo.
That said I don't pay much attention to most of the studies that are thrown back and forth because 1) there is a lot of misinformation (pretty much from one side, yeah you know which side), and 2) most of the studies fail to start at the beginning before any features are speced or any pricing is quoted.
The first step in determining what works for the job is to examine the fine print. That is the licensing agreement which binds you once you make your decision.
http://members.iinet.net.au/~cybersrc/about/compa
If you do your due diligence and start with the licensing then in most cases you won't need to go any further.
Statistically speaking it may make sense to ignore the licensing as most individuals and companies do, however, that wont play well as a defense if the licensing and your practices are in conflict and the licensee demands retribution.
The people they are targetting are, as you correctly point out, those wavering on the edge of Linux adoption.
The trouble is that (IMHO) a great many of these people are moving primarily because they're pissed off at Microsoft. For this reason, they're unlikely to give much weight to a Microsoft sponsored survey and such propaganda may rebound against MS, further harming their credibility. We've already seen this happen with the Get The Facts campaign
So that's why MS so desperately needs a linux insider to endorse the study. If ODSL come on board, then they can claim a degree of balance and impartiality to the report, however illusory it may in fact be.
But without someone from inside the Linux camp, all they're going to do is dig a deeper hole for themselves.
Don't let THEM immanentize the Eschaton!
Maybe the OSDL should say, "sure, we'll participate in a TCO study that excludes the costs of interoperating with existing Windows apps and infrastructure". In other words, a study based strictly on the inherent quality of the two systems.
And if you want to do a study that doesn't exclude that stuff, give us the info we need to implement interoperability, and we'll participate in that too.
Posted from my Android phone. Oh, I can change this? There, that's better...