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.

Comments

OTOH

[tanveer1979]

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

Re:OTOH

[jkrise]

"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?"

I think the world has built up a healthy skepticism about anything coming from Microsoft, so another $10m FUD marketing is gonna go down the drain. There's some key points with this "joint, independent" study:

1. OSDL is just one of the agencies involved in the creation and upkeep of Open Source projects. MS is the only one developing Windows.

2. FOSS projects get used and adopted by word of mouth, whereas MS depends on Gartner reports and 'funded, independent' research to propogate their products. How many Gartner reports and mainstream media reports could forecast the spectacular growth of Open Source?

3. The OSDL could rather focus on their core area of writing and distributing quality software - money invested in 'research' activities such as this is pure waste.

4. Microsoft's philosophy is 'one-size-fits-all' - totally contrary to the FOSS world. If there's an issue with IE it's impossible to (completely) remove it from the OS and be secure - it's possible to install a Linux server that does not include a browser. Hardly any purpose would be served comparing the two.

If people are going to adopt and deploy FOSS, they don't need any of these 'sponsored' reports. Microsoft has no choice.

Use both

[froggero1]

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.

Re:Use both

[Knome_fan]

Ehm, the purpose of these studies is, or at least should be, to find out which one "works best for the job", so I fail to really see your point.

Re:Use both

[weicco]

Well, I don't know why compare just two operating system, why not bunch of them, but I can figure out the reason. There is so many rumours about Windows that are causing harm to Microsoft. I don't know how average slashdot troll ("OMGXIITLOL! My XP crashes ALL THE TIME") affects corporate managers though.

But I'd like to see comparison between Windows, Linux, Open/Net/FreeBSD, Solaris and some other UNIXes if it would be rationally made and conducted. Of course there would be some issues like "why didn't they use kernel option X and Y or software option Z" but it would be fun to read.

Re:Use both

[$RANDOMLUSER]

No, that's completely wrong. This is about which one is "best" in a two-line "executive summary" for the PHBs. It's about implanting the FUD that maybe Windows is better after all. Few PHBs have the spine to actually find out for themselves, or to stick to their guns if challenged.

Double-Edged Sword

[MaskedKumquat]

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.

Re:Double-Edged Sword

[cow-orker]

You know what comes out of this study. In some constructed situation (desktop system, heavily firewalled, used to write letters to people who refuse to use anything other than MS Word) windows will be "better" in some sense. MSFT will heavily market this "fact from an independent study", omitting all the necessary conditions and not mentioning the cases where Linux is superior.

The sensible thing for OSDL is to tell them off: "We don't have time for silly games, we're busy providing value to out customers."

"Microsoft could probably..."

[l3v1]

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.
 

Re:"Microsoft could probably..."

[Lodragandraoidh]

OSDL should be wary. The question needs to be asked, why is Microsoft approaching OSDL to partner on this now - when they were bashing Linux and FOSS in general as "communistic"?

Given Microsoft's track record the phrase "embrace, extend, destroy" comes to mind.

Take a Page from Pepsi's Playbook

[Quirk]

Hearsay has it that Pepsi as a young upstart challenging Coke had only the slightest toehold in the market until Coke decided on a campaign to compare Coke to Pepsi headon. The outcome of Coke's campaign was to give Pepsi the national exposure it needed to break into the market big time.

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.

MS only pays 50%

[jurt1235]

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.

Would you believe...

[Circlotron]

...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*

Re:GET THE FACTS campain

[alexandreracine]

"Customers have asked me for an analysis on Linux," Taylor said in the statement. "While we had done some research in our Linux and open-source lab, there's not yet any substantial, fact-based research out there on Linux to help customers make value based IT decisions."

Wow, that's strong. Some MS guys saying that the Get the facts campain is bullcrap. Did he just said that?

The real scare in this - and Microsoft's plight

[tod_miller]

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.

Missing the point?

[synotia]

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.

Re:What purpose does a joint study serve?

[MichaelSmith]

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.

Studies involving commercial products always follow the money. There is more money behind MS windows, so any study which starts out with no assumptions will quickly steer in a direction which favours the side with more money.

I used to be involved in bicycle advocacy, and debates over bicycle facilities would always go the same way. Car advocates would be well paid consultants with plenty of time to waste. Bike advocates would be unpaid people with no spare time. The final decision would be taken by the people who were able to turn up.

Outfits like OSDL do have resources, but in situations where they can turn up three or four paid advocates/engineers/lawyers, MS will supply thirty or forty.

Flawed analogy in this case

[mj_1903]

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.

Re:Flawed analogy in this case

[gartogg]

On the other hand, all of the time microsoft spent discrediting linux as a stupid choice, and a non-option is suddely reversed; they ARE admitting that it's not ridiculous to think linux is a better option. That could play very well with big exec's who still think of linux as a fad or a 2nd rate hippy alternative for people without any money.

Marketing isn't seen as FUD anymore than others

[PhYrE2k2]

I think the world has built up a healthy skepticism about anything coming from Microsoft, so another $10m FUD marketing is gonna go down the drain.

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

The correct answer:

[Per Abrahamsen]

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.

Get The RIGHT Facts

[jkrise]

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.