Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft FUD Watch
rs232 writes "Not a week goes by when Microsoft doesn't manufacture a little fear, uncertainty and doubt about something. Yesterday's financial analyst conference was full of it ... Our approach is simple: We look at who said what and why it's FUD. Lots of companies engage in FUD, and we only single out Microsoft because we're Microsoft Watch"
I think I may have seen a story like that somewhere else on /.
What we need is more stories comparing Linux and Windows, preferablt by someone getting paid by either Microsoft or a Linux vendor, that's another topic that's hardly ever covered here
I'm sick of hearing of this acronym. Can't you just give it a rest? It's so very 90s to be complaining about "FUD". And a very shallow analysis.
Taking PR statements and criticizing them for being PR speak is #3 on the "10 dumbest ways to spend your time" list that I made a minute ago. Honestly, when I find a large company with a PR department that *doesn't* make exactly the same sort of statements Microsoft's does, I'm going to try really hard to make it back to this reality from the alternate one I somehow ended up in.
Hi we are Microsoft Watch and we spread FUD about their FUD, please FUD our FUD by FUDDING some FUD, preferably via FUD.
I like basketball!!1!
Pointing out MS FUD is like taking home the drunkest, ugliest girl in the bar. Yah, you did it, but no one is impressed.
There, fixed that for ya! Wouldn't want people to get the impression that Slashdot is "fair and balanced". When you are the #1 source of anti-MS FUD, ya'll gotta represent!!
Keep it real, yo!!
I don't know abour FUD watch, but many of their press releases are so obfiscated, long winded, badly phrased and rambling I find it difficult to follow. Its like Sir Humphrey Appleby from "Yes Minister", it takes a moment to actually understand what the hell they are talking about.
:-(
Is it just me or do these guys find it impossible to speak english in a plain and simple fashion?
Actually, I think there is a proper word for this - but for the like of me I cannot remember what it is.
Oh, Sweet Mother of God and Jumping Jesus on a Pogo Stick and Buddha in a Banyan, if there isn't something specific about Microsoft in the news on a Monday morning, some jackass has to manufacture something so there can be a day where MS is mentioned on the /. front page?
This is as bad as the guy at work that keeps talking about his ex-wife, who he divorced 15 years ago. Let it go! At least wait for Microsoft to actually do something, you know they will.
Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong fix.
Apparently "FUD" has become the new word for "spin"
I hope that clears things up!
Where's the difference? Both serve only one purpose: To make potential customers and investors think you have something worth stuffing money into when there is essentially nothing to see and they'd move along.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Ray Ozzie got his job because he worked alongside Dave Cutler at Digital, and he pretty much worships the Microsoft Way. Don't expect change from Ray Ozzie. Ray Ozzie made a career out of re-implementing VAX Notes. Twice so far, and neither successfully. He is overrated, and his image is overhyped. Heck, Bill Gates has better taste and better instincts for what makes good software. Microosft will continue down a path of FUDing and bullying based on their financial and market strength.
This isn't just how it inevitably is at big companies. Some are different. For example, Jonathan Schwartz got his job because he won't do things the Sun Way. No leader is perfect, and I know lots of people who don't like Schwartz. But Schwartz has backed up his promises by embracing GPL3 and hiring Ian Murdock to change the way Solaris is delivered.
You can reasonably expect Sun's performance to improve. You can reasonably expect Microsoft to continue to miss the point when trying to compete against Open Source software, and to grow worse, in fact, in the way they use PR, lobbyists, FUD, and financial bully tactics as they fail to find a way to stop alternative business models from chipping away at their lead.
Tempora mutantur, nos et mutamur in illis
init 11 - for when you need that edge.
Well, since the overall reaction so far has been very negative, I'll chime in and say that I think this is a very good idea.
FUD is a Bad Thing. It causes people to take decisions based on the wrong information. Short of getting really draconic, we can't very much prevent FUD from being spread. In that light, I feel the best we can do is make sure that the truth is also out there. That way, we can at least hope that people stumble accros the truth, or we can point them at it when we find they have been misled.
All this has nothing to do with Microsoft, apart from the fact that Microsoft spreads FUD. It would be a good idea to do the same for people and organizations that aren't Microsoft.
What's also a good idea is to back up any claims you make with references. And spend some time on the visual aspects of our writings. In order to beat the FUD, we not only need to spread the truth, we also need to make it clear that it _is_ the truth. We could do worse than looking trustworthy.
Please correct me if I got my facts wrong.
I'm seeing more people respond negatively lately to what has gradually degenerated into a Microsoft hate-fest in terms of FUD accusations, etc. Rational *nix and Microsoft folk alike seem to acknowledge hypocrisy and finger-pointing, in this case manifesting itself in yet another utterly banal piece of journalistic blood from a stone, a Microsoft Watch "news item". Who-watches-the-watchers comments aside, are /. staff ever going to take steps to reduce this type of flotsam? I'm looking at the upper left corner of my screen right now, and right next to the /. logo is the purported mantra:
"News for nerds. Stuff that matters."
I consider myself a nerd of sorts, I suppose, but I fail to see how Microsoft issuing generic press releases that would compare equitably to any other company, software or otherwise, "news for me." I also have a hard time grasping how it could possibly "matter", given the frequency and quantity at which it occurs.
It's certainly "stuff", no argument there...
Bottom line, this seems to be a never-ending cycle that only /. staff can break. If they don't attempt to deliver on the site's motto, I don't know who's going to.
I suspect that you are correct. If so, you should immediately apply to MS for a technical authoring job at an astronomical salary -- you managed to explain it more clearly in about a quarter of the words. Incidentally, we now know that when Windows installation breaks, it isn't a bug, it's a "...a rich and complex installation experience."
Tempora mutantur, nos et mutamur in illis
I thought for a minute that MS had released a new product: "The Microsoft FUD Watch". i.e. Something you could strap to your wrist and monitor the amount of FUD present in any particular technology sector at that very instant - as well as being able to tell the time, set alarms etc.
Euhm... am I really the only one that likes my installation experiences to be SIMPLE?
That said, I'm quite experienced in installing Linux. And that is not always easy. And no, I don't enjoy doing it.
While I agree with those that think a Microsoft FUD watch page is a bit of a waste of time, I'm still amused by the fact someone is posting it.
Let us not forget that Microsoft was the master of the FUD campaign. Consider how it used to be. A small, unknown company (Small Software Company) launches a software product that has great potential, but would result in users being semi-locked into that company. Microsoft sees the potential and announces they have their own version about ready to release, knowing full well they don't.
Average user thinks "Well, I'll just wait for the Microsoft product because I really don't know Small Software Company and whether they'll be around.", which gives Microsoft enough time to throw tons of money on a project to whip up a Version 1.0 to compete.
This model worked well for Microsoft for a number of years. But now, it isn't Small Software Company that Microsoft is chasing, it's Google and Apple, to name two. These are also well known to Mr. and Mrs. Average User.
So now, Apple or Google announces a new product, the Average User family starts using it. Microsoft announces their plan to release a competitor and the Average User thinks "a little late to the party".
The point is, people are getting more choice from companies they trust. So the FUD campaigns are not going to be as effective.
It is fun to watch, though.
If you want to spread fear, uncertainty and doubt about Microsoft products, point out that Dell went back to shipping Windows XP instead of Vista. Mention the problems with Vista activation. With the "tilt bit" that can kill your system. With Vista phoning home. (Do you want a system that regularly and secretly contacts Microsoft in your business?)
Wouldn't it make sense to wait and see about Vista? Wouldn't that be the safe thing to do? Do you want to take the risk of using a defective operating system in your business?
Try to read legalese without a law degree and see how far that gets you. Same goes for any programming language without actually being a programmer or having any concept of computer science.
'Yes, firefox is indeed greater than women. Can women block pops up for you? No. Can Firefox show you naked women? Yes.'
FUD is a specific case of spin.
"Spin" is when you deliberately obfuscate or selectively reveal information in order to mislead and change the overall perceived picture. It's like "fossil-fuel consumption is good for the economy", that disregards the long-term effects of climate change on the said economy.
"FUD" is more targeted in that it aims to create doubts about your competitors and to misrepresent your ability to deal with said competition - and to manipulate the market into delaying investiments because your "next product" due "real soon now" will blow the competition away. It's like the announcement of the horrible Windows for Pen Computing (designed to hurt the emerging class of Newton and Momenta-like devices, both more functional than MS's product), when Ray Ozzie states "I believe we're the only company with the platform DNA that's necessarily to viably deliver this highly leveragable platform approach to services." ignoring both Apple and Google in a nauseatingly convoluted statement or when Ballmer says something like "Linux violates 2781.36 patents we will disclose shortly and that we may want to seek compensation for the violations" and then falls into silence never to disclose them.
http://www.dieblinkenlights.com
I'd bet that's not from a C# book. It's from a C# with .NET book, one of the 99% C# books on the market. If you just want to learn the C# language, though, I highly recommend C# Essentials. It cuts out pretty much all the .NET crap that consumes 95% of those 1000+ page books, and explains clearly the C# language in a concise way, using about as much space as The C Programming Language - just my style.
.NET, just use online MSDN documentation. Much quicker and easier that way.
For
== Jez ==
Do you miss Firefox? Try Pale Moon.