Slashdot Mirror
Community vs. Corporate Linux, The Coming Divide
tobyj writes "MadPenguin.org discusses the great divide that will separate corporate Linux (companies that are working with Microsoft) and community Linux (companies that haven't yet partnered with Microsoft) and their impact on Linux as a whole. Matt Hartley writes, "For Linux enthusiasts, the rules are simple and clear to interpret. But for Microsoft and its Linux partners, we will see plenty of them pointing to self-created loopholes, which will result in fierce debate, and perhaps even worse, blatant defiance.
As a collective community, we'd like to think that this whole issue will just blow over, but with the massive migration of so many Windows users and companies that wish to capitalize on this migration, defiance of the GPL will happen and more so than ever before."
I think if someone could come up with a penguin with a Borg eye-piece, it would be very funny. Maybe give him a Microsoft T-shirt, too.
Erm... free?
(companies that are working with Microsoft) and community Linux (companies that haven't yet partnered with Microsoft)
Corporations push the envelope all the time, and when they overstep, the only recourse (unfortunately in most cases) is a stiff lawsuit. That is the check and balance of the corporate world: liability and damages.
I myself don't worry about it, because time after time the GPL stands up in court
"community Linux (companies that haven't yet partnered with Microsoft)"
What?!
Rather think "When Microsoft writes an application for Linux, I've Won.", as said by Linus Torvalds
-
I don't see that ending any time soon.
Seriously, how did this get to the front page? What is newsworthy about the link? 60% of the page is advertising/links bundled with a few small paragraphs of mindless speculation.
...but with the massive migration of so many Windows users and companies that wish to capitalize on this migration... Sorry, what? I'm not exactly in a corporate environment anymore but I haven't seen any signs of a massive migration to Linux. Sure there are switchers here and there at an individual company level but there's also no small amount of others going back to Windows. Did I miss a peice of news somewhere about big Windows to Linux switching or is that statement based solely on 2007 being (Yet Another) Year of Linux despite all evidence to the contrary?Spelling mistakes, grammatical errors, and stupid comments are intentional.
What about the kind that realise that Microsoft has screwed so many business partners in the past (Spyglass, for an excellent example) that a partnership with them is not sound buisness.
SJW n. One who posts facts.
Another self destructive attitude with Linux.
"If they wont play nice, then we cont support their stuff"
good move. push Linux more into obscurity by not supporting modern technologies.
It kind of hints at something big missed last week though, when it comes to patents:
If Microsoft 0wnz Novell
and Novell 0wnz Unix
and SCO failed it's lawsuit against linux for the reason of "not owning Unix in the first place"
Could Novell now have an trump card when it comes to Linux?.....could it take the same patent lawsuit against Linux that SCO attempted, while using it's rightful ownership?
IMOSHO!
The MS "no sue/patent deal" with Novell/Xandros is like the Pope blessing a Jewish wedding
Rather think "When Microsoft writes an application for Linux, I've Won.", as said by Linus Torvalds
It's not that easy.
When M$ becomes a free software company, we will all win. If M$ becomes a free software owner, we will all lose. The whole point of free software is to avoid software owners - people who make you pay for the privilege of using and improving their software but who will restrict those uses and improvements so that you never get what you want.
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
Community support is not acceptable to the vast majority of serious businesses. They also want to have their bases covered when it comes to liability. The community doesn't give them that either. If distributions that work with large IP holders like Microsoft end up winning, that is good for Linux as a platform. It means that Linux is getting a legal barrier removed that will allow it to mature more safely in the future. It will also throw in more money behind Linux development which means that more parties will have a vested interest in not seeing the Linux boat rocked.
Of course you can play scrappy rebel. Problem is that big business doesn't want to trust anything important to that sort of team or product. If you want Linux to be able to play with the big boys, it has to be able to play on their terms.
Last I heard, Red Hat was about as "corporate" as Linux got. (Before we start murmuring about Novell, why don't we check the size of Novell's customer list vs. that of Red Hat?) And, last I heard, Red Hat flat-out rejected a deal with Microsoft the likes of the one Novell signed. On the other hand, is Red Hat "working with Microsoft"? I don't have examples off the top of my head, but considering that it would be in the best interests of Red Hat's entire installed base, I would say that it is more than likely. I guess that's why they call it a line in the sand and not a line in the concrete.
Breakfast served all day!
I saw this coming after Redhat stopped making Linux for everyone and went corporate only. Sure there is Fedora; but it's not Redhat. The same thing applies to SuSE/OpenSuSE.
I, for one, like corporate Linux. The support is all there. With community distros, I can't tell you how many times my questions have gone unanswered or have been mocked. With corporate editions, I can actually call/email someone with and issue and get a response in a timely manner.
I understand the whole attitude about keeping Linux free; but alienation of community users by community users is a good way for community Linux to shoot itself in the foot.
The game.
From his article, "The Coming Divide"
x _users.html
"There is in fact a coming divide that will hit the Linux community like a freight train. The battle lines have already been drawn, and companies that support Linux, such as Canonical, will eventually find themselves fiercely pitted against companies like Linspire, who only a short time ago, entered into an agreement of cooperation."
http://www.madpenguin.org/cms/?m=show&id=7988
From my article, "The Coming Linux Storm"
"The Linux community is heading for a clash between three disparate groups with very different goals and agendas. We've already seen some light skirmishes between them already. Sometimes these groups will align for the purposes of advancing their own views, but for the most part, these three groups will either destroy Linux as we know it or have to learn how to get along."
http://www.openaddict.com/the_three_types_of_linu
I dunno.. just smacks of something I wrote 5 months ago...
ConsultingFair.com
...could it take the same patent lawsuit against Linux that SCO attempted, while using it's rightful ownership?
The SCO lawsuit was not about patents, it was about contract violation and copyright infringement. Patents were never mentioned by SCO.
Novell now has legal standing with respect to Unix copyrights. However, they distribute an entire GNU/Linux distribution, much of which (including the Linux kernel) is under the GPL. Therefore, they can't even attack Linux for copyright infringement. So Novell has no "trump card" when it comes to Linux.
Microsoft is to software what Budweiser is to beer.
I think the most obvious problem here is that the Linux community (not partnering with Microsoft) has an eye that sees things without a shade of green around everything. There isn't money to be made in every aspect of what it looks at, and is only interested in improving what they already have. Microsoft and partners looks at it with green tinted goggles (The goggles, they do nothing!) and tries to find ways to eke out money regardless of making improvements.
If they have to improve something to make money, then that would be their motivation.
I think the Linux community itself is divided, however. There are several companies trying to make money from Linux (Red Hat), and then there are other groups of people who are intent on making sure Linux remains open source and free for all...
I would think that either Linux needs to remain completely free and open source for ALL distributions, or Microsoft is going to start sticking its fingers into the pie, trying to figure out where the money drip is.
...is it a slow news day?
This persistent nagging as to how this or that or the other are issues the linux community has to deal with or they will fall and linux will be no more....bla bla blaaaa..pff pff spit..
This sort of shit out of the mouth has been going on since Linus first announced his plans to create linux. Perhaps it was going on before that even with article on Stallman.
I'd really honestly sincerely like to see the stats as to how many of these stories and anal-analists have actually panned out. And that includes SCO and Microsoft shit babeling about Linux...
what's the score? absolute BS __________________________________________ vs. Panned Out _
(space alloted for answers)
look at all the trouble you are causing! /ducks
Living With a Nerd
Why is Slashdot helping to promote this type of fear by posting this type of article?
I thought this was going to be about desktop versus server linux. An Ubuntu vs IBM type of thing. Throw in some FUD about (un)fair schedulers and file access writes slowing things down, it would make for some interesting trolling. No takers?
Anywhile, tagging the companies that work with MS as 'corporate' takes some serious spinning. I'm sure IBM, Sun, Oracle, Apple, etc would all chafe at being left out of the 'corporate' segment. But then, all 4 of them might qualify to be 'corporate' under these terms since most are in bed with MS already, to some degree.
Is there any successful partnership with Microsoft...
...
M$ is black widow... No one get any benefit from them...
IBM, Stac, Sybase
Clever people learn other's mistakes, stupid people learn own mistakes...
[My english is better than most other people's Turkish, so please point out mistakes politely. Thank you.]
Something like that was unconceivable 3-4 years ago.
I dunno.. just smacks of something I wrote 5 months ago...
Well, that's because you're a fucking clairvoyant hero and absolutely everyone should endeavour to be like you.
Did you post for any reason other than to point out how awesome you are? No. No, you sure didn't.
I smell a FUD campaign here.
So, conspiricy theorists are rarely original. And writers of 'opinion' pieces on open source websites are the worst kind.
Please stop fighting these 'freedom stealing' windmills and start enjoying your freedoms. You do realize you lost your all your copyleft freedoms the moment you started writing stuff like this when you could have been writing cool software, testing some beta version of something or even installing Linux on the PC of you mother in law? It's useless to make such a fuss about what the rest of the world does with OSS software, it doesn't help anybody, it doesn't change anything.
Just don't spend a dime on 'patent protecting' or other shit like that. And if somebody else want to pay MS tax, pay licenses, get crappy software, etc. just let them have it. Who cares when the all these closed source companies sue each other to death? Just ignore it.
Manichaeism "A dualistic philosophy dividing the world between good and evil principles. . ."
from Free Online Dictionary
It's not like somebody is desecrating the Holy Bible, (even if sometimes it seems so judging by some comments here!). Hell, i'm a proud Windows user but I use a lot of Open Source, Freeware, 3rd party software and even (of the horror) Apple software without problems. Why must some linuzzz folk be so purit. It's all about chosing, so chose NOT to use "corporated" distros, and let everybody who wants use it!
It's time to realise that Abble's products are the biggest abomination these days. Just say NO to the dumb iAbble way!!
Where exactly in the article did you see FUD ..
was: Re:Sounds Like FUD To Me
davecb5620@gmail.com
Where exactly in the article did you see FUD ..
was: Re:Why is Slashdot..
davecb5620@gmail.com
The least desirable scenario is for Microsoft to benefit/profit from/soak up any of the good-vibes associated with Linux. And any kind of "partnership" with M$ -- whether corporate or community -- would do just that. The "corporate vs. community" headline is misleading. It is not and should not be a matter of fragmenting Linux developers or potential end-users according to corporate or community motives.
Being 'corporate' is not necessarily bad for Linux. Indeed, I think the only way any Linux entity can possibly hope to compete with or gain any significant market share from M$ is by playing on the same type of field -- albeit an economic business-oriented field. I have made this analogy before, and I shall make it again: If operating systems were burgers, M$ Windows (or Vista) would be like the cheap (as in quality), easy, greasy Big Mac of OSes. Works fine for some people, but surely there's market demand for something a little more gourmet.
Don't comment on the article, instead talk about the layout ..
ws: Re:Where's the beef?
davecb5620@gmail.com
That's the conclusion I've come to.
What are the things championed here on Slashdot more than anything else? DRM and Free Software.
So why is it that I couldn't find a free solution to ripping and re-encoding DVDs? I must have tried 5 or 6 different applications with no luck - the audio and video were always out of sync. Even tried the much-ballyhooed Auto Gordian Knot with the same result. Reading the support forums is a joke. "Oh, you need to go pull it up in AutoDub or VirtualDub and adjust the sync rate". Oh, go download this and that codec to make it work.
It seems like you needed 5 or 6 independent "free" pieces of the pie to make it go, and none of them did the trick.
What did I finally do? I went and spent $80 over at Slysoft for a single software package that just worked.
A work that expires before its copyright never enters the public domain and thus enjoys eternal copyright protection.
"GPLv3 Enforcement: This Could Become a Bumpy Road"
"Working Together As a Community to Leave Behind Microsoft Media Formats"
"Separating the Weak From the Strong"
"No matter how hard we try to down play it, the patent threats and deals that are being made because of them are hurting the community - it's a simple fact. The real trick will be to see who sticks this out and who falls back to closed source alternatives, as we see Linux getting split with IP politics"
davecb5620@gmail.com
See here. I've personally never used it, only the servers variants, so I couldn't say what's new or interesting about it (aside from the fact that they've re-entered that market). It's based on 5, which unlike Vista *does* feel like an incremental step forward, so there's that.
Quack, quack.
Around here, new must be you.
which is totally what she said
First, I think that all FOSS licenses will keep us free (GPL, BSD, MIT, Apache, etc). In fact, I have made contributions to BSD-licensed software and GPL-licensed software. It doesn't matter to me what license is used provided that it doesn't contain onerous restrictions (I have no plans to do anything under the Affero Public License, for example because it is too EULA-like and I am *very glad* that the FSF saw the light and only gave a linking exception to that license rather than allowing for the worst terms of the license to be included as optional terms for the GPL v3).
Secondly, many of us contribute to FOSS because it makes business sense to do so. Simply saying "we believe in it so we can keep it going agaisnt the world" in some ways devalues the real economic and business reasons and hence shortchanges the community on an opportunity for recruitment.
FOSS is good for business. Freedom is an economic good (and more freedom may or may not be better-- there are valid business reasons for choosing either the GPL or BSD license over the other depending on what you are trying to do). THe main reason for choosing the GPL is that you may not want your competitors to take your code and run with it. The main reason for choosing the BSD license is that you may want to help foster competition in an industry that is complimentary to your products or services.
LedgerSMB: Open source Accounting/ERP
Canonical has made Linux Desktop a reality and now companies like Novell are suffering because of it.How so? Maybe for the US but not the rest of the world.Mixing GPL 2 and 3 code is not much of a problem if the project is using the "or at your option any later version" clause as most projects are. If not then you're screwed but in reality I fail to see any real cases of this happening. Note its only code, you could have GPL 2 and 3 applications running no problem side by side.
This article is all over the place what is the main point of this article again? It went from distribution divides, to licensing issues, to patent problems. arrgh! stay on topic!
so that someone can go after shoddy writers/speakers and thus bring responsibility to language?
Human languages are the same sort of beast that large open source software systems (like linux) are, only more so. To wit: a system of such complexity and scope solving a set of problems so pervasive and enormous that the only hope for inventing it in the first place, and for maintaining it, is for everyone to spend a lot of time practicing it and tinkering with it and for insights to be passed around freely. The immediate payoffs for all of this experimenting are the everyday problems of communication people need to solve; this is how we pay for all of the time everyone spends experimenting with and using language, without the need for owners. If you tried to construct a patent system to encourage people to further the development of human language (and thus establish "owners"), is there any doubt you would kill it?
Did you ever see that episode of "the Tick" where the tick runs into an alien that is fluent in all of earth's languages, except Esperanto, because "it was obvious from the start that that one was going nowhere."? The only reason an aritificial language like Esperanto can be designed at all is by cribbing off of the already existing natural languages.
This is a bit off topic but I similarly contend that the only reason most general purpose operating systems get off the ground at all is that they all had Unix to use as a crib. It took generations of graduate students tinkering with Unix to make it a useful general purpose operating system and what they achieved was cribbed off of by all modern proprietary generaly purpose OSes.
"Defiance" of GPL'd Linux already has a name. It's called BSD.
The Linux community has always been split between the Pragmatists and the Faithful, so this is nothing new. Gnu/Linux thrives in spite of this fact (or perhaps, horror or horrors, *because* of it), and that won't change anytime soon.
"My country, right or wrong; if right, to be kept right; and if wrong, to be set right." --Senator Carl Schurz (1872)
The freedom to keep the code I contribute from being proprietarized.
Using Microsoft is a bad dividing line to use. Linux is free to partner up with other commercial entities too. It just so happens at this time it's Microsoft. This must show some need somewhere, otherwise it wouldn't have started to happen. I see many posts about how this is bad, but does anybody have points about the bright side?
Isn't RHEL corporate-grade Linux? How about Ubuntu Server? I don't understand how they equate MS-indemnified to corporate-grade.
So, the community is divided on those that made a deal with Microsoft (I'll call those ones "Dead") and those without such deal (I'll call those "Other"). Well, big deal! We have yet another pair of labels to put on each other... And the "Dead" ones won't even stay long enough to make a big number.
Microsoft is trying to divide and conquer the community. The only problem is that we are already divided, and are strong that way. If that was a sucessfull strategy, Microsoft would jump directly to the "conquer" part.
Personaly, I am still amused to Microsoft behaviour... I am waiting them to show their real plan because that one is only enough to gain some time (until they are ready?) not to win.
Rethinking email
they wouldn't partner with Linux companies...
they would simply release (and they have the man power to do it EASILY) a software package for linux compatible with all versions for like $50 or whatever.. that includes all the Codecs and drivers and whatever else.. basically everything that they're partners are getting out of them... and just sell it to the community directly
----------
Trying to fix or change something only guarantees and perpetuates it's existence
So why is it that I couldn't find a free solution to ripping and re-encoding DVDs?
Because DVD ripping software is not free in the US. The DMCA makes it a crime to share that software, even to tell people where the parts are. To use that kind of software, you have to import the pieces through a non-US distribution. Because most of the English world slavishly tracks US law, the import is hard to find in English as well. It can be done but it would be much easier if the US were a free country with laws that reflected the will of the majority instead of the will of a few large media companies.
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
Don't even need to read the article.
It's obvious. People just want to argue about this - not enough Perl vs PHP, or Web 2.0 flamewars going, I guess.
The only "divide" there is in the community is between the FSF fanatics and everybody else.
Personally, I say STFU and get back to coding.
Richard Steven Hack - This sig is TOO GODDAMN SHORT TO DO ANYTHING USEFUL WITH! MORONS!
I've been reading slashdot since 1999. It seems that this used to be the place to get good tech articles, but it seems that the quality has degraded over the years. The -1 really is not nice. It's just my opinion, don't take it personal.
around cock, suck must be you.
Is it part of Mplayer?
http://www.mplayerhq.hu/design7/dload.html
A work that expires before its copyright never enters the public domain and thus enjoys eternal copyright protection.
Your post is a bit inflammatory, guess that's why it was modded down. I do agree with you in general, The Register seems to be going the same way, unfortunately (I've only been reading these sites for a couple of years too and it's noticeable!). While /. can be a bit hit and miss sometimes, there's plenty of good stuff too :p
which is totally what she said
I just hope companies realize (likely) all they need to do is recompile their code. It's something Solaris failed at with the JDS.
Nothing new here, please move along.
Welcome to the world of free software, where developers write software for their own use, without reference to pesky things like interoperability, interface standards, or usability.
:-)
Let's face it, what's holding free software back isn't some evil conspiracy by a shadowy group of corporations working behind the scenes to subvert the moral goodness of the software ecosystem. It's the apparent inability of free software developers to make their code attractive at any level other than price.
In my opinion, the essential examples of this are gimp and Ubuntu.
Why is Ubuntu popular? Not because it's Windows-y, but because it installs painlessly (without the requiring obscure command-line incantaions that a lot if distros do). You pop in the CD and answer about five questions and you wind up with a box that has all the "standard" software (a browser and some basic tools) that's on the network and ready to go. The interface is clean, it generally works in expected ways (keyboard shortcuts do what you expect, it has a "trash can", etc)
The gimp, on the other hand, is a messy pile of usability errors looking for a home. Obscure names for common tools are only the start--the odd behavior of the separate application windows is also egregious.
Free software will only become a real competitor to close software when people espousing it come to the realization the price is not the only factor.
Sorry for the rant
Interested in a Flash-based MAME front end? Visit mame.danzbb.com
That sentence makes absolutely no sense. If I license something under license x, then no one can revoke that license (but me, and yes, this includes code written under the GPL).
The actions of a third party are IRRELEVANT when talking about the freedom of code that _I_ have released. Even if they decide only to redistribute in binary form, my distribution of source is always available. Thus, even if I use a "permissive" license, no user has the right to deny _my_ source to others, making your definition ("does not grant the freedom to deny other people the same freedom") completely meaningless.
Rephrase your definition and try again.
Copyleft* trolls are funny.
*Before you respond, please don't assume that my position is for or against the GPL, it is just an argument showing the fallacy of a terrible definition.
"If Microsoft releases Windows for free we've lost."
I would not use Windows for important things, even if you paid me.
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
You can think Novell and Linspire might threaten the GPLv3, but the fact is Novell doesn't seem interested and Linspire is simply too lame to be able to do that...
Wasn't this already happeningIt is silly when you consider that the top corporate Linux vendor wants nothing to do with Microsoft, I think it is a fallacy to say that the deals are required for corporate business, perhaps for dumb business, but I really don't see much going on
Companies might love to close stuff, the thing is that unfortunately they can't, GPL ensures that once something is open it cannot be closed again, whether it is GPLv2 or GPLv3 it doesn't matter, hope this teaches the people that really use simply permissive licenses to notice why they need something stronger
Copyright infringement is "piracy" in the same way DRM is "consumer rape"
Just moments ago it was "MySQL closes its source" (which it hadn't), now a nonsensical, bipolar, I'll-let-you-know-what-you-can-decide headline from the same brainless moron.
If I spent more than 10 minutes on this site, I'd figure out how to filter out all of CmdrTaco's posts. What a lame excuse for a "journalist".
. . . .against the coming M$-Novell-Sun-(IBM?) Behemoth?
Only Ubuntu, I think.
The law is not an ass. No really.
While I'll admit that this kind of article makes for great sound bytes on *ox news. I don't agree with the premise of the article one bit. I understand the coffers of Microsoft make for deep pockets, but since they are in the middle of their 3rd flop OS (Bob, ME now Vista) they have gone heavily hardware (Which Bill Gates wrote in his book would be a sign that MS had lost it's way in the market) and design problems with their best selling (but still unprofitable) hardware the Xbox. You could very well say that MS is starting to thrash. Their puppet lost it's buns recently (SCO) and the IP that MS had so graciously purchased is now the property of Novel. I see MS using the agreements more to prevent Novel from lashing out than to really divide Linux. Xandros and Linspire are only slightly more popular than Slackware, with SuSE being the only deep water player in that camp (ala United Linux). As long as Mandriva, Red Hat, and the Ubuntu family don't follow most likely the MS play will suffer the same fate as United.
Too many people forget just exactly how impossible it is to hold onto something like Linux. The truth be known the whole of the SCO debacle has in fact made Linux stronger. Lawyers, Paralegals, News Media types etc who never would have otherwise heard of Linux now know what it is and use it. Geeks who previously could give a rats about the legal side of the GPL, suddenly have put a lot of effort into learning about it, at worse they learned the value of the legal side. GPL3 exists in many ways as a well thought out response to close the holes of GPL2.
Microsoft as a dominate force now has 4 fronts to fight on. 1. Apple, Steve just plain out markets them. 2. Linux, it may never dominate the desktop but it does rule the server room. 3. The Web. Mozilla/Firefox has enabled things to the point that Ajax like applications can be webalized to the point of being as useful as locally held apps. 4. Google, They made their mark doing what MS didn't want then proceded to begin chiping away at what the do want.
Now that Dell Lenovo HP and others are beginning to openly sell Linux laptops etc, perhaps MS is hedging their bet more than the old days of divide and conquer.
I'm sorry, I'm to tired to be witty at the moment so this message will have to do.
Practically every single story on that site, including the name of the site itself, is a subtle OSS FUD piece. Many of the "third party" comments also.
Marketers aren't stupid; they know that overt FUD'ing doesn't always work so they do more subtle forms as well.
Many people greatly underestimate the financial resources that are spent on marketing in general and astroturfing in particular. Comments by company executives are just the tip of the iceberg. M$ and their "partners" probably have hundreds if not thousands of lying astroturf sites of various kinds and large nunmbers of people paid to "comment" (lie actually) on sites like slashdot. Part of the problem is that many of those people astroturfing believe their own propaganda and are in denial about the fact that they're frauds.
Among other things they will be regularly submitting company propaganda to slashdot. Some of it's bound to get through. Remember vista? Many months of practically daily content free trash. And that was before it was even released.
---
Astroturfing "marketers" are liars, fraudulently misrepresenting company propaganda as objective third party opinion.
With the GPL you cannot:
1) Write softare that uses OpenSSL in a way as to be a derivative work of that software despite the fact that OpenSSL is Free Software by the FSF's own definition (and they even classify the license as Free).
2) create software which is derivative of GPL v 2 (only) software and Apache License v2 software even though both are Free Software licenses by the FSF's terms.
3) Create software which is derivative both of GPL software (any version) and Mozilla Public License software even though both respect the 4 basic freedoms.
The GPL is the best tool we have to release software we want to do open source without having other companies proprietize it. But it does have other restrictions which go beyond the "you can't take other people's freedom."
I would like to see a list of linking exceptions built into the GPL. It would go a long way toward actually resticting the limitations to what you say.
LedgerSMB: Open source Accounting/ERP
Linux is used in the server areas where high reliability is critical, and where components can be upgraded without taking systems down. Once the system is installed, Linux rarely needs to be rebooted except for a hardware problem. Normal software upgrades are handled on the run without rebooting, unlike WIndows. So service types in the public aren't dealing with reliability issues. They are dealing with J. Q. Public and his or her lint and cat-hair filled Windows boxen. In fact most of those installers are probably slightly less sophisticated than many of their clients, no more than a subset of J. Q. Public themselves. So, you're right that does explain quite a lot.
Don't fret folks. This is just a generic article that the MadPenguin could use with different titles, for shock value.