Slashdot Mirror
Open Source Complaint Against IBM Gets Support
FlorianMueller writes "ZDNet blogger Dana Blankenhorn reports that '[t]he efforts by open source TurboHercules to break IBM's mainframe monopoly through the European Commission got some proprietary support this week when NEON Enterprise Software LLC of Austin, Texas, filed an EU complaint alongside a US antitrust lawsuit.' NEON's founder co-founded BMC, so the company is well-funded for this fight. In comments given to the IDG News Service, IBM claims that NEON's product, which saves mainframe customers money by optimizing the use of coprocessors, 'offers no innovation,' and accuses the 'copycat' of violating IBM's intellectual property. That's basically what IBM also said about the Hercules emulator. The European Commission is expected to take a decision on an investigation in a matter of months. Since IBM lobbies the EC over the Open Document Format, it's now accused of double standards."
Wow PJ compared to Rush Limbaugh!
I pointed out a difference. I didn't say they had anything in common. In fact, I right now can't think of anything they have in common. I meant to point out about Rush that there can be no doubt that the only ones on whom he's dependent are the people who tune in to his show, but there's no way that he's under the control of anyone he reports on. I pointed out the fact that Rush demonstrates independence because he doesn't always agree with the Republican Party.
Why is this example important? Because political parties, like large corporations, take positions on a large number of issues and have a diversity of interests. So it's normal that at some point someone will disagree, such as Rush who didn't want McCain to be nominated, and he disagreed with the GOP on many other things.
So if someone over the course of so many years always supports whatever a particular large company (IBM) does, it's normal that people wonder how this is possible. There are different possible explanations, not just one that many consider obvious. But no matter what the reason is, it means that Groklaw is biased propaganda and makes gross misrepresentations all the time, and doesn't "dig for truth" as it claims.
By contrast, I have been politically active since 2004 (the year I founded the NoSoftwarePatents campaign) and I've criticized about every major company in the industry over the years. PJ says she's against software patents, which is doubtful because she encouraged IBM to sue the pants off TurboHercules. Even if it was true, it would just mean a disagreement on the desirability of software patents but she has so far applauded every single thing - every little thing, every big thing - IBM has done that's relevant to Groklaw's topics. Every IBM-sponsored initiative gets glorified by Groklaw, even some that are schemes to mislead the community, to lull it into a false sense of security concerning software patents and to discourage it from taking real action against them.
There are people who think as you do, and support you. We are just not so vocal as the feeble minded /.ers here.
Thanks! I know the difference between irritable hordes and silent, reasonable majorities. But I don't think one can generalize some of this for all slashdotters. We're talking about a Groklaw crowd that uses its moderator rights etc. here on slashdot to suppress the truth that Groklaw claims to be digging for. Groklaw sent its crowd over by way of a link in its news pick column. And some of the postings look a lot like written by people who if they're not IBM employees are at least very close to IBM and very much informed.