1. You err because:
Linux is not in competition with Microsoft (M$). Some Linux advocates might have that perception, but there is no competition. M$ cannot stifle Linux. There are more people worldwide working on Linux every day and improving it than who work in all of M$. Linux gets better and better faster and faster. M$ is experiencing fear, uncertainty and doubt first hand, and that is what they are trying to associate with Linux in this ad. I find it amusing when I read reports about Linux marketshare vs M$ because Linux does not have a "marketshare." RedHat or Mandrake might, but Linux itself does not. M$ can malign it and make it out to be a lessor alternative in any way they like, but then cannot make it go away and they cannot keep it from becoming better. I think it typical that the M$ marketing response would be to suggest unsubstantiated hypotheses as a detterent to using free Linux (Forks!-UNIX forked, but its various versions are still in wide use) as opposed to buying in to the M$ lie and being caught in an upgrade/patch-bait-and-switch-buy-the-new-version cycle. I would hope that the various Linux distributors would print a similar ad pointing out the built-in obselesence of M$ OS's as demonstrated by the use of "model" years in the naming schemes. The gist: LINUX GETS BETTER AND BETTER, M$ CANNOT STOP IT.
2. You err because:
"Let's reaffirm our love by sabatoging the 2.4 kernel"
Unproductive thought! Let's try to hurt something you purport to love by sabotaging it. How are you going to do that anyway. Why would that cross your mind? If there are bugs, clean them up and move on.
3. You err because:
"Linux needs Microsoft the way Laverne needs Shirley."
Linux and Open Source will proceed right on as they have since before M$ and the attendant and pandering media discovered them. M$ should proceeed in whatever manner they deem best to their stockholders. Linux development is in no way tied to or need be responsive to that. The whole principle is to maintain and improve an OS that is freely available to anyone who would like to use it. No inherent competition there. I hope Bill Gates has tried it himself ("Uh, well they don't have the "Abort, Retry, Ignore" feature, do they...).
4. You err because:
You seem to tie Linux's general acceptance and/or its "marketshare" in comparison with M$'s with its success. Your whole perception of what Linux represents is in error. Linux is not about being on all desktops or stealing "marketshare" from other OS's. Linux is about being a freely available OS that is continually improving by contributions from its user community. If this is perceived as a threat by those who have business to lose (M$, et al) because of it, all I can suggest to them (if they care) is that they step up their own efforts (Perhaps they should try to mimic Apple's success with the iMac line by selling Windows in hip-colored boxes) to improve their product. Linux makes stride after stride irrespective of "marketshare", and I don't expect that trend to stop.
5. I err because:
I write this on a Windows machine. M$ has about 1/3 of my "marketshare" due to where I work. I intend to do everything I can to remedy that in a positive way.
Note: I appreciate your views and applaud your Linux/OS advocacy, but we're not talking religion here (or are we?)...
Slashdot Mirror
1. You err because: Linux is not in competition with Microsoft (M$). Some Linux advocates might have that perception, but there is no competition. M$ cannot stifle Linux. There are more people worldwide working on Linux every day and improving it than who work in all of M$. Linux gets better and better faster and faster. M$ is experiencing fear, uncertainty and doubt first hand, and that is what they are trying to associate with Linux in this ad. I find it amusing when I read reports about Linux marketshare vs M$ because Linux does not have a "marketshare." RedHat or Mandrake might, but Linux itself does not. M$ can malign it and make it out to be a lessor alternative in any way they like, but then cannot make it go away and they cannot keep it from becoming better. I think it typical that the M$ marketing response would be to suggest unsubstantiated hypotheses as a detterent to using free Linux (Forks!-UNIX forked, but its various versions are still in wide use) as opposed to buying in to the M$ lie and being caught in an upgrade/patch-bait-and-switch-buy-the-new-version cycle. I would hope that the various Linux distributors would print a similar ad pointing out the built-in obselesence of M$ OS's as demonstrated by the use of "model" years in the naming schemes. The gist: LINUX GETS BETTER AND BETTER, M$ CANNOT STOP IT. 2. You err because: "Let's reaffirm our love by sabatoging the 2.4 kernel" Unproductive thought! Let's try to hurt something you purport to love by sabotaging it. How are you going to do that anyway. Why would that cross your mind? If there are bugs, clean them up and move on. 3. You err because: "Linux needs Microsoft the way Laverne needs Shirley." Linux and Open Source will proceed right on as they have since before M$ and the attendant and pandering media discovered them. M$ should proceeed in whatever manner they deem best to their stockholders. Linux development is in no way tied to or need be responsive to that. The whole principle is to maintain and improve an OS that is freely available to anyone who would like to use it. No inherent competition there. I hope Bill Gates has tried it himself ("Uh, well they don't have the "Abort, Retry, Ignore" feature, do they...). 4. You err because: You seem to tie Linux's general acceptance and/or its "marketshare" in comparison with M$'s with its success. Your whole perception of what Linux represents is in error. Linux is not about being on all desktops or stealing "marketshare" from other OS's. Linux is about being a freely available OS that is continually improving by contributions from its user community. If this is perceived as a threat by those who have business to lose (M$, et al) because of it, all I can suggest to them (if they care) is that they step up their own efforts (Perhaps they should try to mimic Apple's success with the iMac line by selling Windows in hip-colored boxes) to improve their product. Linux makes stride after stride irrespective of "marketshare", and I don't expect that trend to stop. 5. I err because: I write this on a Windows machine. M$ has about 1/3 of my "marketshare" due to where I work. I intend to do everything I can to remedy that in a positive way. Note: I appreciate your views and applaud your Linux/OS advocacy, but we're not talking religion here (or are we?)...