Everybody's watching Microsoft for FUD right now, so they've toned it down, to a more subtle approach. Get a writer, give him geek credentials, then have him act mystified by such monumental tasks as creating a boot disk.
Faint praise and subtle FUD -
-'the gui looks like Windows' (implying that Xwindows copied MS). -Yes, it did go a long time without crashing, but the writer only managed uptime of one week (without saying why, perhaps hinting that it crashed after a week). -Take a subtle shot at FSF ("When pushed they [actually] define free software as...", as though they were admitting to a compromise). -Multithreading - something it shares with WinNT (typical of MS to point to a *nix and say it's "just as good as NT", when in fact they wish to imply that NT is just as good as the *nix). -Have the so-called geek express doubt as to the future of Linux. I mean, he should know, right? - "something called a core dump"... no mention of GPF here. -It's as fast as Windows (Jesus, they must have done something wrong!) -"Linux will never do that [run old code]". No, you may need to recompile. But wait - then you can run OSS code on any version! Unlike closed source... -"Developers want to write code, not solve niggling little problems". Funny, if Linux isn't properly debugged, how come it has so many fewer bugs than ANY MS product?
Watch for more of this. People will jump all over MS for attacking Linux directly, so they'll try to pull the rug out indirectly.
NT desperately wants to be seen as 'Industrial Strength'. The way this discussion is framed leans heavily toward that.
ie... NT is as old as Unix, and an evolution of VMS (a genuinely industrial strength OS).
ie... Describing NT's architechture first, then going on to say that "Unix implements a similar approach", as though Unix were playing catch-up.
ie... slagging Linux for not making kernel-level threads available, but ony casually mentioning that NT's kernel-level interface is undocumented and unavailable (the tech. may be beyond me here - is this a valid pont?)
I think we're going to start seeing lots of articles that Take NT Seriously (TM), with no mention of stability, speed or overall appropriateness of this OS on a server. But simply taking that tone will start to leave an indelible impression on a "New generation of IT professionals".
Slashdot Mirror
$20M is generous and all, but it's equivalent to me donating about $6.50.
Gates is a cheap bastard.
This could've been written by Bill himself.
Everybody's watching Microsoft for FUD right now, so they've toned it down, to a more subtle approach. Get a writer, give him geek credentials, then have him act mystified by such monumental tasks as creating a boot disk.
Faint praise and subtle FUD -
-'the gui looks like Windows' (implying that Xwindows copied MS).
-Yes, it did go a long time without crashing, but the writer only managed uptime of one week (without saying why, perhaps hinting that it crashed after a week).
-Take a subtle shot at FSF ("When pushed they [actually] define free software as...", as though they were admitting to a compromise).
-Multithreading - something it shares with WinNT (typical of MS to point to a *nix and say it's "just as good as NT", when in fact they wish to imply that NT is just as good as the *nix).
-Have the so-called geek express doubt as to the future of Linux. I mean, he should know, right?
- "something called a core dump"... no mention of GPF here.
-It's as fast as Windows (Jesus, they must have done something wrong!)
-"Linux will never do that [run old code]". No, you may need to recompile. But wait - then you can run OSS code on any version! Unlike closed source...
-"Developers want to write code, not solve niggling little problems". Funny, if Linux isn't properly debugged, how come it has so many fewer bugs than ANY MS product?
Watch for more of this. People will jump all over MS for attacking Linux directly, so they'll try to pull the rug out indirectly.
NT desperately wants to be seen as 'Industrial Strength'. The way this discussion is framed leans heavily toward that.
ie... NT is as old as Unix, and an evolution of VMS (a genuinely industrial strength OS).
ie... Describing NT's architechture first, then going on to say that "Unix implements a similar approach", as though Unix were playing catch-up.
ie... slagging Linux for not making kernel-level threads available, but ony casually mentioning that NT's kernel-level interface is undocumented and unavailable (the tech. may be beyond me here - is this a valid pont?)
I think we're going to start seeing lots of articles that Take NT Seriously (TM), with no mention of stability, speed or overall appropriateness of this OS on a server. But simply taking that tone will start to leave an indelible impression on a "New generation of IT professionals".
Yeah, the best example I heard of was each user logging in to an NT box via WinFrame and triggering FastFind. Every time.
Eventually the machine staggers to a halt under the load of a cheesy little app.
ha ha!
1)Ignore the competitor, at least publicly.
2)Come out swinging - tell everyone how useless/bad/undesirable the cometing product is
3) Announce a product that "Has all the features only better!"
4) Release a crappy me-too copy (unless the competitor has been purchased by this time).
5) Release an improved, almost workable me-too copy. But this time Embrace and Extend (TM). Competitor begins to wither.
Interesting thing is, I don't know how MS could pull off Act 3 this time! Can't wait to see where this is going...
See Meat Beat Manifesto's 'Helter Skelter'.
It's a great application of this technology - water frozen midair, etc.
but I'm standing on my chair applauding.
I'm getting funny looks from my coworkers.