Verily I say unto thee, that Doug Mentohl spake thusly:
> Rob, if OSS was so defective, then why is someone expending
> considerable effort in trashing it in the Media.
Why you even bother reading his trash, I have no idea. He's Microsoft's
most infamous spin doctor, and litters his arguments with straw men and
false dichotomies.
> 'I started writing about Linux not because I thought it interesting,
> fascinating, or even because I liked to code (I don't)'
>
> No, you started to write about Linux when someone started paying you
> large sums of mony to lie in print.
Exactly.
,----
| I started writing about Linux because I was told I couldn't and the
| more people told me I couldn't, and particularly when they said "or
| else," the more the Linux dirty laundry became attractive to me.
`----
Everyone has Dirty laundry, and as Enderle should know, Microsoft has
more than most:
http://antitrust.slated.org
He's inventing a scenario where none exists. There are no conspiracies
in Linux. He doesn't even cite any examples to support his "conspiracy"
FUD. I find it hilarious that Enderle tries to spin the whole
"conspiracy" issue around to point at Linux, since the entirely Open
and Free process of developing FOSS is about the most transparent
process in the industry. The total opposite is true of proprietary
software development.
,----
| One: Is Linux a Myth?
`----
That whole section is nothing but meaningless waffle, intended to make
you think that there must surely be a serious point, but just missed
it; the ultimate misdirection trick; i.e. the windbag tactic.
The reason that Linux can be anything it wants, in order to "win a
deal", is because it is flexible enough to do so. Enderle presents
this as though it were a detriment, not an advantage, as though this
is somehow a confidence trick. The fact that "Linux" is not a company
is the nature of FOSS, not some imaginary diversionary tactic.
,----
| Two: Is Linux Secure?
`----
The first three paragraphs of his tripe in that section, seems to be a
suggestion that Linux is insecure because of the notion of "security
through obscurity", a particularly narrow minded, and often ridiculed
myth, as I'm sure Ewik will happily confirm.
,----
| Linux is surrounded by people who generally don't even use real names
| and often "exaggerate" what they do for a living. Wonder over on
| Groklaw and you'll see a lot of legal experts, a few months back I
| corresponded with one. His legal "expertise" came for a class on
| contracts, and I'm not kidding, he took in high school. PJ, the woman
| who allegedly heads up this legal resource, is currently ducking
| service from SCO and lord knows what she is covering up (and I don't
| think it is that she works for IBM; they aren't that stupid).
`----
Witness the professionalism of a man convinced of his own superiority,
as he dives headlong into the gutter with Ad Hominem attacks, that not
only completely undermines what little there is left of his integrity,
but is also so utterly irrelevant to the heading topic (let me remind
you this is was supposed to be about *security*) that it is simply
laughable.
The rest of this section is frankly just ill-informed lies and
paranoia. Having worked on package submissions for a well known
community Linux distro, I can tell you that Enderle is talking utter
nonsense if he thinks contributors to the core of GNU/Linux are
allowed to check-in to CVS or repo trees anonymously. The only
anonymous participation is in community channels such as Blogs and
forums, and most of that anonymity is mainly necessary to guard
against spam, something Windows evangelists should be familiar with,
since it is primarily their platform that facilitates the vast global
spam problem we have today, thanks to compromised Windows zombies. If
he's going to criticise "anonymity", he should take a long hard look
at the so-called Microsoft Munchkins who are paid to infiltrate every
corner of the Free world, to poison it with pro-Widows
indoctrination. What next? Is he going to start criticising the
individual's right to privacy, or the principle of Net Neutrality? Why
stop there, he should take his supremacist ideals to the ultimate
conclusion, and just intern everyone who doesn't blindly subscribe to
his Red-Neck agenda, in concentration camps.
,---
| Three: Do Communes Work?'
`---
I can see Enderle tried desperately not to use the word "Commie" in
this section, which is by-and-large, just stereotypical Red-Neck
propaganda.
Yes, I am painfully aware of his capitalist imperialist persuasion,
and no, the gulf of our opinions will probably never be bridged. I
happen to enjoy Freedom, apparently others enjoy slavery. Go figure.
,---
| Four: Is Linux Pro-Developer, or Pro-You?
`---
The classic false dichotomy; that personal freedom, and innovation
leading to financial success, are mutually exclusive propositions.
,----
| Maybe if you live in a Third World country and like to work for
| peanuts. Linux throws off very little cash
`----
Maybe Enderle should consider a career change to stockbroker, because
he seems to have an unhealthy obsession with money, and a badly
twisted perspective of how it should be acquired. But then he was an
analyst, so he's bound to have a very narrow minded outlook, hasn't
he?
The first and most important consideration in software development
should be technical excellence. Let marketing strategists decide what
props they want to use to hoard cash, and leave the developers to
write software.
I particularly enjoyed the all-too predictable "car analogy". I think
Enderle is running out of clichÃs; at any minute I expect him to start
screaming "un-American".
He criticises the FOSS development model, because it depends too
heavily on services, but conveniently ignores the fact that Microsoft,
a company probably more reliant on proprietary licensing than any
other, is desperately trying to break into that service sector, in
anticipation of the inevitable death of the shrink-wrapped software
industry. Maybe Enderle should take a queue from his paymasters,
unless he thinks he knows something Microsoft does not.
The rest of that section is little more than supposition and
speculation, based on a very loosely defined axioms, and overall, I
feel, the false attribution of the down-turned market to something
specifically to do with Linux.
Equally, it could be argued that the down-turn is as a result of many
true IT experts leaving the industry, in disgust at having to support
Microsoft's closed standards for broken software. Here's a good
citation of what I'm talking about:
.----
| In addition to the outsourcing of jobs, let's not forget the
| considerable number of people (outside of Microsoft) who left the
| computer field because they found it too much of an insult to their
| intelligence to be spending all their time supporting that which is
| always and by far the weakest link in any computer infrastructure --
| Microsoft. I've watched over two decades the inverse relationship
| between prestigious jobs in the computer field vs. the growth of
| Microsoft such that computer science now ranks near the bottom of the
| academic desires of college students. And who can blame them,
| working in computers has become synonymous with supporting Microsoft
| and one can find a more rewarding and respectable career as janitor
| at the local sewage & wastewater treatment plant.
`----
- Mike <mike@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Enderle places much "value" in proprietary solutions, but never once
explains in detail *why* he thinks FOSS solutions could not be just as
valuable, both in financial, and more importantly, in sociological
terms. More FUD and hyperbole.
.----
| In any case, if we accept (and OSF{sic} in particular would not agree
| to this) that financial success is the primary measure of a
| successful platform, Linux has done very poorly historically against
| the alternatives, and both UNIX and mainframes seem to be coming back
| as a result.
|
| By the way, Google is a really good example of how to use Linux and
| make tons of money doing so, so I'm not saying it is anti-business,
| as I mentioned above; it is FSF that appears doing that. I'm not sure
| Linux is pro-anything, though it is clearly positioned most often
| against Microsoft.
`----
I must say, it is very generous of Enderle to make such a charitable
concession towards Google's success with Linux solutions. Can we take
it then that this is an admission that his entire article is nothing
but ill-conceived cerebral flatulence?
My dissent is not with the fundamental principle of "making money",
but rather with the underhand "Dirty Tricks" used to get it, at the
expense of other, considerably more worthy endeavours. In particular,
I take exception to the fallacy that the process should be dependant
on "secrets", "boiler-room deals", patents, the inhibition of civil
rights, and legal frameworks designed by (and lobbied for) fat-cat
industrialists, which are then undemocratically thrust onto the
taxpayers.
.----
| the grass may be greener, but it may be wise to also watch where you
| step. (I have three dogs, and they suggested I mention this).
`----
That's good advice, he should take it, especially as he seems to have
a poor sense of direction, and appears to be headed straight towards a
field of rather anorexic looking (cash) cows.
.----
| Is Linux is "Open"?
|
| How can anything be "Open" if honest discussion isn't allowed?
`----
More FUD. Criticism is not censorship, so the word "allowed" is pure
hyperbole.
.----
| Some of the mail has been rather nasty
`----
If he wants to see some *really* nasty Email, he should read some of
the evidence presented in the "Comes Vs Microsoft" case. It kind of
puts his little "hate mail" problem into perspective.
.----
| As an analyst I actually had to quit my job to have the same freedom
| of speech with Linux. According to The Register, there is actually
| some kind of a strike team that comes after me every time I say
| something positive on Microsoft or negative on Linux.
`----
Is this anything like the "strike team" that comes after Linux
advocates whenever they make an appearance outside of their respective
communities? Witness the recent events on DellIdeaStorm. Here we have,
essentially, a customer feedback site, in the form of a Blog, where
there are over 100,000 votes for pre-installed Linux boxes from
Dell. And sure enough, the Munchkins came crawling out from under
their rocks to criticise Linux, even though their criticism was
irrelevant. The "vote" thread for Linux is not an "advocacy" forum, it
is a request from customers. This is not an intellectual attack on
Microsoft or Windows, or any other negative behaviour, it is purely a
genuine and positive appeal from customers for Dell to give them what
they want. And yet the Munchkins came dutifully marching in,
regardless.
Certainly the responses to these "Trolls" were equally out of place (I
contributed, as you probably suspected), but although Microsoft
supporters certainly have the right to voice their support of Windows,
they most certainly do not have the right to dictate to others that
they cannot have Linux. That's why they call it "Freedom of Choice",
something Microsoft would dearly love to eliminate, and will succeed
in eliminating unless people like me speak out against them and people
like Enderle.
.----
| And I'm not alone: Laura DiDio at Yankee gets sexual harassed, and
| Dan Lyons over at Forbes is attacked regularly, although he does have
| supporters as well.
`----
I don't condone sexual harassment, ever, but someone as gormless as
DiDio deserves all the criticism she gets. As for Lyons, he is just
another Trash Piece hack not worthy of anyone's attention. Enderle
certainly has identified with his own kind, hasn't he? The three of
them are like three rotten peas in a rather mangy pod.
.----
| Let's take indemnification
`----
Yes let's.
Let's look at how Ballmer assures indemnification against Novell
customers for IP infringements that don't even exist.
If America's draconian and badly broken software patent system was not
as out of sync with the ideals of the rest of the planet, maybe this
"need" for indemnification wouldn't be anywhere near as urgent.
.----
| There are at least two sides to everything. What I've observed with
| OSS in general and Linux in particular (and this applies to Apple as
| well) is there is a distinct effort to make sure only the popular
| side can speak.
`----
But according to the Window advocates, Windows is the most "popular
side" since it controls greater than 90% of the market.
Therefore, I must thank Enderle for his admission that Microsoft and
their supporters attempt to inhibit the freedoms of FOSS and Linux
advocates.
.----
| I think the thing that bothers me the most about Linux is IT
| advocacy. IT shouldn't be an advocate of any product, because it
| needs to make determinations between them. Whether it is Microsoft,
| Apple, or Linux, once IT takes a side it is no longer capable of
| properly assessing a solution based on the needs of the business. And
| that is the job.
`----
I agree that specific problems should be met with specific solutions,
based purely on technical merit, and not swayed by political opinion,
such as Enderle's article, for example. In fact it is primarily
Linux's technical merit that encourages me to advocate it's use over,
say, Vista. But then it's probably unfair of me to take pot shots at
Vista, since it's pretty much a lame duck, as most of the Blogosphere
confirms.
.----
| When only one side is heard, you don't have "Open," and you sure as
| heck don't have "Free" as in Freedom, which, to me is more important
| than "Free" as in "Free Beer." If, to get "Free" Software, we give up
| "Free" Speech the cost, at least to me, is way the heck too high.
`----
I agree, but this is reverse logic. Who is inhibiting whom here; the
advocates of FOSS, Linux, and Open Standards; or the corrupt
monopolists sitting on a tonne of marketing cash?
.----
| Wrapping Up:
|
| I stopped at 5 things but there are clearly more we could chat about.
`----
Yes, there's a large number of issues that Enderle carefully
circumvented, such as the gross technical inadequacies of Windows, and
Vista in particular.
He also failed to touch on the issue of how the entertainment industry
is manipulating the software industry into capitulating to their
draconian demands, and thus enslaving the public in their civil
rights-violating policies. And that apparently Microsoft is eagerly
helping them to commit this violation, even at the expense of
functionality within it's own Operating System.
.----
| Like why don't we talk about Apple vs. Linux?"
`----
Why don't we talk about Steve Jobs appealing for an end to DRM,
something that would finally kill off the Windows Media format once
and for all (since that seems to be its only attraction to content
providers).
.----
| Does the Free Software Foundation own Linux? They appear to be
| trying to rename it.
`----
I take it that quip is aimed at the fact that RMS asks people to
credit GNU software to GNU, rather than to someone else.
How about we call "Windows NT" (and all subsequent derivatives) "VMS"?
I mean that is essentially what it is, right?
How about we stick a notice on every Windows retail box, and a screen
during the Windows install, that reads "Windows Networking: brought to
you by the Regents of the University of California"?
FOSS is Free, not plagiaristic, unlike the vast majority of the
Microsoft portfolio.
.----
| Who's side is Steve Ballmer or Richard Stallman on? (I would argue
| it is Stallman and the GPL 3.0 do more to kill Linux than anthing
| Microsoft could conceive of
`----
I'm sure Torvalds would agree, since he seems so dead set against
protecting his freedom, and allowing the Tivoisation of his work.
I'm equally sure that a sufficient proportion of the of *GNU*
developer base will embrace GPLv3 to protect GNU/Linux from predatory
behaviour, and ultimately convince the strays to join the rest of the
community.
.----
| and that Ballmer's statements generally benefit, though
| unintentionally, Linux).
`----
He's not much of a role model, is he? Unless you're so hung up
amassing wealth at the expense of your integrity, that you're prepared
to stab everyone in the back, and then jump around on stage, whooping
and sweating all over everyone, in celebration of your misdeeds.
.----
| When I was growing up a popular T-Shirt Slogan was "Question
| Authority." Take a look around, what are people afraid to ask
| questions about, what isn't being discussed that should be? I
| believe in preventing mistakes, not constantly finding creative
| ways to blame someone else.
`----
More reverse logic. *Who* exactly is the "authority" figure here? Is
it the corrupt forces of the proprietary world, or the free thinkers?
.----
|Ask questions, get answers.
`----
I keep asking, but all I get is spin and lies.
> http://www.technewsworld.com/story/31899.html
--
K.
http://slated.org - Slated, Rated & Blogged
.----
| "Future archaeologists will be able to identify a 'Vista Upgrade
| Layer' when they go through our landfill sites" - Sian Berry, the
| Green Party.
`----
Fedora Core release 5 (Bordeaux) on sky, running kernel 2.6.19-1.2288.fc5
06:15:20 up 19 days, 17:40, 3 users, load average: 0.96, 1.04, 1.13
|
|
