Ballmer Vs. Linux, IBM and Novell

It's not even really worth trying to refute any of the rah rah drivel in what Ballmer says but I just can't resist picking on one:

"Who will stand up and stand behind open source?" Ballmer shouted. "Microsoft provides a clear chain of responsibility. No such line exists in open source."

I can't help but think about that EULA that you must agree to before using any Microsoft product and think "What chain of responsibility?"

http://voidmain.is-a-geek.net/docs/comparing_the_gpl_to_eula...

I can't help but think of all of those Viruses and security holes that plagued all Microsoft products since the very beginning and think "what chain of responsibility?" When a new virus or security hole is discovered and exploited what would you expect Microsoft to do about it? Fix the problem right? But what Microsoft does to "fix" these types of problems lately is offer a cash reward for information leading to the capture of the person who discovered and exploited the flaw in the software. They seem to ignore doing what is necessary to actually fix the problem. It seems their "chain of responsibility" does not include taking responsibility for the shoddy software. It does include law enforcement and the BSA. That's the only "chain of responsibility" I have seen from Microsoft.

After reading the article I also can't help but think of this: http://www.ntk.net/ballmer/mirrors.html

Enjoy.

This is just one of those many times when I want nothing more than to see a Louisville Slugger connect with Ballmer's fat head.