- Site menu:
- Latest Discussions
- Latest Newswire
- Archives
- Submit Story
- Story HOWTO
- Syndicate
- E-mail Alerts
It's Time to Get Over Microsoft
|
|
|
Comments (44)
MS bashing is just a small amusing community distraction
16 earlier comments in the full thread.
Quoting:Perhaps our new response should be, "Steve who?"
Indeed.
...or m$ who?
Quoting:MicroAngst does nothing positive, may help to keep FOSS a step behind.
Then I would suppose you simply misunderstood what I was trying to say for something more dramatic and.. as you call it.. "silly".
Quoting:The only vigilance that matters is providing the best software and best solutions to the problems that people out in the world encounter.
To define "best" one needs a reference point. Best relative to what? For a free operating system to be the best solution it must be better than Windows, Mac OS X or any other proprietary OS. When Microsoft actively uses it's influence to keep people away from this better solution of ours and even further target the legality of its existence then I don't think the vigilance in terms of simply making best software is going to be enough.
The best software in the world is useless against corrupt laws, a corrupted standards process, rampant anti-customer collusion, a broken patent system, and unopposed FUD and propaganda. Most FOSS users are able to ignore microsoft and its evil antics because of the people who are doing the hard work fighting all that garbage on their behalf. It doesn't "just happen." It takes hard work and dedication.
Quoting:It doesn't "just happen." It takes hard work and dedication.
Juvenile rants, however, achive nothing positive, and probably a hell of a lot of negative. Yeah fight Microsoft, but don't resort to childish behaviour to do it. Good analysis of the FUD, that strips the FUD bare is much more effecive.
>To define "best" one needs a reference point.
I certainly hope that you bring a better mindset than that to your real world doings.
The only best that matters is the best we can do, and that is always inching upwards.
>The best software in the world is useless against corrupt laws, a corrupted standards process, rampant anti-customer collusion, a broken patent system, and unopposed FUD and propaganda.
And yet, nearly every large corporation is awash in free software. The last place I worked was moving it's bread and butter money-making application to a Linux cluster when I left. They also used libxml2 (not, unfortunately, a high point in free software), apache, MySQL, perl, gobs of other free stuff.
Somehow all those insurmountable obstacles get surmounted.
Go figure.
FOSS works. Really.
I certainly hope that you bring a better mindset than that to your real world doings.
The only best that matters is the best we can do, and that is always inching upwards.
>The best software in the world is useless against corrupt laws, a corrupted standards process, rampant anti-customer collusion, a broken patent system, and unopposed FUD and propaganda.
And yet, nearly every large corporation is awash in free software. The last place I worked was moving it's bread and butter money-making application to a Linux cluster when I left. They also used libxml2 (not, unfortunately, a high point in free software), apache, MySQL, perl, gobs of other free stuff.
Somehow all those insurmountable obstacles get surmounted.
Go figure.
FOSS works. Really.
Well tracyanne, going back to the actual article, he didn't identify any actual childish rants, or present anything to support his contention that FOSS is awash in them and is being harmed, but pretty much trashed an entire community for daring to speak up at all, and seems to think that sticking one's head in the sand is the correct behavior. This whole 'juvenile childish stuff hurts FOSS' stuff is one big fat strawman.
dino, you appear to mis-stating the issue. Do you believe that FOSS would have the acceptance it has today if everyone had kept their heads down and ignored microsoft, and ignored everyone else who was trying to kill off FOSS? Because that's what you seem to be saying. Which would mean you are wrong, and gosh knows that's so improbable I must not be reading correctly.
dino, you appear to mis-stating the issue. Do you believe that FOSS would have the acceptance it has today if everyone had kept their heads down and ignored microsoft, and ignored everyone else who was trying to kill off FOSS? Because that's what you seem to be saying. Which would mean you are wrong, and gosh knows that's so improbable I must not be reading correctly.
>Do you believe that FOSS would have the acceptance it has today if everyone had kept their heads down and ignored microsoft
Depends on what you mean by "ignore".
If you mean to pretend they aren't there and ignore the fact that most computers users define computing more or less by Microsoft software, then no. Samba is good. Wine is good. It's good that Linux desktops understand what the rest of the world has grown used to. It's good that Apache can handle some Microsoft oddities, that Firefox can support some Microsoft extenstions, that AJAX is able to build on something that started with Microsoft, etc, etc. It's good to know that businesses will be looking at Microsoft products and to maintain an awareness of what it takes to compete.
So, in that sense -- no.
OTOH -
Came you name anything at all that FOSS folk have done in terms of -- gosh, what would you call it? -- attacking/defending against the "Microsoft Menace"?
We certainly didn't bring the antitrust suit against them, or the Sun suit, or the Novell suit, or the EU action, etc, etc, etc.
Foss attacks Microsoft best by being viable, not by calling names and slinking around in a state of permanent paranoia.
That really is just silly. Heck -- more than that. It's stupid beyond belief.
Depends on what you mean by "ignore".
If you mean to pretend they aren't there and ignore the fact that most computers users define computing more or less by Microsoft software, then no. Samba is good. Wine is good. It's good that Linux desktops understand what the rest of the world has grown used to. It's good that Apache can handle some Microsoft oddities, that Firefox can support some Microsoft extenstions, that AJAX is able to build on something that started with Microsoft, etc, etc. It's good to know that businesses will be looking at Microsoft products and to maintain an awareness of what it takes to compete.
So, in that sense -- no.
OTOH -
Came you name anything at all that FOSS folk have done in terms of -- gosh, what would you call it? -- attacking/defending against the "Microsoft Menace"?
We certainly didn't bring the antitrust suit against them, or the Sun suit, or the Novell suit, or the EU action, etc, etc, etc.
Foss attacks Microsoft best by being viable, not by calling names and slinking around in a state of permanent paranoia.
That really is just silly. Heck -- more than that. It's stupid beyond belief.
[quote]This whole 'juvenile childish stuff hurts FOSS' stuff is one big fat strawman.{/quote]
Not in my experience.
Not in my experience.
Quoting:Well tracyanne, going back to the actual article, he didn't identify any actual childish rants,
No he didn't, but I did, one of those was the Bash Novell, sorry Boycott Novell, another was the SuSEBlog, the first was linked to by way of a comment about his blog, the other was linked to from the Boycott Novell blog. Boycott Novell seems to spend most of their time creating stawman Novells so they can bash them down (I wouln't mind if they published something of actual substance, but they seem to have attended the same FUD classes as as that Steve person from Microsoft), the SuSEBlog was just plain Juvenile.
Quoting:Came you name anything at all that FOSS folk have done in terms of -- gosh, what would you call it? -- attacking/defending against the "Microsoft Menace"?
Sure. They (and I'm one of them BTW) have prevented software patents from being enforceable in the EU; by means of giving attention to how BSA represented itself as Small & Medium Business; by means of the FFII website, writing to the real SMB's and asking their attention, and by means of writing letters to the EP's.
At the moment, it is the SaMBa team who's demanding other terms in the anti-trust case in the EU.
Also, it were the 'FOSS' folks that asked for Ubuntu computers at Dell, and finally they came.
>They (and I'm one of them BTW) have prevented software patents from being enforceable in the EU; by means of giving attention to how BSA represented itself
FOSS folk did that, did they? And they did it by means of anti-Microsoft rants?
I seriously doubt that.
RMS has argued against software patents for years. And you know what? He does it on the principle that software patents are a bad thing. He argues on principle, not on Microsoft.
That, my friend, is the point.
FOSS folk did that, did they? And they did it by means of anti-Microsoft rants?
I seriously doubt that.
RMS has argued against software patents for years. And you know what? He does it on the principle that software patents are a bad thing. He argues on principle, not on Microsoft.
That, my friend, is the point.
> ...he didn't identify any actual childish rants, or present anything to support his contention that FOSS is awash in them...
TC, you know as well as I do that the examples are too numerous to mention. I've run into them too many times myself.
Which doesn't mean he isn't exaggerating the problem. The fact is that the group of people he's talking about are a fairly small percentage of the FOSS community.
Which doesn't mean he isn't exaggerating the problem. The fact is that the group of people he's talking about are a fairly small percentage of the FOSS community.
Quoting:He argues on principle, not on Microsoft.
Did you read what I wrote? If Microsoft acted like it represented small and medium business, and on behalf of small and medium business (by means of the BSA) argues on principle in favour of software patents, do you think if RMS arguing against them would help anything, if _both_ small & medium AND big business, and also lawyers - which are rather over-represented in Brussels, are in favour of software patents? If the BSA is handing out ice-creams among 'EP's who are going to vote', and if a key-politician also works for a lobby organization at which Microsoft receives a discount, what else do you expect than a rant against Microsoft? That's not even speaking about Mr. McCreevy - who was first the minister of finances of Ireland and got Microsoft aboard as the main-sponsor of Irelands chairmanship of the EU - trying to push software-patents by muzzling anti-software-patent countries. Should we ignore that behaviour and just argue on principles, thereby letting the BSA continue with lying? Come on, you are kidding, aren't you?
If you read the news, you should have known by now that it actually were the folks of FFII who brought this to the attention of the public, and it was the FFII who joined the _real_ SMB's to speak out. Probably this wasn't an anti-Microsoft rant, but they had to point out what Microsoft was doing.
And what did RMS reach with all his anti-software-patent on principle arguing? Well, I can tell you: Almost nothing. The only reason the patent system in your country is changing at last is because it was nearly bringing the whole business down; not because people who are arguing on principle.
So while arguing on principle is the point from _your_ viewpoint, it hasn't been of much help if there isn't a business aliance behind it. US government isn't going to listen to RMS, nor to the FSF. However, if there's an alliance which represents few hundred _real_ SMB's, chances are the government might listen. But before you can make an alliance of the SMB's, you first have to bust the myth that BSA represents the SMB. I can tell you, and you would have known if you read about the case, a part of the companies joined the alliance because they were told what the BSA was doing. So ranting might help, and if you doubt that FOSS folks stopped those patents, you should read the backgrounds, not make wild guesses; you seem uninformed to me by the statements that you make. Saying that, I encourage you to consult the knowledge base at http://eupat.ffii.org/ to make more sensible comments in the future (though I'm sure you know more about the legal aspects of patents than I do).
BTW does the name Erik Meijer ring a bell?
Dinotrac:
Interestingly that's exactly the argument I used in my rant about a desktop oriented kernel once.. using Linus's saying that "Linux sucks" but "just sucks less" identifying it as "the best" and then pointing out that "the best" shouldn't be enough. We should be beating ourselves too.
BUT, the thing is we can keep being better and better relative to what we produced earlier and not just relative to what others are producing, but that still doesn't change the fact that these offerings of ours will be frowned upon and its legality attacked by companies like, indeed, Microsoft.
So that point doesn't really bring much to the argument for toning down on Microsoft.
I agree. It's not name calling and other such silliness that I'm defending, not even "permanent paranoia" that often displays as obsession.
What I defend is vigilance in, not just making better software (although I definitely agree that is a good complimentary strategy), but in awareness and calling things for what they are. FUD needs to be rebutted. False education needs to be countered. Attempts at strategically undermining the very *legality* of Free Software (which MS seems to be doing a lot these days) need to be recognized and acted upon (just think of MS's latest achievement in Europe).
If you think these should be ceased than I believe it is you who is naive. Right, just do good software and don't care about anything else.. everything will just magically fall into place.
You might as well write your awesome code on the prison walls... and it shall set you free.. Yeah right.
Quoting:The only best that matters is the best we can do, and that is always inching upwards.
Interestingly that's exactly the argument I used in my rant about a desktop oriented kernel once.. using Linus's saying that "Linux sucks" but "just sucks less" identifying it as "the best" and then pointing out that "the best" shouldn't be enough. We should be beating ourselves too.
BUT, the thing is we can keep being better and better relative to what we produced earlier and not just relative to what others are producing, but that still doesn't change the fact that these offerings of ours will be frowned upon and its legality attacked by companies like, indeed, Microsoft.
So that point doesn't really bring much to the argument for toning down on Microsoft.
Quoting:Foss attacks Microsoft best by being viable, not by calling names and slinking around in a state of permanent paranoia.
I agree. It's not name calling and other such silliness that I'm defending, not even "permanent paranoia" that often displays as obsession.
What I defend is vigilance in, not just making better software (although I definitely agree that is a good complimentary strategy), but in awareness and calling things for what they are. FUD needs to be rebutted. False education needs to be countered. Attempts at strategically undermining the very *legality* of Free Software (which MS seems to be doing a lot these days) need to be recognized and acted upon (just think of MS's latest achievement in Europe).
If you think these should be ceased than I believe it is you who is naive. Right, just do good software and don't care about anything else.. everything will just magically fall into place.
You might as well write your awesome code on the prison walls... and it shall set you free.. Yeah right.
Maybe it's a good thing to point out I absolutely agree MS Bashing is not going to help (much). However, sometimes 'telling the thruth' looks like MS Bashing. In the case of software-patents I pointed out, not only Microsoft was a proponent also (at least) the whole BSA (Most notably IBM is a software-patent supporter, but also Adobe, SolidWorks, AutoDesk etc.) and Philips were, so they are 'guilty' as well.
When it comes to 'distinguishing open source' however, Microsoft stands out between the other BSA members. For example, if Apple is trying to get rid of free software (and they kinda did by closing their kernel IIRC) than the reaction would be 'Steve who?', but if Microsoft tries to get rid of it, the results are more severe. It's mainly because of 'natural evolution' between of the opponents of open source that I'm blaming Microsoft more than others. On the other hand, I can't tell you how annoyed I am that both recent AutoDesk and SolidWorks products don't even run on Linux (nor on Wine) and use closed file formats.
When it comes to 'distinguishing open source' however, Microsoft stands out between the other BSA members. For example, if Apple is trying to get rid of free software (and they kinda did by closing their kernel IIRC) than the reaction would be 'Steve who?', but if Microsoft tries to get rid of it, the results are more severe. It's mainly because of 'natural evolution' between of the opponents of open source that I'm blaming Microsoft more than others. On the other hand, I can't tell you how annoyed I am that both recent AutoDesk and SolidWorks products don't even run on Linux (nor on Wine) and use closed file formats.
Oh, if you want to have a (really) good laugh (actually, it is really sad), check out the story at FFII how the BSA created an alter-ego for the FSF/FFII; they called it the 'Free Software Alliance' to make it look like the FSF/FFII have the same interests as 'software pirates':
http://eupat.ffii.org/gasnu/fsa/index.en.html
So they made it look like the FSA represents the FOSS users - that's BSA tries to represent us!!! (downright insulting). Therefore they try to make it look like all FOSS users are pirates. So BSA tried to both represent its members, Small & Medium business and the Free Software movement, all at the same time! Talking about influencing political debate, this should go into the textbooks...
Just look at the FSA's site, and you will be rolling over the floor laughing. It states: All information located on the current site is placed there for private/education purposes and may not be downloaded, viewed or used in any way or for any purpose whatsoever. The current site webmaster or organization hosting this site takes no responsibility for the way you could use information from this site. If you`re member of any anti-piracy or related group or organization you cannot enter this site and view any of site content
( http://www.freesoftwarealliance.com/ )
When was the last time you saw that message at FSF's webpage? If I'm bored, I'm going to read their forum.
ED: Now this is insulting, Free Software Alliniance offering downloads for CS2 for Windows and Kapersky anti-virus for Windows!
http://www.freesoftwarealliance.com/forum/index.php?showforu...
And the BSA tries to make it look like the FSA represents us!
http://eupat.ffii.org/gasnu/fsa/index.en.html
So they made it look like the FSA represents the FOSS users - that's BSA tries to represent us!!! (downright insulting). Therefore they try to make it look like all FOSS users are pirates. So BSA tried to both represent its members, Small & Medium business and the Free Software movement, all at the same time! Talking about influencing political debate, this should go into the textbooks...
Just look at the FSA's site, and you will be rolling over the floor laughing. It states: All information located on the current site is placed there for private/education purposes and may not be downloaded, viewed or used in any way or for any purpose whatsoever. The current site webmaster or organization hosting this site takes no responsibility for the way you could use information from this site. If you`re member of any anti-piracy or related group or organization you cannot enter this site and view any of site content
( http://www.freesoftwarealliance.com/ )
When was the last time you saw that message at FSF's webpage? If I'm bored, I'm going to read their forum.
ED: Now this is insulting, Free Software Alliniance offering downloads for CS2 for Windows and Kapersky anti-virus for Windows!
http://www.freesoftwarealliance.com/forum/index.php?showforu...
And the BSA tries to make it look like the FSA represents us!
> However, sometimes 'telling the thruth' looks like MS Bashing.
No, it doesn't, except as viewed through Redmond-centric eyes.
Let's see if we can draw a finer line here:
1. When Microsoft tried to pervert the ISO process in favor of OOXML, they were rightly called on the carpet. It is not bashing to oppose wrong action, and Microsoft acted in a wrong way.
2. When Microsoft submitted licenses to the OSF for acceptance/certification/whatever they call it, it was not bashing to seek changes to the licenses in order to make them comply with OSF standards. However, there were lots of "No! Never! No way! Don't let those bastards in house!" statements to be found around the Net. Even Eric Raymond struggled with personal angst on the issue. Those would qualify as Microsoft bashing, although I'm not sure that it was inappropriate bashing in context of the ISO debacle.
3. It was not bashing to call Microsoft and Novell on the carpet for finding a way to grant a form of patent "protection" without violating the GPL. The apoplexy to follow, however, pretty much is bashing when you consider that nobody broke the law and nobody violated a license. Worse, everybody seems to excuse the drafters for writing a license that permits people to do something they want to forbid. A law firm who did that would have to worry about an action for malpractice.
4. It is not bashing to call the BSA a shake-down operation for Microsoft. It is.
In short, when people do bad things it is fair to call them on it. When you need to fight the bad things they do, it is ok to fight them.
But -- GEE WHIZ!!!!!!! -- Some people out there really need to get a life.
No, it doesn't, except as viewed through Redmond-centric eyes.
Let's see if we can draw a finer line here:
1. When Microsoft tried to pervert the ISO process in favor of OOXML, they were rightly called on the carpet. It is not bashing to oppose wrong action, and Microsoft acted in a wrong way.
2. When Microsoft submitted licenses to the OSF for acceptance/certification/whatever they call it, it was not bashing to seek changes to the licenses in order to make them comply with OSF standards. However, there were lots of "No! Never! No way! Don't let those bastards in house!" statements to be found around the Net. Even Eric Raymond struggled with personal angst on the issue. Those would qualify as Microsoft bashing, although I'm not sure that it was inappropriate bashing in context of the ISO debacle.
3. It was not bashing to call Microsoft and Novell on the carpet for finding a way to grant a form of patent "protection" without violating the GPL. The apoplexy to follow, however, pretty much is bashing when you consider that nobody broke the law and nobody violated a license. Worse, everybody seems to excuse the drafters for writing a license that permits people to do something they want to forbid. A law firm who did that would have to worry about an action for malpractice.
4. It is not bashing to call the BSA a shake-down operation for Microsoft. It is.
In short, when people do bad things it is fair to call them on it. When you need to fight the bad things they do, it is ok to fight them.
But -- GEE WHIZ!!!!!!! -- Some people out there really need to get a life.
Actually, seems to be quite the reverse.
From the hard-htting HackFUD piece 'InformationWeek Lets Microsoft’s Bill Hilf Try To Scare You.. Yeah. Right.' at http://hackfud.net/2007/11/18/informationweek-lets-microsoft... MS-HilfBilly's FUD/IP-threat attacks on FOSS clearly demonstrate that
MS SURE AINT GETTIN' OVER FOSS ANYTIME SOON, NO WAY!!
( this HackFUD piece also posted to LXer courtesy of itron at http://lxer.com/module/newswire/view/96110/index.html )
( this HackFUD piece also posted to LXer courtesy of itron at http://lxer.com/module/newswire/view/96110/index.html )
He has a few very good points, the constant references to Windoze and M$ and Micro$oft are really annoying, and such references don't have anything but a negative impact where it matters. It simply sounds/looks juvenile, and contributes nothing useful to the debate.
Sites like Boycott Novell and the even more childish SuSEBlog merely reinforce the stereotytpe that the Linux FOSS community are a bunch of obsessive childish freaks.
Sites like Boycott Novell and the even more childish SuSEBlog merely reinforce the stereotytpe that the Linux FOSS community are a bunch of obsessive childish freaks.
Quoting:He has a few very good points, the constant references to Windoze and M$ and Micro$oft are really annoying, and such references don't have anything but a negative impact where it matters.Nope, not true. AAMOF, KC has MORE than a "few good points"....... strong points against MS's FUD tactics mentioned from top to bottom throughout the ENTIRE HackFUD piece. All of these strong points are made WITHOUT(!) a single mention of the "Windoze and M$ and Micro$oft" terms that carry such a supposedly "negative impact where it matters". You should re-read this HackFUD piece, also currently found directly at http://hackfud.net/
Quoting:Sites like Boycott Novell and the even more childish SuSEBlog merely reinforce the stereotytpe that the Linux FOSS community are a bunch of obsessive childish freaks.Why at all stop there with "bunch of obsessive childish freaks" ?? Similar and supposedly more "neutral" voices within the grander debate(s) regarding Proprietary Software vs FOSS, somehow manage to CONTINUE stereotyping even less-extreme Linux FOSS supporters on LXer as "fanbois", "fanatics", "radical/reactionary zealots", "hippies", "Communists", ... etcetera, etcetera.
Tuxchick recently commented at http://lxer.com/module/forums/t/26358/
Quoting:The best software in the world is useless against corrupt laws, a corrupted standards process, rampant anti-customer collusion, a broken patent system, and unopposed FUD and propaganda. Most FOSS users are able to ignore microsoft and its evil antics because of the people who are doing the hard work fighting all that garbage on their behalf. It doesn't "just happen." It takes hard work and dedication.Your so-called "bunch of obsessive childish freaks" may very well consist of some of those hard-working and dedicated "people who are doing the hard work" on YOUR behalf "fighting all that garbage [doled out by MS]".
Quoting:You should re-read this HackFUD piece
I thought the HackFUD peice was very well written, it did exactly what I would have expected, it analysed the FUD and stripped it bare without once slipping in to the childish or juvenile.
Boycott Novell and SuSEBLOG did exactly what I'm complaining about.
Quoting:Your so-called "bunch of obsessive childish freaks" may very well consist of some of those hard-working and dedicated "people who are doing the hard work" on YOUR behalf "fighting all that garbage [doled out by MS]".
The "bunch of obsessive childish freaks" are doing nothing on my behalf, they are simply making it harder for me to promote Linux and FOSS in a Business owned by someone who thinks that if you don't pay for it and get an encypted key so you can use it, you don't have real software. In fact it's those "obsessive childish freaks" that the business owner refers to every time the subject of Free Software comes up.
Quoting: In fact it's those "obsessive childish freaks" that the business owner refers to every time the subject of Free Software comes up.Oh come on, "the business owner" is not bothered by the torrents of nonsense and lies that flood from Redmond on a daily basis, or the childish behavior of its president and CEO, or their daily ration of dirty deeds? Get a grip, folks, a few foamy FOSS fanbois are not the problem.
>"the business owner" is not bothered by
The business owner is bothered by stuff that doesn't work, costs that go out of control, etc. I've known lots of business folk -- owners, executives, just plain old managers -- who are bothered by Microsoft's perpetual push to upgrade, to raise prices, to further restrict licenses, etc.
Interestingly, I don't think they much listen to the Microsoft blather any more. Too many broken promises over too many years. Break my heart.
The business owner is bothered by stuff that doesn't work, costs that go out of control, etc. I've known lots of business folk -- owners, executives, just plain old managers -- who are bothered by Microsoft's perpetual push to upgrade, to raise prices, to further restrict licenses, etc.
Interestingly, I don't think they much listen to the Microsoft blather any more. Too many broken promises over too many years. Break my heart.
Quoting:In fact it's those "obsessive childish freaks" that the business owner refers to every time the subject of Free Software comes up.To build upon tuxchick's above response, DOUBLE nonsense on this! Again, refer to KC's HackFUD piece on HilfBilly's MS-FUD:
Quoting:Hilf: We just had a bunch of our global account managers in with us, people who handle our super big customers, and they said, these customers don’t even know who Richard Stallman is, they don’t even care. They’ve chosen Linux or Apache or open source in general because of a few simple reasons: either price, or functionality, they want a more modular system or they want something that has a smaller footprint, there are certain needs that they have that are satisfied by that type of software. Turning to the product that we’re releasing, we said what do people really like about Linux servers, what do they really like about Unix servers? They like having a modular system that has a small footprint. They like having a great command line environment that allows a power user to do a lot of scripting and command line things that are not UI-based. That’s what we built [Windows Server 2008] with Server Core and PowerShell and new technologies that support PHP better in IIS 7 [Internet Information Services]. For us, it’s not a religion, there’s literally feature requests from customers showing up in some of our competitive products, we said great, people want this stuff.HilfBilly indirectly accusing those not with MS as part of a "religion" eh?? Oh boy! KC commentary on this right here
Quoting:They’ve “chosen Linux or Apache or open source in general” because of quite a few, varied reasons, and it’s not a case of “price”, OR “functionality”, either. Other reasons for choosing Apache might to do with it being a truly Open Source project, for example. Can anyone see the code for IIS and change that code to their own needs? Oh, and for the vast majority of people, FOSS isn’t a religion either.Right on! And without name-calling too. Neiither ""obsessive childish freaks" nor those who consider FOSS as a religion; varied and REAL non-anti-MS reasons for adopting FOSS instead !!!
As a related aside, LXer has a Latest Newswire posting 'Let Emacs help you out with assistance from the editor', http://lxer.com/module/newswire/view/96170/index.html courtesy of solrac. The very creator of GNU emacs, Richard Stallman, has certainly been referred to in similarly negative terms as an "obsessive childish freak" in the past.
Quoting:Oh come on, "the business owner" is not bothered by the torrents of nonsense and lies that flood from Redmond on a daily basis, or the childish behavior of its president and CEO, or their daily ration of dirty deeds?
Some Business owners (this one in particular) believe that Microsoft can do no wrong, and the Rumours of that person from redmond throwing chairs is just that a rumour put about by "obsessive childish freaks", with too much time on their hands. That the Monkey Boy story is just some "obsessive childish freaks" taking a simple rev up troops bit of tom foolery way out of context and throwing it all over the web. That if you don't have to pay for it it must be as valuable as it costs - that you get what you pay for. which is why said Business owner will scour the web for a proprietary application, that he has to pay a license fee for, to get an encrypted key, so he can use it, in order to do something I've already done using the GIMP.
Post a comment
A free account is needed to post. Write your comment here first: your text is kept in this browser while you sign up or log in, and is waiting for you when you come back.
Your message:Markdown: **bold**, *italic*, [text](https://link), - lists, > quotes, $x^2$ for math. Formatting help
Sign up and post (it is free) or Log in and post
This silly talk reminds me of a story ESR used to tell. Wish I could remember the details, but it involved reverse-engineering of secrets, either trade or military.
At any rate, in the course of the discussion, a member of the secret-holding organization said they didn't really mind the reverse engineering because technology was moving so quickly, that it guaranteed that the copiers would always be one step behind.
How this relates to FOSS?
The only vigilance that matters is providing the best software and best solutions to the problems that people out in the world encounter. MicroAngst does nothing positive, may help to keep FOSS a step behind.