Great article
|
| Author | Content |
|---|---|
| mdl Oct 25, 2005 8:01 AM EDT |
Dvorak practices the world's oldest profession.....and I don't mean journalism. |
| tuxchick Oct 25, 2005 9:12 AM EDT |
woa dude! Awesome rant. Applause! mdl- awesome coda to an awesome rant. :) I think it's worth continuing to remind folks that adhering to a Stalinist-type purity is unhelpful, even destructive. (I still like dino's "Friars of Freedom.") Bitching at people like Brian Proffitt, or whoever fails the daily purity test, is not what FOSS is about. |
| tadelste Oct 25, 2005 10:28 AM EDT |
Great read. Now, I remember why I wanted to be an editor-in-chief. I get to read the great stuff before anyone else. :) |
| mmelchert Oct 25, 2005 11:02 AM EDT |
Yesss, RantMode==1 is back, I already enjoyed your writings while you were at LT: well done, Paul ! |
| PaulFerris Oct 25, 2005 11:54 AM EDT |
Thanks everybody -- mmelchert: I'm here for you, man. --FeriCyde |
| jimf Oct 25, 2005 12:06 PM EDT |
Good to be reminded that there is nothing at all wrong with an honest bias, and, that those professing to be in a no spin zone are often the biggest topsy's. |
| hkwint Oct 25, 2005 12:36 PM EDT |
Nice article, only a shame that it isn't as objective as one would suspect from an article coming from an unbiased person like Paulie. Hope you don't mind if I join the rant: This Dvorak-person writes: Quoting:With 90 percent of the mainstream writers being Mac users, what would you expect? He argues: The writers being Mac users causes the anti-MS bias. I argue: 90% of the writers found out MS sucks, which causes them to use Apple-stuff. They're the dumb writers. The other 10% is smarter, and uses Linux. BTW what mental conditions do you suffer to write a very biased anti-bias article? Answer: None, you just get paid by some company I won't mention. |
| PaulFerris Oct 25, 2005 12:57 PM EDT |
hkwint: *exactly* Where does he get this 90% figure anyway? I seriously doubt there's any hard research behind it. What is more likely is that Dvorak maybe knows a Mac-like crowd and he's tweaking their noses. I mean, look at all of the positive press you've been reading about how *this* year, good ole Microsoft will take security seriously. How many times do we get to hear Ballmer parrot that Linux has worse security than Windows? Give me a break, no journalist in their right mind (oh, ok, maybe one that's not ever used Linux, or done any real research, so that does broaden the potential horizons, substantially) -- no one trying to be factual could parrot those words without some serious laughter to accompany. Things are a smidgen better -- you're far more likely to read Microsoft's bogus statements in "fact-based" whitepapers on their web site than you used to be -- but it still happens. |
| tuxchick Oct 25, 2005 1:03 PM EDT |
In Dvorak's defense (note that I am safely tucked away behind the rotten-produce shield) in his early days he was really plugged in. He had contacts in all kinds of tech companies, and he turned out some pretty good columns. I suspect that the grind of having to crank out column after column after column, year after year, while maintaining the curmudgeon persona, has taken its toll. It wouldn't surprise if half the stuff printed under his name was writted by uncredited junior editors, which is a common ZDNet/CNET practice. (So much for trust, eh?) I do not defend the shoddiness of his later work. Just wanted to point out that once upon a time, he delivered the goods. |
| PaulFerris Oct 25, 2005 1:12 PM EDT |
Quoting: I suspect that the grind of having to crank out column after column after column, year after year, while maintaining the curmudgeon persona, has taken its toll. Yes, speaking from experience, it does. --FeriCyde PS: I know you weren't speaking to me directly.... OR were you! Darnit, I hate it when my paranoia subsystem kicks in like that. |
| tuxchick Oct 25, 2005 1:33 PM EDT |
Paulie, Paulie, Paulie. Are you positioning yourself as our resident vain celeb? Really, it's not ALWAYS about you. Really! No, I mean it! Really! |
| PaulFerris Oct 25, 2005 2:57 PM EDT |
Quoting: Are you positioning yourself as our resident vain celeb?No, that position is already taken by the 'trac -- he gets all superior about his height (it goes to his head easily). It could be worse, though -- I could be the resident vane celeb. Similar to Dvorak, I'd turn to match the direction of the wind today... --FeriCyde |
| dinotrac Oct 25, 2005 6:53 PM EDT |
Paulie, Paulie, Paulie... Vain celeb? Not likely. I'm not remotely a celeb. I think you may have missed the boat on Dvorak's piece, though. It reads like a heavy-handed satire of a million pro-Linux pieces complaining about Windows bias. |
| PaulFerris Oct 25, 2005 7:27 PM EDT |
I've missread the guy before in similar fashion. Maybe he did it to tweak peoples noses. Such is life. The thing still stands -- lack of bias is a stupid thing to strive for. |
| tadelste Oct 25, 2005 8:00 PM EDT |
Quoted:
lack of bias is a stupid thing to strive for In this context, I agree with you, Paul. However, that's not a universal truth. The Great Masters would say always use discretion. |
| dinotrac Oct 25, 2005 10:12 PM EDT |
Quoting:The thing still stands -- lack of bias is a stupid thing to strive for. Objectively speaking, of course... ;0) |
| michaelcole Oct 26, 2005 12:10 AM EDT |
The thing that bothers me is the Analysts and Consultants in the "IT Reporting" field.. Take Gartner for an example. "Gartner has been the trusted advisor by many of the world's largest and most demanding enterprises for over 25 years......No one sees the implications of technology so clearly, so consistently..... " This company makes Reports "Paid for" and then Researched by Biased people. Every time someone pays for a report they give them the view they wanted. Then the reporters grab these reports and throw them out as if they are Facts and not someones Perceptions.. When I read a review or other items I try to check the persons background, where were they where did they come from, who do they look up to and answer to also who is paying ultimately. How much money yearly do these firms get from M$ to create reports.. |
| PaulFerris Oct 26, 2005 3:22 AM EDT |
Quoting: How much money yearly do these firms get from M$ to create reports..michaelcole: They exist on that money, and it's got to be some nice bread. The example you provide is right on the money -- From what I understand, there are tons of benchmarking and studies that are paid for that don't turn out flattering for Microsoft -- they don't see the light of day. That's the system. Essentially, they pay someone to do an "independent study" and if they don't like the results, they toss it in the can. Dino: I'm a pretty objective guy when you get past all the emotion ;0) --FeriCyde |
| tadelste Oct 26, 2005 6:13 AM EDT |
Guys, It's worse. Ever hear of Silver Lake Partners? http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=12525 Microsoft and Dell reportedly own an influential piece of SLP who inturn owns a big piece of Gartner. Silver Lake has Board members and staff working at Gartner. But, they are T-O-T-A-L-L-Y objective. And Paul, you're bias because you have an opinion. Let me ask you this, how biased are you based on your enormous wealth tied up in Microsoft, Dell and Silver Lake Partners? And, sir, how much insider information do you actually possess and use in your every day business deling related to your holdings? Please explain this to the panel, will you? Mr. Ferris, answer the senator's question. Mr. Ferris, need I remind you that you are under oath. Excuse me for second. (Turns to assistant and whispers: Just tell her to deposit it in the Caymans bank. ) Turns back to the Microsphone, vell Heir Ferris, tell us how much money do you really have in zeese companies. |
| Corriher Oct 26, 2005 2:49 PM EDT |
Why was this pulled off the front page so soon? Anyway... Well stated, as expected Colonel Ferris. I'd like to help, but I'm not sure there is much any of us could do. In the past, I was in the front lines with you and other folks here. As a fellow technology expert, skilled writer, and as someone who has an intuitive understanding of people; I felt that the struggle for standards, freedom, progress, and fairness in the realm of technology was an area I was practically called to make a difference. We have had some glorious victories. I believe your shining moment was exposing the bogus OS survey over at MS-NBC, and the parody survey was hilarious. Of course, I also believe "Believable Lies" should be required reading for every new computer purchaser. My best moment was after fighting an astroturfer at ComputerWorld for six months, I finally tricked him into admitting he was a Microsoft employee: getting him so upset that he offered to send proof of his argument in the form of a fragment from the Windows kernel code. Of course, I asked him where I could download my copy of the Windows kernel source code -- to see all those innovative features for myself. My next post was only three words: "check and mate". He didn't have much to say after that. Alien abduction, perhaps? His multiple personalities and writing styles were a give-away from the very beginning... alas... it is just history, and a war story now. We had some fun, didn't we? The struggle is more uphill now than ever, with the unresolved issues of being cut off from the OEM / Retail markets, F/OSS not having the funding to mass market, and with the added complication of the Supreme Court essentially having found Microsoft to be above the law -- as Microsoft received more of a tickle than a slap on the wrist (plus a wink and a nod). As usual, you concentrated your editorial upon Linux issues; which is appropriate to do here, and is appreciated by many readers. Your concern about the possible vanity of preaching to the choir is a valid one, which we have debated for years now; but I worry perhaps that at this time there are ever greater interferences upon your effectiveness. What happens when the even the choir isn't listening? Read me carefully before making conclusions about my meaning, or developing any attitude about it. More than anyone here, you will probably understand the significance of the spirit involved. As a community, we have been wounded greatly by a slew of deceptions, betrayals, in-fighting, legal games, the current economic environment, and tragic events occurring outside of the community. We've been hit by a hurricane in the last couple of years. The spirit of hope, and the leadership is gone. Yes, I know you are trying to provide some sort of that leadership again, but you are merely one candle blowing in the wind and darkness. I once took up my light saber, and accepted the call to arms, because I realized that having a corporate governmental complex controlling and subverting technology was a sure path to slavery, and that our riping technological tools would be transformed into weapons by our masters. We're already there, like the case of the FCC is requiring all future IP traffic to be routed through a FBI hub: http://www.nytimes.com/2005/10/23/technology/23college.html (This is so important, they aren't requiring registration this time) To be blunt, things have just become too evil for me to worry much about software anymore. While other people may not be disturbed most by exactly the same issues, most of them are suffering in spirit from at least some of the recent history both inside and outside of Linux. It would take some awesome leadership to reunite our fragmented community, and return its fighting spirit. It is hardly a task for the meek, and you could not possibly do it alone. I'm sorry, my friend, that I do not have the answers for you, but perhaps a deeper look at the problems may yield something productive. We all know that money is a corrupting force, and the problem is growing rapidly everywhere. While Paul concentrates upon the issue in the technical media, all of us see the corruption happening in all directions. However, the economic corruption is not the core problem. It is merely a symptom. The core problem is a moral one -- one of spirit. Some of us avoid such issues for fear we will be shouted at for being "off topic" or a "religious nut". The people shouting those things are the ones who are dragging us down, and whenever we allow ourselves to be manipulated by them, our silence is a part of the problem too. By way, on another personal note Paul, I'm not directing this last thing upon you. Nonetheless, I hope it is thought provoking. One more thing: That "Batch Login Project" you are working on looks REALLY impressive. I didn't know you did Java. That's my new thing, so maybe I could help with something. |
| cuzic4n Oct 27, 2005 4:19 AM EDT |
i really didn't notice the bias.. it all made sense to me.. wierd.. ;-> |
| phubert Oct 27, 2005 8:54 AM EDT |
These days, in so many environments, anyone who believes in objective truth is either completely ignored or rapidly labeled "hopelessly biased" "extremist" et al. Bob Lewis has had a couple of good articles at his site: http://www.issurvivor.com/ addressing forms of relativism in business. Then, Bob's been a favorite of mine for many years... |
Posting in this forum is limited to members of the group: [ForumMods, SITEADMINS, MEMBERS.]
Becoming a member of LXer is easy and free. Join Us!