If you're going to use the metaphor...
|
| Author | Content |
|---|---|
| dinotrac Sep 11, 2006 9:23 AM EDT |
Y'know, Rev, I have a little bit of experience with abusive relationships too, having had an abusive drunk of a stepfather and seen the effect he had on my mother and siblings (by the time his rage reached its zenith, I was already on my own). Applying that metaphor to the free software community and its relationship to Microsoft bothers me, for a couple of reasons. First, the relationship you describe requires two elements: 1. Power on the part of the abuser, and 2. Buy-in on the part of the abused. The abuser can do very real harm to the abused, and frequently does. In a culture like ours, however, the abused is free to walk away, but, far too often, doesn't. She buys into the abuse, allows the abuser to so sap her of self-respect that, in a funny way, she begins to believe, at some level, that she deserves the treatment, that she couldn't possibly survive if she left. At some point, if you talk to her long enough, you're likely to hear, "I know he loves me." Both points fail the smell test with regard to Microsoft and the free software community (or so I hope). Microsoft is powerful, but it's been dented. It's failure to take over the server room with NT and later OS's is a real chink in its armor, as are the delays in Vista. More to the point, the free software community is not some battered spouse, convinced of her own worthlessness. Names like IBM, Oracle and Novell show up in the free software universe. Even better -- Microsoft's real battered spouses -- it's customers -- have been reclaiming self-esteem by going into free software big-time. Sadly, some free software supporters do seem to lack confidence in the community's ability to hold its own, but I'd like to think that the key people do not. >However, since the process of reconciliation calls for an acknowledgment of wrongdoing and a change of behavior, Maybe reconciliation is the wrong process to pursue. Maybe armistice or cease-fire or contract or something else that requires nothing more than self-interest and agreement. After all, Microsoft and free software folks don't have to divvy up the chores or sit down at the dinner table. Maybe they can do what people and organizations have done throughout history, which is to say, "Hmmmm. I can live with that, and it gets me something I want." |
| dcparris Sep 11, 2006 9:57 AM EDT |
Dino, I knew I could count on you! ;-) With people like McAllister telling us how to respond to Microsoft, we're vulnerable (assuming we listen to them) to becoming the "battered" housewife. McAllister should be encouraging Microsoft to do more to earn our trust, rather than encouraging us to engage in the "buy-in" behavior that leads to continued battering. I agree that most of the key people in our community have not bought into the victim mentality - but then, I would argue that they aren't as susceptible to McAllister's influence, either. He isn't really writing to them. I enjoyed @ 14 years of multi-faceted peer abuse - good, solid brainwashing it was. Oh joy! Come to think of it, the peer abuse analogy might work a little better than the spouse abuse one. |
| devnet Sep 11, 2006 1:53 PM EDT |
I responded completely different to this...mainly by pointing out how uninformed the author was on what 'Open Source' actually is and his faulty logic and assumptions. http://tinyurl.com/o2bq8 I was going to submit it here but I guess it would defeat the purpose :/ |
| dcparris Sep 11, 2006 1:57 PM EDT |
Awww go ahead. Submit it. It'll add to the discussion. |
| devnet Sep 11, 2006 3:11 PM EDT |
lol...fuel to the fire? |
| dinotrac Sep 11, 2006 5:18 PM EDT |
Rev - Your trivialization of battered spouse syndrome is coming mighty close to offensive. Microsoft is a nasty player, but hardly does to free software what abusive husbands do to battered wives. There is no comparison of their very real fear to the attitudes and feelings of free software types. We are angry, not afraid. We have power and that is why Microsoft is extending olive branches. But...accepting olive branches has nothing to do with any desire to be nice to Microsoft. It has everything to do with watching out for ourselves. Do you really think the Mozilla folks accepted the Microsoft offer because they love Good ol' Bill? Of course not. Firefox developers and users will be better off if Firefox works well with Vista out of the chute. Why cede so much as an inch of ground to Internet Explorer if they don't need to? To return to the metaphor, I think the negative posters on this thread have plenty in common with battered spouses: They are letting their fears and emotions interfere with their best interests. That's a recipe for disaster no matter how you slice it. |
| dek Sep 11, 2006 5:50 PM EDT |
Actually, dino, I think you're reading our good Rev. wrong. I took it that he was not comparing the OSS movement to the battered woman syndrome but M$'s current user base. No matter how much M$ abuses their current user base their users keep coming back for more of the same. Why? Because they feel they don't have a choice! That's where the Battered woman syndrome image fits. Now the OSS advocates know there is freedom from M$'s abuse. We know there is a choice and we've made it. However. there is a significant percentage of people who, for whatever reason, haven't become "enlightened" or "unfrightened" enough to recognize or make that choice. Don K. |
| Libervis Sep 11, 2006 6:18 PM EDT |
Quoting:Firefox developers and users will be better off if Firefox works will with Vista out of the chute. Why cede so much as an inch of ground to Internet Explorer if they don't need to? I agree to that dino. We should take everything they give us no matter how we feel about them. That should go without saying. If it contributes to Free Software in some way, take it! This is about attitudes, not accepting Microsoft's occassional calls for cooperation. Just because they do that sometimes doesn't necessarily mean that they are a changed company and that they have a different attitude towards Free Software. They need to do a whole lot more than what they've already done for our attitude towards them to change. And until that our attitude should be nothing less but cautionary distrust and no giving in whatsoever. It is about defeating Microsoft as it stands today until it either dissappears or completely reforms. Adapt or die. That is pretty much the only message MS should be getting from us IMO. Are they adapting? Maybe they're trying, though I don't think their "attempts" are genuine. Did they adapt? No way. If not, than the continued attitude towards them should output: "Adapt or die!" message. That's all they get. No concessions whatsoever. Every concession to Microsoft as it is today is likely to be a compromise on our side and we don't need to do that. We are too powerful to suck up to MS in any way. If anything, they are the ones who should suck up to us. Thank you |
| dinotrac Sep 11, 2006 6:24 PM EDT |
Libervis - yes. Take what they give when and where it makes sense for free software. |
| jimf Sep 11, 2006 6:37 PM EDT |
I just don't see this is very important. What is important is that people have a choice. If people choose to put up with MS's behavior, and bad treatment, for whatever reason, I can point out the illogic of what they are doing, but ultimately, It's their choice. Spousal abuse, not even close Rev. As Lincoln said, "you can fool some of the people all of the time". He sure did, and, some people will continue to want what MS has to offer no matter how insane that is, or how bad he treats them. If MS honestly decides to contribute to FOSS, that's fine, and, they'll be forced to play by our rules. All will benefit. If not, who cares, life will go on. |
| Libervis Sep 11, 2006 6:56 PM EDT |
jimf, actually, the abuse is towards the Free Software community. Until recently, and even today but only with a changed strategy, Microsoft spread lies about FOSS, tried their best to isolate it (just remember their initiatives towards having all computers sold with Windows pre-installed for example) and ultimately remove it as a valid choice for the end user. You talk about choice and that is exactly what Microsoft is attacking. This choice is their enemy, because people who choose rationally, ultimately choose GNU/Linux. Maybe Microsoft knows this and tries their best for this truth not to come out. Microsoft is the antithesis of choice. |
| dcparris Sep 11, 2006 9:21 PM EDT |
My spouse abuse analogy aims at Microsoft's brutish, crude, dictatorial ways of dealing with the world at large. Those who read the article should clearly understand that my second paragraph is definitely discussing the FOSS community. They "abuse" just about anyone they can, so maybe the upper management should just be declared psychopathic or psychotic or something. ;-) Dino is correct in that we have power that most abused spouses do not have. Frankly, I see the community as standing up to the wife beater, but here's our well-intentioned friend over here telling us to go meet Microsoft half way. Fine. But my point is, you don't "go back" until the behavior changes. Microsoft's behavior must change. And it will take a while for that changed behavior to become recognizable as a change in the pattern of behavior that would convince us that they are genuinely changing their attitude toward us. Frankly, I don't want some pundit telling our community that we should act all prim and proper since "hubby" brought home the flowers. Wife beaters typically - at least in early stages - do things to try to make up for their abusive behavior. How do we know that Microsoft's reaching out to Mozilla isn't just a bouquet of flowers? So we accept the flowers. Then what? We get comfy and cozy, only to get brusied and bloodied again. No thanks. Maybe we accept the flowers - Mozilla did - but we need to keep Microsoft at some distance until we see the changed behavior emerge as a pattern. |
| jimf Sep 11, 2006 10:47 PM EDT |
> but here's our well-intentioned friend over here telling us to go meet Microsoft half way. Fine. But my point is, you don't "go back" until the behavior changes. Absolutely, but even then, we still may not have much interest in going back. Too much history there. |
| dinotrac Sep 12, 2006 2:39 AM EDT |
Rev - I agree that we don't "go back", but part of that is because we were never "there" to begin with. The free software movement has never been cozy with Microsoft, so there isn't much danger of rushing into it's arms. I say take the flowers and say, "Thanks for the flowers". Nothing more, nothing less. They took the BSD TCP/IP stack (and who knows what else), we can take some pointers on Vista. Enough things over enough time might be reason to smile and soften the heart, but we're a long way from that. Checking our baggage at the door doesn't mean throwing our brains into one of the bags, and it certainly doesn't mean closing our eyes, even to blink. |
| dcparris Sep 12, 2006 5:37 AM EDT |
> I say take the flowers and say, "Thanks for the flowers". Nothing more, nothing less. We're on the same page then. :-) |
| theBeez Sep 12, 2006 5:55 AM EDT |
dinotrac, will you please refrain from trying to decide what is "in my best interest"? I, for one, will probably not work with Vista. Whether Firefox works there is of no interest at all to me. What *is* of interest to me, is the way MS is and will keep on trying to force everything out of its way what it considers to be a treat, including - but not limited to - FOSS. It makes me still pay for an OS I do not want (when I buy a laptop of my choice, and don't try to force this soley on the HW vendors), it pollutes some decent paper and online magazines (don't say that's nonsense, because I know it is true) and some servers still produces IE "optimized" HTML - making it impossible to use these services. DC, I don't find this "battered wife" analogy offensive. I probably would have stepped up a little, since there is no analogy strong enough to describe MS behaviour. |
| dinotrac Sep 12, 2006 6:05 AM EDT |
beez - >dinotrac, will you please refrain from trying to decide what is "in my best interest"? Nobody can decide that for you, though I wonder why you buy copies of Windows if you don't have to. I have purchased exactly one copy of Windows in the last 10 years, and it was under extreme duress -- my wife needed software for work that we could not run under Linux. Still, your choice. If you like Windows machines, that's your right. |
| dcparris Sep 12, 2006 6:11 AM EDT |
Well, analogies are just mental pictures anyway. They should never be understood as literal viewpoints. When McAllister shared that he thinks I "anthropomorphize" Microsoft too much, I explained that I might be prone to doing that, given my background. ;-) |
| dcparris Sep 12, 2006 6:26 AM EDT |
beez - I didn't think Dino was trying to decide what's best for anyone. I took him as just commenting along the lines of my analogy. As for buying PCs with Windows pre-installed, you really should consider your options. We have, right on this site (http://donkey.lxer.com/module/forums/t/23168/), a list of vendors that will sell you a Windows-free PC. As for IE - I haven't had a need for it in over two years now without Windows. If you just want to buy a PC with Windows preinstalled and use IE to visit certain sites, go for it. That's certainly your choice. Just don't blame that on Microsoft's bullying tactics, or the webmasters for that matter. :-) |
| theBeez Sep 12, 2006 11:37 AM EDT |
dinotrac - I was clearly talking about LAPTOPS. Budget laptops are hard - near impossible - to get in the Netherlands without Windows. FYI, we call it the "MS tax". If you want to play the dummy, that's your right. But it won't help the discussion very much. |
| dinotrac Sep 12, 2006 12:49 PM EDT |
Well, Beez -- Gosh. I guess that's just tough. Doesn't make me a dummy. And, ahem, the internet stretches everywhere. I'm not buying your whine. |
| theBeez Sep 12, 2006 2:51 PM EDT |
dinotrac - Fair enough. If it looks like a dummy, smells like a dummy, writes like a dummy.. |
| dcparris Sep 12, 2006 3:47 PM EDT |
Beez, we generally refrain from attacking people here on LXer. If you disagree with Dino, fine. But please refrain from personal attacks. |
| dinotrac Sep 12, 2006 4:33 PM EDT |
beez - >If you disagree with Dino, fine Not only that, you'd be in good company, and plenty of it. |
| tuxchick2 Sep 12, 2006 6:07 PM EDT |
Nonsense. No one ever disagrees with Dino. |
| jdixon Sep 12, 2006 6:21 PM EDT |
> Nonsense. No one ever disagrees with Dino. Well, not for long anyway. (OK, Dino, I posted it, you can call of Guido and Luigi now). :) |
| dinotrac Sep 12, 2006 6:56 PM EDT |
>you can call of Guido and Luigi jd - Man, you take the fun out of everything!! |
| dinotrac Sep 12, 2006 6:57 PM EDT |
>Nonsense. No one ever disagrees with Dino. TC - I just got that. Cute. |
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!