- Site menu:
- Latest Discussions
- Latest Newswire
- Archives
- Submit Story
- Story HOWTO
- Syndicate
- E-mail Alerts
ComputerWorld Employs Ignorant Journalists
|
|
|
Comments (15)
computer world guy misses point
Quoting:"He's putting the cart before the horse by completely skipping over the fact that open source users have legitimate gripes"Not to mention that many, many thousands of Open Source advocates only run one operating system...and that is Microsoft Windows. I've found tons of programs released under BSD, LGPL, and GPL 2 licenses that run happily on MS Platforms. I'm sure if I got involved with these projects they wouldn't trash the MS platform they were building for would they?
Oh...crap, I just read your second paragraph. I just beat the dead horse too :| *sheepish grin* :D
A little research goes a long way
From this genius' own article:
From Microsoft's "Shared Source Initiative Home Page": http://www.microsoft.com/resources/sharedsource/Articles/Mic...
Is he going to be so disingenuous as to suggest that, in those paragraphs, Microsoft never intended for people to believe that they were beginning to buy in to the Open Source model? Or did he just not do his homework?
Read the whole commentQuoting:Microsoft never claimed that Shared Source was open source
From Microsoft's "Shared Source Initiative Home Page": http://www.microsoft.com/resources/sharedsource/Articles/Mic...
Quoting:Microsoft has been learning from the OSS community regarding the benefits of deeper collaboration and increased transparency leading to better communication with customers. We believe the most effective pathway for a commercial software company is to strike a balance between investing in research and development and the release of intellectual property assets in the form of source code for both reference and collaborative purposes.
The increased competition resulting from the proliferation of OSS has been constructive for the industry as a whole. The implications of OSS within multiple market segments are causing organizations to figure out what is most important to them. It has placed a higher premium on innovation and a drive to deliver greater value for lower costs. The big winner in this equation has been the software consumer, whose choices have increased dramatically.
The Shared Source Initiative is the manifestation of these factors within Microsoft. With more than 80 source code offerings being used by more than two million developers, Microsoft is looking to apply the best of open source while helping its customers avoid many of the model’s pitfalls. There is no one, correct way to create software. The ecosystem as a whole will benefit from a rich tapestry of development, business, and licensing models.
Is he going to be so disingenuous as to suggest that, in those paragraphs, Microsoft never intended for people to believe that they were beginning to buy in to the Open Source model? Or did he just not do his homework?
I think he did his best to write something that MS would like. He is probably clueless as to the actual issues and facts involved.
I think that it is nothing more than tag lines combined into an "article".
I think that it is nothing more than tag lines combined into an "article".
Research? What is this word?
Research: Its the stuff you do when you want to know what your talking about.
You should know Carla, you do it all the time.
:-)
You should know Carla, you do it all the time.
:-)
> Research? What is this word?
I think it's one of those archaic words that's been removed from the dictionary.....
I think it's one of those archaic words that's been removed from the dictionary.....
I still can't believe half the crap this guy slapped into his article.
It's written blog style but not for a blog? Is that what journalism is coming to? Everyone will write for agencies like it is their own personal blog?
*sigh*
Thank God it's computerworld and not Linux Format :D
It's written blog style but not for a blog? Is that what journalism is coming to? Everyone will write for agencies like it is their own personal blog?
*sigh*
Thank God it's computerworld and not Linux Format :D
Is it just me or is Independent Journalism under serious attack? I know I know, it is.
The only people who proofread my stuff are my fellow Editors because then I know that any crap of mine that might have made into the article is found and dealt with.
You know, REAL EDITING.
The only people who proofread my stuff are my fellow Editors because then I know that any crap of mine that might have made into the article is found and dealt with.
You know, REAL EDITING.
Actually DevNet, the guy works for InformationWeek. Did you do your research? ;-p
I did...and it was published on infoworld, not computerworld. He may work for infoweek, but they're all IDG.net
Computerworld didn't post a link back to the original article which is how I originally made the mistake.
Computerworld didn't post a link back to the original article which is how I originally made the mistake.
Yeah, I my bad. It's InfoWorld - not Week. Oh well.
you'd think they would post a back link...maybe this will learn em?
McAllister has said he doesn't have control over how his articles get propagated, and really doesn't know much about it. We've been in contact regarding this article he wrote.
I pointed out that the problem many of our readers have is that his viewpoint was pretty lopsided. He says he's trying to avoid the religious dogma, in a manner of speaking. I explained that Microsoft throws around all this deplorable rhetoric, but we get labelled as "religious zealots" because we (a) call Microsoft on the carpet for the way they treat people, and (b) we believe people should be free to improve the software. Oh, I so feel another editorial coming. :-)
I pointed out that the problem many of our readers have is that his viewpoint was pretty lopsided. He says he's trying to avoid the religious dogma, in a manner of speaking. I explained that Microsoft throws around all this deplorable rhetoric, but we get labelled as "religious zealots" because we (a) call Microsoft on the carpet for the way they treat people, and (b) we believe people should be free to improve the software. Oh, I so feel another editorial coming. :-)
sic 'em Chief. It is lopsided, because Microsoft's BS gets freely propagated as "news."
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
And on top of that, he's just plain wrong. Every major piece of open source software runs on Windows just fine: OpenOffice.org, Abiword, Firefox/Thunderbird/Mozilla, Apache, ClamAV, Gaim, Ghostscript (I've even written Win2k printer drivers for using GS for unsupported printers), every game console emulator ever written, etc... you name it, if it runs on Linux, there's probably a version for Windows, with the exception of KDE/Gnome specific programs, and even that will change soon with KDE 4.0.
And it's in every open source enthusiast's interests for those programs to work in Windows. When a Windows user is forced to upgrade, it's a relatively easy sell to at least get them to try Linux, because you can assure them that all of their favorite free programs they loved to use on Windows work identically in Linux, with the added bonus of practically no viruses or spyware.