I'm at the Moscow airport getting ready to fly back to the United States. Before I leave, however, I figured it would be good to note (and then bury) three myths that I heard perpetuated by Microsoft at the Interop Moscow conference. They've been largely discredited elsewhere, but it appears Microsoft prefers to keep regurgitating the party line until abject ridicule sets in.Read more »
It has for long been argued — in several different places in fact — that one of the principal adoption barriers for Free software to face is corruption. The obstacles to clear are not purely technical.Read more »
This guy thinks that the "GNU" part of the term GNU/Linux is derived from the GNU GPL being the license used for the software. Yes he's confused. I'm posting it here so FSDaily people can go and comment.Read more »
"The lack of personal tax software, like the lack of commercial games, is sometimes cited as a clear indication that Linux is not yet ready for ‘prime time’. To be honest, I haven’t the foggiest idea as to why this is such a ‘tell-tale’ sign."Read more »
Earlier today we mentioned some of the latest FUD from Gartner, which was directed at the GNU/Linux server/desktop in particular. Always remember the Gartner-Microsoft connection and also remember how Microsoft views analysts.Read more »
Read your post. One question immediately springs to mind.Why?
Looking forward to Microsoft subverting an International Standards Organizations submission process, and beginning a new era of vendor lock-in and monopolistic office suites seems to be antithetical to Free and Open Source philosophy.
What happened to you Miguel, you used to be cool?
Every once in a while, an article or post will appear, claiming that Linux is just not good enough for everyday use. The reason?Read more »
The Objective Observer wrote what appeared to be a logical argument from which he drew what he claims is a reasonable comparison... Open Source is like Terrorism. Riiiiight. Well, I decided to respectfully respond to his commentary with some specific examples of how his conclusions are inaccurate. I'm assuming he got hit with a lot of flames but I didn't want to add to it.Read more »
Interesting article that resumes what happened in the last days...
"I was intrigued by the way the story mutated as the day progressed."
ITWire has a rant disguised as an opinion piece titled OLPC: one bad idea per child by Sam Varghese.
I should let it be known I have written on the OLPC XO before. All of my articles have showered it with praise. My kid wants one, I wouldn't mind tinkering a bit with it myself. So it should come as no surprise how I feel about Sam's article. Although no real point was made, I will do my best to address his comments.Read more »
I recently came across some Total Cost of Ownership (TCO) information Microsoft has published on their website, showing how using Windows Server gives you a better Return On Investment (ROI) than Linux. Given the ubiquity of Microsoft Windows, you may think that what they have to say would hold a good deal of truth to it. I think the truth is a little closer to "Microsoft makes it as expensive as possible to break out of the lock-in their products create."Read more »
A few days ago a story was posted to FSDaily with the assuming title of "Can we please stop fighting FUD with FUD?"
The article concludes by throwing down the gauntlet.
I—for one—would like to see more blogs and comments on why free software is good rather than why Microsoft is bad. So let’s start here. Your task is complete the sentence “Free software is good because…” in less than 50 words.
I pick up your gauntlet Mr Cartwright and offer my answer. Ahem...Read more »
It has long been the case that proprietary software companies regularly engage in FUD (fear, uncertainty and doubt) tactics against their opponents. This particularly seems to apply to Microsoft’s statements about free software in general and GNU/Linux in particular. Recently I’ve noticed a surge in the amount of FUD going the other way—from the FOSS community towards Microsoft and other proprietary software companies. Why do we feel it is necessary to fight FUD with FUDRead more »
In this installment of my series on the Top 10 Linux FUD patterns, I address two patterns that have more to do with software packages that run on the Linux platform than with the Linux OS itself. As I stated in a previous post, every believable piece of FUD has some element of truth behind it, and these two are no exception.
Linux FUD Pattern #3: With Linux, you cannot access old files or share new files with others.
Linux FUD Pattern #4: There are no good software titles for Linux.Read more »
FUD (Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt) is defined on wikipedia.org as a "tactic of rhetoric used in sales, marketing and public relations....a strategic attempt to influence public perception by disseminating negative (and vague) information". In layman's terms, it's a bunch of bull to scare people into doing what they want you to do. Linux and the Open Source community are no strangers to FUD.Read more »