Proof of an organized attack on Linux.
Glenn Hall
being attacked in an organized fashion in ways other than just
competition between Microsoft vs Linux.
Not really too much different than Shick vs Norelco although with
"Comes" it got fairly nasty.
However I stumbled upon two articles basically attacking Linux,
from two different places and two different authors, posted within
a day of each other and reading much the same.
Coincidence?
Or have these people gotten their orders and are churning out the
FUD?
They both look like they have been written using the same formula.
You decide.
This one is from PCWorld:
http://www.pcworld.com/businesscenter/article/207999/desktop_linux_the_dream_is_dead.html?&tk=hp_fv
Desktop Linux: The Dream Is Dead
By Robert Strohmeyer, PCWorld
It kills me to say this: The dream of Linux as a major desktop OS
is now pretty much dead.
Despite phenomenal security and stability--and amazing strides in
usability, performance, and compatibility--Linux simply isnοΏ½t
catching on with desktop users. And if there ever was a chance for
desktop Linux to succeed, that ship has long since sunk.
And this one is from TechEYE .Net
http://www.techeye.net/software/linuxs-chance-has-gone#post-comment
For the last few years I had been hoping that Linux would finally
end up on the desktop as a rival to the closed source universes of
Microsoft and Apple.
There was an opportunity for it to happen. Canonical had got its
Ubuntu Operating System up to speed and Redmond was still shipping
its piss poor Vista Operating System. Even Apple's Leopard was
nothing to write home about.
But it didn't happen and now it is unlikely to do so. While Linux
will rule supreme on the server it will never make it to the
desktop.
Now it is time for the Open Source industry to look closely at
itself as to why it failed. There are lessons here, but I have
grave doubts as to whether they will be learned.
The biggest killer of putting penguin software on the desktop was
the Linux community. If you think the Apple fanboys are completely
barking, they are role models of sanity to the loudmouthed Open
Sauce religious loonies who are out there.
Like many fundamentalists they are totally inflexible - waving a
GNU as if it were handed down by God to Richard Stallman.
Read more:
http://www.techeye.net/software/linuxs-chance-has-gone#post-comment#ixzz12j1DNnUO
One Shot - One Kill
"Glenn Hall" <glennhall59...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:yssjjvcp9nxo$.1jnpc2c0rehfs$.dlg@40tude.net...
> I've never been satisfied with most of the proof that Linux is
since when did fair criticism become an "organized attack" you stupid
POS????
Steel
> I've never been satisfied with most of the proof that Linux is
> being attacked in an organized fashion in ways other than just
> competition between Microsoft vs Linux.
> Not really too much different than Shick vs Norelco although with
> "Comes" it got fairly nasty.
>
> However I stumbled upon two articles basically attacking Linux,
> from two different places and two different authors, posted within
> a day of each other and reading much the same.
>
> Coincidence?
> Or have these people gotten their orders and are churning out the
> FUD?
> They both look like they have been written using the same formula.
>
> You decide.
What, you can't believe your lying eyes? Linux had it's chance when
Vista faltered out the gate. Linux had it's chance then, but
unfortunately for Linux, they stuck with XP and they are moving to
Windows 7 from XP, the masses don't even know Linux exist.
Sure, Linux is running on smartphones, and embedded devices. But I can
tell you for sure the masses don't know nor do they care. Linux also has
a good reputation in the Web server market. But that is a limited market.
What the masses see is Windows and Apple, and they don't see Linux.
amicus_curious
"Glenn Hall" <glennhall59...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:yssjjvcp9nxo$.1jnpc2c0rehfs$.dlg@40tude.net...
> Coincidence?
> Or have these people gotten their orders and are churning out the
> FUD?
> They both look like they have been written using the same formula.
>
> You decide.
>
The most likely explanation is that they either come up with similar notions
at the same time or, more likely, the second one was inspired by the first.
Plagiarism of ideas is not unknown in this world for these amateur bloggers
facing some sort of publication deadline and a need to be controversial.
Trolling can be both proactive and reactive, you know.
I think that a more enlightened view of the situation is that Linux really
has no chance on the desktop or laptop because the market for such things is
far too mature to tolerate a significant new player. People expect to see
Windows on their new computer and give it little thought until it is
missing. That expectation was engendered almost 20 years ago. You would
have the same problem trying to sell a mainstream automobile with 3 wheels
instead of 4.
Glenn Hall
> On 10/18/2010 10:37 AM, Glenn Hall wrote:
>> I've never been satisfied with most of the proof that Linux is
>> being attacked in an organized fashion in ways other than just
>> competition between Microsoft vs Linux.
>> Not really too much different than Shick vs Norelco although with
>> "Comes" it got fairly nasty.
>>
>> However I stumbled upon two articles basically attacking Linux,
>> from two different places and two different authors, posted within
>> a day of each other and reading much the same.
>>
>> Coincidence?
>> Or have these people gotten their orders and are churning out the
>> FUD?
>> They both look like they have been written using the same formula.
>>
>> You decide.
>
> What, you can't believe your lying eyes?
It has nothing to do with it being true or being false. The part
you miss is that two different writers from two different sources
write almost the exact same article within a day of each other.
Don't you find that a little unusual?
Steel
No, you missed the point, because I didn't even read it. I am no expert
on anything, but I do feel confident is saying that Linux has no chance
on the desktop. It never did. Sorry, that's how I see it. Linux has a
wonderful chance on the smartphones, and it's popular on Web servers.
TomB
>
> Linux also has a good reputation in the Web server market. But that
> is a limited market.
ROFL
Speaking is silver. Silence is gold. Trolling is platinum.
--
Attempted murder, now honestly, what is that? Do they give a
Nobel Prize for attempted chemistry?
~ Sideshow Bob
Homer
> I've never been satisfied with most of the proof that Linux is
> being attacked in an organized fashion in ways other than just
> competition between Microsoft vs Linux.
> Not really too much different than Shick vs Norelco although with
> "Comes" it got fairly nasty.
>
> However I stumbled upon two articles basically attacking Linux,
> from two different places and two different authors, posted within
> a day of each other and reading much the same.
>
> Coincidence?
No coincidence, and no mystery either. You can expect more to come too.
This sort of thing always happens around certain times, when certain
events are unfolding. Can you guess which pertinent event might be about
to unfold? I'll give you a clue: exactly the same thing happened around
the time XP was launched, and Vista, and Windows 7, and Office 2003, and
Office 2007, and Office 2010, and every other Microsoft product that has
Linux-based competition. Then, like now, it was transparently obvious
that such articles were being professionally orchestrated by Microsoft,
along with other phenomena, like an explosion in the number of social
networking comments supporting Microsoft and criticising its
competitors. Just take a look at the COLA archives on Google: you'll
easily see the correlation between Microsoft product launches and a vast
increase in troll activity. The Vista launch was particularly obvious
(Microsoft's biggest ever carpet-bomb "guerilla" advertising campaign).
That's right: three days from now Microsoft will launch Windows Phone 7,
their last-ditch attempt to gain relevance outside the desktop (and thus
secure their future from a failing business model).
Microsoft have long since given up their trademark carpet-bomb
advertising methods, because they know it has little impact - their
audience is highly unreceptive. They only make themselves look foolish,
and waste millions (indeed billions) of dollars in the process
(apparently they spent *ten Billion* on Vista alone ... think about that
for a minute) - something they can ill-afford to do in the current
economic climate (and especially in their present predicament). They
have nothing of interest to offer, nothing of any technical merit,
nothing "cool" or even mildly interesting, that others don't also offer
- only better. They also badly suck at advertising ... I'm mean
seriously suck. They have zero sense of style, and an even poorer
sense of relevance and timing. They are completely out of touch with
what consumers want, and completely lack the skills to deliver it even
if they weren't. This fatal combination of incompetence, second-rate
products, and a public image that's lacklustre at best, and a
standing-joke at worst, means they have little interest in using
orthodox methods to promote new products.
So what's left?
The only thing Microsoft has ever excelled at is dirty tricks. It's the
cornerstone of their business, starting with their extortionate deals
with MITS and IBM, and acquiring stolen property from Seattle Computer
Products, up to their FUD and hate campaign against OS2/Warp - and
beyond, right up to the present day with racketeering deals with HTC,
and contractual exclusion of competitors' products with OEMs. Throughout
all this they've relied heavily on "bought" supporters to astroturf the
negative impact of their behaviour and second-rate products. Microsoft's
erstwhile chief Technology Evangelist, James Plamondon, spelled out
their methods in explicit detail, in a company briefing entitled
"Evangelism is WAR!", and to this day Microsoft still operates a
"Perception Management" team. Give some serious thought to that too ...
what sort of company even /operates/ something as sinister as a
"Perception Management" team, or openly admits to (even brags about)
engaging in "guerilla" advertising?
Like I said, there's no coincidence, and certainly no mystery.
> Or have these people gotten their orders and are churning out the FUD?
> They both look like they have been written using the same formula.
You've just woken up to the reality of Microsoft's methods.
> You decide.
I decided a long, long time ago.
--
K. | [ubuntu]
http://slated.org |
Fedora 8 (Werewolf) on sky | 1. Ancient African word meaning
kernel 2.6.31.5, up 3 days | 'I can't configure Debian'
Gregory Shearman
If Linux isn't hurting Microsoft then why bother attacking it?
One snot one shill shows how much microsoft is hurting, by its
continuous attacks.
--
Regards,
Gregory.
Gentoo Linux - Penguin Power
Clogwog
news:yssjjvcp9nxo$.1jnpc2c0rehfs$.dlg@40tude.net...
> I've never been satisfied with most of the proof that Linux is
> being attacked in an organized fashion in ways other than just
> competition between Microsoft vs Linux.
Stop whining about Microsoft vs Linux, you paranoid twit!
Linux is simply not not good enough to gain desktop marketshare from Apple -
Mac OS X Snow Leopard nor Windows 7!
--
Linux has 100% Desktop marketshare in.................... North Korea!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Star_OS
High Plains Thumper
> One Shot - One Kill wrote:
>
> One snot one shill shows how much microsoft is hurting, by its
> continuous attacks.
One Shrimp - One Krill is such a small object that it warrants no need
for reply, except for its hunger for Snit like attention.
--
HPT
Snit
on 10/19/10 6:00 AM:
The irony is amazing.
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]