Slashdot Log In
Yankee Group Slams Linux 'Extremists'
Posted by
Zonk
on Fri Apr 08, 2005 05:13 PM
from the ya-hippies dept.
from the ya-hippies dept.
AvatarofVirgo wrote in to mention an article running on ZDNet in which the consulting firm The Yankee Group goes after folks in the Linux community who have been questioning their objectivity. From the article: "Laura DiDio, an analyst at the Yankee Group who has been at the receiving end of much of the criticism from Linux advocates, claimed the radical elements of the community could damage the reputation of open source software."
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Full
Abbreviated
Hidden
Loading... please wait.
true (Score:5, Insightful)
One of the prime examples of winnowing me away from I.E. for instance, was that someone finally sat there for a moment and told me what Firefox could do - 10/15 messages back and forth - not a word or mention of IE, and I switched.
I'd like the same about Linux, but always get belittled for asking.
Re:true (Score:5, Informative)
If one person says "X is better than Y" and someone else says "Y is bad compared to X" they are both saying the exact same thing, but they seem different on a purely emotional (read: bullshit) level. I don't subscribe to the notion that sugar-coating what you say like that actually changes anything signifigant about your message.
Parent
The problem is (Score:5, Insightful)
Now when someone starts off with accusing your chosen thing of having problems it doesn't, you begin to think they are full of shit. Maybe they aren't making it up, maybe their experience is different than yours, but they need to base their comments off of your experience, since you are the one they are they are trying to convince.
Another problem I find is trying to dismiss every problem Linux has, or somehow spin it into a good thing. Linux isn't perfect, nothing is. So when someone points out a flaw, and the Linux enthusist just tries to spin it as being nothing, or even a good thing, it again makes them sound full of it, and makes the rest of what they say sound less sincere.
So it's not a matter of never mentioning the other side, it's a matter of finding out what the person wants to do, and talking to them about how Linux would be a good solution for that. Sometimes that may involve pointing out things it does better, but you do that in a constructive, not a demeaning way. Also when a flaw is noted in Linux, acknowledge it, don't pretend it's nothing.
Generally I find that Linux people who are trying to convert someone take such a fanatical view of how cool Linux is and such a demaning view of Windows (complete with immature names like M$ and Winblows) that it's no supprise most people percieve them as extremists with no clue.
Parent
Re:The problem is (Score:5, Insightful)
So when someone points out a flaw, and the Linux enthusist just tries to spin it as being nothing, or even a good thing
They are often telling the truth. Just because you consider something to be a bad thing doesn't mean I will. Linux has a very complete list of CLI apps and a rather incomplete list of GUI ones. For what I want to do this is far better than the Windows situation where it's the inverse of that. Therefore the feature "too much stuff done through the CLI" is not a flaw. Not to me. Obviously it's better to have both a GUI and a CLI, but if I can only have one because the developer is strapped for time, I'd rather have the CLI.
It's not just spin. It's a difference of preferences.
So it's not a matter of never mentioning the other side
According to the person I was responding to, that's exactly what he claimed happened. I have my strong doubts.
(complete with immature names like M$ and Winblows)
Well, not to sound immature, but Microsoft started it - by picking product names that tried to supplant previously existing non-trademarked vocabulary. "windows" was the generic term for rectangles in your gui that stuff is displayed in. "SQL server" was a term that meant some kind of database that you can talk to with SQL. In my case (and I can't speak for everyone else) my strong dislike of the MS terminology is because they tried to hijack previously existing terminology and turn it into a trademark, and so it grates on my nerves to have to speak of their products using the hijacked term.
Parent
Re:The problem is (Score:4, Insightful)
Read that point again and then look at how many times you typed "M$".
We can focus on your points about Microsoft's actions and the debate surrounding the different parties and be open to new ideas... or we can be distracted by your interesting use of the dollar sign and what you mean by it.
Parent
Re:The problem is (Score:5, Insightful)
Disclaimer: I'm a systems software developer and a moderately enthusiastic Linux advocate.
My experience is much the same. Win2k and WinXP have been very solid for me. During the time I've been using them, I have had two or three crashes per year at most. I've had about the same number from Linux on my desktop machine. (My Linux servers, on the other hand, have only gone down when I shut them down on purpose for a hardware upgrade.)
In short, the whole Windows-crashes-all-the-time argument is outdated. Claiming otherwise will not improve one's credibility with Windows users. Nor will offering the GIMP as an alternative to Photoshop when talking to a design professional. Offering OpenOffice as an alternative to MS Office, on the other hand, can be compelling. It all depends on your needs. I still need -- thanks mostly to Adobe -- to dual boot.
Now, as far as Laura DiDio goes, the real credibility gap comes when you have a non-programmer examining actual source code -- as she did at the beginning of the SCO fiasco -- and acting as if she has the ability to reach an informed opinion. (We leave aside the question of whether SCO's peek-a-boo evidence displays, now long discredited in the courts, should have been taken seriously to begin with.) I'm not a doctor. If you showed me a human heart and a pig heart of approximately equal sizes, I'm not sure I could tell which was which. I know I'm not qualified to form an opinion, so I reserve judgment. Likewise, Laura DiDio is not a software engineer, and ought to have reserved judgment when she was looking at isolated code snippets that a qualified professional would have rejected as too small and too context-free to reach a conclusion in the first place.
Now, I'm not going to cast aspersions on the independence of DiDio or the Yankee Group. There may or may not be any bias stemming from funding. There clearly is a bias rooted in simple intellectual arrogance, or at the very least a failure to distinguish between business questions and technical questions. It's not necessary for these people to be whores; it's quite possible that they are simply honest people who are out of their depth and too conceited to realize it.
Parent
Re:The problem is (Score:5, Insightful)
Bloody hell. The competent of us do have firewalls, antivirus software, Firefox, and antispyware software. We get a tick if we don't update these and the OS, and the Office suite, twice daily. We do open up task manager from time to time and look at processes (no not applications, processes). We do occaisonally cmd -> netstat. We have some idea of how a zombied machine looks like (we've cleaned out friends with such enough). We know with to about as much degree as possible whether or not we're running a compromised box.
How the bloody hell do you Linux people know for sure you're not all compromised? (Exploits for Linux aren't completely unheard of, just harder to find) You do (or don't) the same way we do. We're not all clueless. In fact if you bothered to step outside your close circle of propaganda-spewing cronies for five seconds you'd find a surprising number of us aren't.
I for one can't stand hearing you people talk about FUD anymore without looking in a mirror.
Alright, I'm done, you can mod me down now.
Parent
Re:The problem is (Score:5, Informative)
More or less the same way competent Windows users do. Netstat, tripwire, checkrootkit, etc.
Exploits for Linux aren't completely unheard of, just harder to findActually, it's rather easy to detect a compromised Linux system, using only the tools that virtually every distro comes with "out of the box". Sure, you have to learn to use those tools, but I'm sure you weren't born knowing how to secure a Windows system.
I get a little tired of Windows users saying "Linux is hard to use" when what they really mean is "It doesn't work like the system I know how to use and I'm too damn lazy to learn another", conveniently forgeting how long it took them to learn Windows in the first place.
Most of the people I've met who didn't like Linux tell me the same thing. "I tried (insert long since obsolete version of redhat, usually 4 or 5 point something) for a couple days and didn't like it." Give it a chance - it'll take a few weeks of heavy use before you break out of the Windows mindset. Until you can break out of the Windows habits you'll never be able to appreciate the power and flexibility of Linux, and for Pete's sake download a RECENT distro. Comparing Redhat 5 to Win XP simply isn't fair. Comparing it to Windows 3.2, maybe.
And it always amazes me how many Windows powerusers think nothing of reformating and throwing on a fresh install every six months just to "keep things fast" because the registry gets too much crap in it. Any website you visit can write to the registry unless you've installed a third party blocker like Finjan's Surfin Guard Pro. Your Antivirus/firewall/antispyware combo probably isn't preventing it - very few antispyware apps (and no firewalls or AVs that I'm aware of) will prevent registry writes. What a joke. If you don't believe me - get Surfinguard and watch the warnings pop up. Since people learned how to delete cookies many sites now use the registry to keep permanant tabs on you (and not just pr0n sites, either - CNN used to, among others).
TommyParent
Re:true (Score:5, Insightful)
And, according to the article that detailed the survey, developing applications and securing servers were the two major cost differences. DiDio highlighted Visual Studio as a boon for Windows users in developing software, while completely forgetting IDEs that exist on Linux which help development, and are far better than Visual Studio.
To most Linux users, and those in the know, that reeks of bias. Most executives would be more familiar with Windows systems than Linux systems, because of their experience with the former. Moreover, it is highly likely that executives wouldn't have heard about Eclipse or KDevelop as much as Visual Studio, simply because of marketing reasons.
DiDio, herself, added that Microsoft's shift to a monthly security update cycle and increased efforts to combat security issues were the main drivers behind its new ratings. Linux's security program is not trumpeted as loudly as Microsoft's "Patch Tuesday" is.
She deserved the criticism for not pointing out these obvious flaws. Whether the "extremists" were a bit too radical is another case altogether.
Parent
Re:true (Score:5, Informative)
Well, no. Your statement "IDEs...exist on Linux which...are far better than Visual Studio" is a subjective statement, backed up with nothing. That is a biased statement, or a partisan one if you prefer, and you would need facts and figures to back it up.
Cheers,
Ian
Parent
the claim of FUD is FUD (Score:5, Interesting)
the issue *isn't* that open source advocates are attacking her analysis.
the isue *is* that open source advocates have discovered that:
1. she teamed up with a microsoft gold partner to perform the analysis
2. they sent the survey to subscribers to a microsoft publication (a completely biased sample)
3. the analysis & survey don't match up well - a considerable amount of apparently unfounded interpretation occured.
So, are open source advocates sometimes excessive? Sure. But more to the point: Didio's analysis was beyond flawed - it was deceptive. And that discredits her as well as Forester.
Parent
Help me understand something. (Score:5, Insightful)
Firefox is Free (as speech, as beer).Do you apply that same logic to Microsoft?
If Microsoft publishes some FUD, do you immediately switch to an alternative?
Parent
Do you even know who she is? (Score:4, Informative)
Just take what she says wiuth a grain of salt.
Parent
Re:true (Score:5, Insightful)
The kettle called, it wants its color back. Laura Didio is the queen of OSS bashers in research analyst's clothing. Don't beleive me? Try a Google search on Laura [google.com].
She has made a career out of bashing open source because she knows it makes her one of the most well known technology analysts around. Read a bit about this woman and the reports she writes, and then tell me you don't see a trend. Whenever a long period of time goes where you hear nothing about Laura Didio, she throws out something controversial to stir the pot.
She's the equivalent of a troll - don't feed her.
Parent
Re:true (Score:5, Interesting)
And is easier to setup (for most distros) than windows from scratch
Huh?
I've installed, for various periods of time, a number of linux distros. Mandrake, a number of RedHats (6.something through FC2 I believe), and I currently run Gentoo. (For disclosure purposes, I also run XP on my laptop as well as a dual boot on my desktop, but I haven't been in anything but Gentoo on my desktop in ages.)
In no case can I pick any of these systems and say they were easier to set up than Windows. Windows is a truly idiot-proof setup. If you can set the time zone, you can get it installed and humming. All of the linux distros I used had at least some sort of package selection. I'm sure at least some, if not all, had a "just do what you want" option that would have made it basically the same as windows--but certainly not easier.
Once installed, the basics in setting things up for linux and Windows is either the same or tilted toward Windows, in my experience.
I'm really curious how you arrived at the conclusion that linux is easier to set up than Windows.
Parent
Re:true (Score:4, Informative)
You'd probably find out that the installer dies when it cannot find your hard drive, and you can't install extra drivers since you dont have a floppy drive.
Well you're right, you cannot set the timezone since the installer doesn't go that far so windows is no go on modern high-end machines without some slipstreaming to the cd.
Parent
Re:true (Score:5, Informative)
The mainstream Linux distros are pretty much the same as Windows. SuSE, Novell Desktop, Mandrake, Red Hat, etc are all as easy to install as Windows now. That wasn't true a couple of years ago. And like Windows, if things go wrong, you need to know what you're doing to get them working.
I too run Gentoo but it's a geeks distro and isn't as easy to setup as the more mainstream distros.
The package selection you pointed out is primarly because Linux tends to install a lot of apps along with the OS. Sure, Windows may not ask you about packages but when you're done, you don't have Office and a whole host of other software installed either. By the time you go through the install process for all of the additional software, I don't think Windows is much easier.
I'm not going to argue that Linux is easier, but it's hardly more difficult either in the mainstream distros.
Parent
She should know. (Score:3, Interesting)
She's a prime example of how pro microsoft extremism in the course of her job has decimated her credibility. Her. O'Gara ( for SCO). Enderle. No one believes them any more.
Learn your lessons well.
Re:She should know. (Score:5, Insightful)
It's not zealous nonesense. By any standard she's a shill.
I'm not defending the people who call her didiot, or call to harass her. They're idiots, no question. But she's far from innocent on the zealot scale, and I thought I'd take the opportunity to point that out.
Parent
From TFA.. (Score:5, Funny)
On SLashdot?
Say it aint so!
Re:From TFA.. (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:From TFA.. (Score:5, Insightful)
Continually modded up.
Yeah.
Hypocrites. Every last one of us.
If you want to turn this into a black/white Windows/Linux issue (which it most certainly is not), I daresay there are more pro-Microsoft posts on this site these days than otherwise, which makes me think there are more pro-Windows folks here than not. However, a goodly lot seem to be compelled to end their posts with "now this will just get modded down due to Slashbot hypocrite groupthink".
Guess what, Checkers? That sort of 12-year old boy prattling deserves modding down, because it's just pure flamebait.
Parent
As opposed to being bought out opinionistas? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:As opposed to being bought out opinionistas? (Score:5, Insightful)
I mean, really. If we get the job done, why not act like hippies, if that's what we feel like? Does it change anything about the product? Is Hippy Linux somehow inferior to CorpDrone Linux, supposing all the underlying code is the same? It's a dangerous idea, this concept of being able to not be a serf, and still being competent to make what society needs.
Parent
Reputation of GNU/Linux Advocates (Score:5, Insightful)
The big FUD statement we always hear is how is FOSS profitable if it's all being done for free? I always cite the Linux kernel itself as a model for the future; most of the people working on the kernel are paid developers. Companies like IBM sponser FOSS development. If every company which needs software to use worked in the same manner, the world would be perfect.
There are simply too many people who can't shake the idea that software is a "product" to be bought and sold. I've seen some pretty nasty things said to FOSS advocates. I've even seen some of the conservative opposition refer to FOSS as "Communism" and "Anti-American". Facing blatant ignorance and bigotry every day, it's no wonder that *nix people can seem condescending [halo43.com] at times.
Re:Reputation of GNU/Linux Advocates (Score:3, Insightful)
A classic example of that they are are talking about. Do you not think such a narrow perspective puts people off, or are war, disease, disaster and famine all ok because the world is perfect so long as software is free.
Re:Reputation of GNU/Linux Advocates (Score:3, Insightful)
I dunno, I kind of like the idea of getting paid to do what I love. I would love if everything were FOSS, but chances of that happening are slim to none. The only thing we have a *real* chance at is open standards, where hopefully the opensource client will be the best.
Re:Reputation of GNU/Linux Advocates (Score:4, Insightful)
Companies like IBM sells hardware. If making Linux available for their servers makes it easier for them to sell them, then yes, I can see them adding to the Linux kernel. To apply this in a broader sense, only hardware companies would be able to support software.
I've seen the claim that FOSS developers can make money by selling support for their software. That's kind of backwards as then there is no incentive to make their software easy to use or install, and actually creates a disincentive because that means hard to use software generates more support money.
Parent
The worst bit (Score:3, Insightful)
Which is the problem, since it's "not free enough", the zealots simply dismiss it, and lets face it, the zealots are the ones helping spread Linux usage. It's stupid and it needs to stop.
Re:The worst bit (Score:3, Informative)
Maybe "zealots" don't want to help spread software that doesn't meet their criteria for good software (i.e. "isn't free enough").
Re:The worst bit (Score:3, Insightful)
It's bullshit political ideology, of course!
Re:The worst bit (Score:5, Insightful)
For some of us the freedom is the goal and Linux is just a tool to help get there. What's annoying is that people who come into this community to get away from the lock in, disrespectfull treatment by software vendors, restrictive licensing etc. and the first thing they want to do is convince everyone to submit to the same crap over here. It's a bit like someone who moves into the countryside to get away from the city and the first thing they want is to put up street lights and mini-malls.
Parent
OK, every large group has assholes in it (Score:3, Informative)
Tell me about death threats or stalkers and I'd say you've got extremists. Tell me about name-callers and heavy-breathers and I'd say you've got the nuisance equivalent of script kiddies.
While we're at it... (Score:4, Insightful)
My point being, that the analysts damage whatever they're paid to damage nowdays, if you've been following things at all lately.
"I don't take money from any vendor" (Score:5, Interesting)
This statement was dismissed too quickly by Ziff-Davis:
The fact is that major analyst firms earn their revenue in two ways:
1. Selling reports and consulting services to customers (IT businesses in this example) that describe the market, the vendors, and who's doing what.
2. Selling consulting services back to the vendors to help them position their product for various markets.
It's tough for the analyst firms to remain objective because sometimes they make more money from the latter business than the former. And in that case, the vendor can exhibit tremendous pressure to make sure that no negative remarks are made about their products or even steer analyst reports in the direction they would like.
(Investment firms had a similar problem until recent regulations required them to maintain a split between the side that provide investment advice and the side that does IPOs for firms).
Does this mean that Microsoft has paid Yankee Group enough money that they are saying negative things about Linux? Not necessarily. But it does call into question DiDio's statement, "I don't take any money from any vendor." I've seen at least one top-tier analyst firm (though not Yankee specifically to my recollection) who reported favorable market results for firms that paid a lot for their consulting services. And Microsoft has been known for exerting some pressure on companies it works with.
Any time you have an entity expected to be "objective" but who's existance depends on the largess of the firms it is supposed to be objective about, you must be wary of these conflicts of interest.
Just like how it's dubious to suggest the mainstream media is going to seriously bite the hand of the Republicans that feed it (read as, interviews, embedded reporters during war, or bigger media-consolidation regulation), the industry analyst firms can be just as susceptible to strong-arm tactics of vendors.
If you wern't for sale... (Score:5, Insightful)
They are high-tech hookers, for-sale to the highest bidder. Their opinions/results have no meaning under such circumstances.
Get a little professional integrity and you'll get the respect you seek.
This reminds me of PETA (Score:5, Interesting)
Sounds like a nice group, I want animals to be happy too. Then one day they came around a KFC in my neighborhood and members yelled at families going in for dinner, calling them murderers and supporting animal concentration camps. They had a bucket of fake blood they threw on someone. Instantly, nobody gave a damn about their group. More importantly, people would support the opposite side just because they hate PETA.
Same think could happen with Linux. What got me interested in Linux was friendly people who really liked it, and wanted to share what they knew about it. What turns me off, I went to a Linux group meeting and had a dual boot machine, Windows 2000 and Debian. Someone gave me shit for having Windows on the laptop. Another dork, and I use the word dork because I think nerd is too nice; anyways, another dork starts laughing and saying how Windows sucks and how easy it is to hack into. I had my machine hooked up to the LAN, and these idiots decided they wanted to try and hack my machine. They even asked me to "ipconfig" and tell them my exact IP address. They thought I was an idiot. After 5 minutes I left. Fuck them.
Executive Survey??? (Score:3, Informative)
Maybe if Yankee Group asked the people doing the work and not the PHB's (who usually admit to not understanding the technology anyway), they would have gotten different answers. Perhaps its the frustration of the professionals who see their work summarized by higher-ups who don't understand it that is leading to such harsh criticism? DiDiot's pretty funny, too.
Dead on (Score:3, Insightful)
It reminds me of the other day in the subway when this crazy old guy was yelling about the trains running on different lines. He was actually correct, but nobody listened to him because he was a crazy old guy.
If we could somehow shut up these zealots and let only the presentable and friendly members of the Linux community do the talking we would be much further along. But I guess that's not the way its going to be.
our extremists are better then your extremists (Score:3, Interesting)
I'm a huge OS X fan, and its done my heart good to see more and more acceptence of OS X at the enterprise level, but problems still exist, and until they are worked out, I wish the extremists would just shut up.
Chad Dickerson writes a column for InfoWorld, and a few weeks back he mentioned some issues he has with OS X. He had the nerve to mention that perhaps OS X wasn't meant for everyone and got a firestorm of hate mail. His blog offers more detail:
http://weblog.infoworld.com/dickerson/001225.html
A consequence of the strengths. (Score:4, Insightful)
To quote Twain: "The pitifulest thing out is a mob." The democratic nature of OSS development gives strength (in terms of control) to anyone who wants it, but you have to work for it. Anyone can contribute to the linux kernel, but only a couple thousand do. It takes a lot of work, and it's not an easy way to earn respect.
Criticism, on the other hand, is easy. It doesn't take to much effort to tare someone down. Especially if you do it in an internet forum where you don't even need to look them in the eye.
The only silly thing about the article is that these groups are somehow surprised that the internet is mostly full of idiots, and that the people with enough time to flame research groups are teenagers. You'd think they'd have done their research... well, we won't get into that.
Hypocrisy. (Score:5, Interesting)
"The thing about Linux is, you can talk about a free, open operating system all you want, but you can't take that idea of free and open and put it into a capitalist system and maintain it as though it is some kind of hippie commune or ashram, because if you can do it like that, at that point I'm like, 'Pass the hookah please!'"
"I'm all for open source, and competition serves everyone's interest. But if Linux is really to take its place alongside Windows... then the vendors in this space cannot act like a bunch of hippies in a '60s commune or ashram. There really is no such thing as a free lunch."
She has a definite predisposal not to like open-source, right down to rejecting its philosophy and its ability to exist in a capitalist system... yet claims to be unbiased when her organization concludes that an open-source product inferior. She hates name-calling... but calls open-source developers communists and hippies.
As far as I'm concerned, she's getting what's coming to her.
Re:Link? (Score:4, Informative)
Parent
Oh, Laura's objective alright... (Score:5, Informative)
And for proof of that, check out her video here [microsoft.com]. Now, Laura, tell us again how objective you are again. (I could use a good laugh.)
Didio's objectivity spoiled by SCO involvement (Score:5, Informative)
She doesn't mention her quick involvement in the SCO case, where she was one of the first and only Analysts to sign the SCO NDA and claim publically they had a solid case. She wasn't all to forthcoming to her 15 year friendship with everyone's fav marketing vp, Black Stowell either.
http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/06/09/10550
Quickly after that initial report she produced a report that critized Linux vendors for failing to indemnify customers, the exact same line Darl McBride was telling.
http://www.ecommercetimes.com/story/31252.html
Then she produces a TCO report on Linux vrs Windows development that uses BEA and Oracle on the Linux side vrs IIS and SQL2000 on the MS side and reports MS is much cheaper then the linux solution. Which i belive is the one the article mentions.
So to say Didio was unfairly attacked because she objectively came out with reports that critize linux is quite wrong. She was questioned because of her seemingly permament bias against Linux.
If the source of this is not monetary, I'd hate to know what some Linux developer did to her to make it so Personal.
Nut Jobs??? (Score:3, Funny)
I should know. The court appointed Psychologist told me I'm a nut job. She said that was the technical term for it...
Here's what everyone here needs to understand.... (Score:5, Insightful)
This works as corporate marketing as well. Ads which are the most effective are ones that frame the competition as being idiots or ridiculous. The Coke vs. Pepsi truck driver commercials, etc.
This is strategy. Frame Linux advocates as fringe element types. Frame the open source movement as un-American, hippy idealism. Cast aspersions, and most importantly, PUT A WOMAN UP FRONT TO PLAY THE VICTIM ROLE.
Oh no, she's been flamed and horrible emails have been sent. Linux zealots are RUINING things. They are vociferously countering our FUD and constantly shedding light on our spin and half truths. We need to stop them!
This is a war. It's a war against a monolithic corporation which controls the operating system market with an iron grip, and is co-opting the mainstream press and buying favorable press. On the other side is the open source movement, now potentially aided by companies like IBM which will genuinely help it achieve legitimacy in the corporate and academic worlds. European and South American countries are realizing they get escape debt cycles by simply getting out from under the thumb of insane software license schemes.
In this war, you can expect every trick to be used. Linux users will be cast in the vein of the Simpson's comic book guy. Sarcastic nerds, nobodies, people who are wacko. People who hate capitalism and hate intellectual property law.
It's ordinary every day programmers contributing to something for the gerater good vs. Madison avenue types running bought and paid for marketing campaigns. You need to defy them by refusing to be defined by them. You need to recruit other people to the benefits of OpenOffice and OpenVPN and Linux and away from corporate juggernauts who will try and FUD this thing to kill it.
Re:Here's what everyone here needs to understand.. (Score:4, Insightful)
You're absolutely correct on every point.
And that's why people hate these clowns like DiDio - because these clowns are fundamentally vicious assholes who think nothing of lying and stealing and using the state to crush their opponents.
Back in the 1960's, one of the Situationist International people made the point that the hot violence of mobs and riots - so often derided as mindless violence - was precisely the right antidote to the cold, malicious thwarting of human potential which the state and the corporations DELIBERATELY engage in for their own benefit.
And as Bush and his cronies have demonstrated, these kind of people will kidnap you, torture you, and kill you and everyone around you to get their way - and then smirk about it at press conferences.
Unfortunately for them, so will I (leaving out the press conferences). Worse, I'm willing to wait for the right technology to perform a "Final Solution" on their asses.
Meanwhile, you are correct that the appropriate response is to keep producing good stuff and show it to people. Things will keep getting better if we do.
And that's why, as someone else posted, DiDio is "squealing like a pig" - and so is Bill.
Parent
If the Linux radicals haven't already... (Score:4, Insightful)
Some quotes (Score:5, Informative)
"Within the open source community, there are a large percentage of tinkers and 'ankle biters' who are trying their hand at hacking. Some are even communicating with each other. So it only takes one or two of these groups sharing information to be able to pull something off. When you have this type of passion, it's hard to fight because these people are like virtual suicide car bombers."
If you can't stand the heat Laura, don't keep throwing fuel on the fire.
Even though Billy boy over there says that you can't get burned by being his shill, you might get an unpleasant surprise...