Yankee Group Slams Linux 'Extremists' 623
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."
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.
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.
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.
Re:The problem is (Score:3, Interesting)
I'm not going to make any juvenile insults against MS for their names, but it is one thing that really irks me about them. It's like they have absolutely no creativity whatsoever when it comes to naming things. Some people might make the argument that MS wants it to be plainly obvio
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.
Re:The problem is (Score:3, Insightful)
You are distracting from your own good points that you have and makes people question if you actually have a good point or have you an extreme bias and are blinded by love/hate.
>I use it on
Thats about effective as saying I use IRC chat spelling or l33t-speak to combat against the mass oppression of the traditional educational system. It says more about you than it does about your message.
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.
Some good points (Score:3, Interesting)
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.
Re:The problem is (Score:3)
Look at what you have to do for Windows in security- Firewall (depending on Version of Windows it is a third party addon), Antivirus (Probably a pay for option and closed source), Antispyware (Probably third party and at least a seperate addon), then finally run a third party browser. In Linux, you have a firewall that comes with the system, and
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).
TommyRe:The problem is (Score:3, Insightful)
I'm using Ubuntu 5.04 (hoary) and I have no plans to switch back to Windows except where necessary (school).
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", convenient
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.
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
Re:true (Score:3, Informative)
Well, exactly since unless you can develop for the other with each it doesn't really matter anyway. Xcode is extraordinary (and it's included with every $129 purchase of Mac OS X) but you can only develop for Mac and Java, so it ain't that useful for Linu
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.
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?
Really? (Score:3, Insightful)
They email you specifically? I find that difficult to believe.
/., but you do not have to take it personally.
I'm sure they tell each other that. Particularly on
Re:true (Score:2)
Re:true (Score:2)
Security updates and version upgrades to most software, sometimes ALL software, can be accomplished with a
Do you even know who she is? (Score:4, Informative)
Just take what she says wiuth a grain of salt.
Ahh, I see (Score:3, Insightful)
So now the Yankee Group wants to blame a nebulously-defined class of scapegoats ("Linux extemists") while it tries to recover.
Face it Yankee: Even Gartner did not make the same factual and ideological mistakes you did. Having your wagon hitched to SCO must be no fun right now and no doubt it is hurting business; THAT is the fault of noone but DiDio and her boss.
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.
Re:true (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:true (Score:3, Insightful)
I see the extremists belittle, spread FUD, and incorrect information.
That's true, microsoft.com [microsoft.com] is getting really bad. Their Get The Facts [microsoft.com] site is particularly extreme. According to them Linux is never the correct choice. ;-)
Remember, somebody needs to balance out the M$ marketing fanatics.
---
Commercial software bigots - a dying breed.
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.
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.
Re:true (Score:3, Insightful)
When I want a workstation that works as soon as I can, I use Windows. Sure it's not 100% installation bullet-proof, but
Re:true (Score:3, Informative)
Re:true (Score:3, Insightful)
Linux is okay to set up if you stick in the CD and let it format and go. I've found it a BEAR to add new hardware though -- I installed a fibre channel RAID device, and it always takes me about an hour to figure out how to get the device info out of
Re:true (Score:3, Informative)
For example, Gentoo's default udev naming scheme puts my CDRW in (at least) 3 places:
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.
Re:true (Score:3, Insightful)
This is a fucking tautology. What, is Linux easy to set up when shit goes terribly wrong?
I too run Gentoo but it's a geeks distro and isn't as easy to setup as the more mainstream distros.
Have you heard of Debian? It is about as hard to set up as Gentoo, although it is more consistant in how it does things.
Of course, by "mainstream" you mean "red hat, suse, mandrake", so I'll give this one to you. Those distro's are much easier as long as you just
Re:true (Score:3, Insightful)
In Linux you usually do these selections by clicking a few checkboxes and klick the continu button a few times and you are ready.
In windows you do it by visiting an online store paying a couple of hundred or dollars or more. Worry that your credit card info will be missused,
Then you wait just for FedEx to deliver a package. You open it to find the CDs insert them into your computer and
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:2)
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.
Re:She should know. (Score:2)
That's what I'm thinking. Check my history. I'm not a troll. I don't need karma. I call pot-kettle-black on her story, and for experessing my opinion I get mod-nuked.
Sensitive people, apparently.
Damn Yanks! (Score:2, Funny)
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.
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.
Re:As opposed to being bought out opinionistas? (Score:3, Insightful)
I'd suggest you do a bit of research before assuming that people who don't like DiDio don't like her because of "myopia and precious little else". She's no "Sammy the Bull", but she HAS fairly earned her reputation for being Microsoft's loyal enforcer.
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.
Re:Reputation of GNU/Linux Advocates (Score:3, Interesting)
sendmail
Re:Reputation of GNU/Linux Advocates (Score:3, Insightful)
IBM makes its money from services, not hardware. Interesting take here [djurdjevic.com]. The fact is that for most businesses, maintaining their own kernel, or web server, or mail server, won't give them a competative advantage over the competition but more cost.
Re:Reputation of GNU/Linux Advocates (Score:3, Interesting)
Reminds me of a sig I've seen here; "Information wants to be free. Mortgage wants to be paid."
Why do you want to see pay-for software die out? Why should the creation of software be any different to the creation of any other work? Or do you believe that *all* works (music, books, etc) should be free, with the creators supported either by other jobs or - for the lucky f
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:2)
I understand where RMS is coming from - as the leader of the Free Software Foundation he needs to be squeaky clean as possible in espousing his ethics in order to be as effective as possible. I also know that as it is with most anything, Freedom is a dual edged sword, and cuts both ways. Freedom gained for some usually means Freedom lost for others.
If I could solve that dillema, I sure wouldn't be posting he
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.
Re:The worst bit (Score:3, Interesting)
And, frankly, they have a point. Software freedom is an issue that occasionally gets burried by pricetags and flash. The fact that you mention "freeware" only demonstrates the point.
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.
What's that expression again... (Score:2)
"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.
Re:If you wern't for sale... (Score:2)
Right back at'cha!
Re:If you wern't for sale... (Score:3, Informative)
Professional integrity applies to ones profession. My profession is not to post on slashdot, her profession is to publish objective opinions on technology. First she participated in research funded by one of the vendors and second she publicly whined about her critics again via her professional identity.
Re:If you wern't for sale... (Score:3, Funny)
I would be pissed too.
Here is the problem though. Our megaphone seems to be louder then hers. Maybe, just maybe our voices are being heard louder then hers in the corporate halls. If this is tru
Re:If you wern't for sale... (Score:3, Informative)
HaHa! I almost fell out of my chair laughing. I had to forward your post to some co-workers
In other news (Score:2, Insightful)
A survey of cafeteria staff was recently completed in which they asked the various staff how often senior executives eat cafeteria food. The results indicate that senior executives NEVER eat cafeteria food.
"As the study was carried out independently, DiDio sa
Can't take the heat... (Score:2)
Please allow me to introduce myself,
I am an analyst of wealth and taste...
DaGoodBoy
Name calling (Score:2)
Reminds of the kid who stands up in class in front of everybody and complains that the kids are calling him "dick face" or something.
It ain't helpin' yer case, kid, so siddown.
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.
Since when is security not part of reliability? (Score:2)
The article says:
I guess compromised servers are just as reliable as uncompromised ones?
-- Terry
Why waste time bashing Microsoft... (Score:2, Insightful)
Note how earlier today, the story on Microsoft creating software for police to crack down on child pornography was greeted on slashdot with paranoia and conspiracy theory. How it is purely a move by Microsoft to do marketing. It doesn't matter what Microsoft does, it's always a conspiracy with you guys.
How about Mono? Mono is an amazing piece of OSS. But because it was based on something Microsoft did, it's considere
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.
There's Gnu Such Thing as GnuLinux Extremists (Score:2)
COULD do damage? It's long done... (Score:2)
Football-team fan maniacs don't detract from the respectability of the team itself, for instance.
Calling people at home with abuse is way over the line and certainly nobody should approve of it. I t
Here is the way I see it (Score:2, Interesting)
In many ways, this makes their zealotry a simple defense mechanism which will cause them to become unrealistic and unobjective for no reason other than they see criticism of Linux as an attack on themselves.
Defining the terms of the debate. (Score:2, Insightful)
Here's an example: Politician A says, "My opponent supported a bill that would increase the number of kill shelters in their district. Therefore, my opponent supports the killing of puppies." Then, an
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.
Re:A consequence of the strengths. (Score:3, Informative)
Constructive criticism is good, it's what produces quality in opensource. It's what keeps it viable and useful. Useless criticism is just that, useless. It provides nothing and should not affect the one on the receiving end. It simply adds or contributes nothing in any form or fashion.
That is
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)
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.)
+6, Incredible (Score:3, Interesting)
The open-source community's basic problem, as far as Didio et al are concerned, is that it doesn't give the Yankee Group enough money. It really is that simple.
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.
Re:Didio's objectivity spoiled by SCO involvement (Score:3, Informative)
And if some are inclined to dismiss the above as trivial ("there are always stupid people out there, no need to pay attention to them"), read this statement [groklaw.net] at Groklaw.
For those not aware of what had happened in the past few
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.
Calls at 11pm (Score:3, Funny)
Stick to your analysis and don't preach, it makes you look ever so slightly less biased. SCO found this out, you found this out, do not fuck with a community of people who have put their talent, and their names on the line to write code, and support the community. We have a thin, thin tolerance of people publically abusing us for no good reason other than that you seem to feel like it. I wonder, was William Genevesse (arrested for stealing the winows 2000 software and reselling it) ever convicted of being an "open source terroist" or perhaps and "ankle-biter" (I might agree with you here).
Truth be told you were dead wrong and instead of waiting for LAW ENFORCEMENT to do their job and arrest the cracker responsible for this, you launched a slur campaign.
Damaged Reputation (Score:3, Insightful)
It must be very convenient for them to have a few zealots around to distract from the question of the quality of their work.
If the Linux radicals haven't already... (Score:4, Insightful)
This probably won't go over too well... (Score:3, Informative)
That said, in my prior professional life I was a corporate-type IT manager. For two different companies over an 11-year period. During that time an old college friend of mine went to work for Computerworld as a reporter, and through her I met and occasionally worked with Laura DiDio back when she was covering the Novell beat for CW (old Google searches will probably turn up a quote or two from me in articles of hers). I can't directly speak of her attitudes now, because it's been a couple of years since I've spoken to her (I've talked to her about stuff since she joined Yankee, though). Here's my take on Laura, and where she's coming from:
Laura is not a tech geek like most of us are. She's also not specifically a fanboy of any particular company or technology. Laura's strength at CW was in insight - she did a good job of seeing through the fluff that companies were spewing and getting to the "real" impact behind it. Covering Novell back when Microsoft was first starting to take a big bite out of their business, she recognized then that it wasn't the superiority of the product that was winning the battle for Microsoft, it was the marketing. She also saw what Novell was doing wrong, but wasn't in a position to do much about it other than point it out in columns.
As an analyst, I'd say her work (that I've read) is usually solid. I don't agree with all her conclusions, but remember - her job is to figure out what mainstream business is doing and is interested in. It's not to rave about one platform or another. And since mainstream business is on Windows, converting would incur costs and complications that don't exist if they stay on Windows. Some companies would save money by moving to Linux - some would not. Sometimes it's worth it for a business. Sometimes it's not. And sometimes she's spot-on - sometimes she's not.
The folks who post flames about her and other analysts who say anything other than "Linux rocks and Windows sucks" regularly are giving Linux a bad name, Slashdot a bad name, and the whole open source/free software community a bad name. There are valid criticisms one can make of some of DiDio's work. Flaming the messenger personally because you don't agree with her professional conclusions - that's just stupid.
Even Rob Enderle deserves better.
OK, maybe that's going a little too far...
Brent Noorda responds (Score:3, Informative)
Yesterday, Brent Noorda posted an open letter on Groklaw Brent Noorda Sets the Record Straight [groklaw.net] --here's a key quote:
While the information provided by analysts like Rob Enderle and Laura DiDio weren't incorrect, their statements represented speculation more fitting to a daytime soap opera than to the business section of a newspaper.
this refers in part to DiDio's many inflammatory statements, in particular one from the SLC Tribune on March 9:
No one could say for sure Wednesday, although Yankee Group analyst Laura DiDio had some advice for those watching the fortunes of both Canopy and the Noorda Family Trust - two entities controlling hundreds of millions of dollars. "This is all about the money, and the ones most closely following the money are the Noordas' [four] kids," she said. "Who stands to gain the most? And what's the only thing that stood between them and the money?
"That was Ralph Yarro. So, good-bye, Ralph," DiDio added. "I don't think Yarro will be reinstated. I find that highly unlikely. . . They will just pay him off and send him on his way - but they won't countenance anyone who's a threat" to their monetary access.
People following the case know about Val Noorda Kreidel's tragic suicide a few weeks ago, and evidently, Brent Noorda felt compelled to address the out-of-bounds tactics of these so-called 'analysts.'
While it could be agreed that there are individual extremists among the pro-FOSS crowd, DiDio and her fellow neo-cons (Enderle, Maureen O'Gara) consider Groklaw itself to be a radical extremist site, despite the solid legal reportage done by Pamela Jones and company (so good, in fact, that SCO raided Groklaw's documents to seed their own prosco site).
While DiDio is crying harrassment, one could have a sense that the best defense is a good offense, as in she'd rather take offense than apologize for her own transgressions...
I encourage everybody who hasn't already, to check out Brent Noorda's open letter on Groklaw, and then decide for yourself who's the real extremist!
questioning their objectivity? (Score:3, Informative)
My, that name sounds familiar. I remember her repeating SCO's unsubstantiated claims about Linux being stolen SCO code.
You mean people haven't been questioning their competence?
I think the problem that Yankee Group has is indeed that Open Sourcers are questioning their competence in inconvenient places like the offices of CIOs and CTOs, and if the direct customers for Yankee Group publications and analysis start hearing enough questions as to whether or not the products are a rational use of company funds, Yankee is likely to find their customers going to the competition or even bringing analysis in-house.
Yankee doesn't sell to end users, their only market is corporate/investor, and ALL they have to sell is their credibility.
They should concentrate on finding facts to analyze, not trying to spread more Linux-related FUD. The only credibility that sort of thing hurts is their own.
This isn't "Linux zealots hurting. . ." anything but Yankee Group. I'm sure the Gartner people enjoyed reading the article.
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...
Re:Extremism is true (Score:2)