OK, now that I have read the article, I was steamed about some of the other points. Here's the feedback I sent to Forbes:
------------ Why is being anti-Linux any more acceptable than anti-Microsoft? If there isn't an agenda behind this article, then why the bitterness against Linux? You might be surprised, but in a lot of Linux circles, so-called "Microsoft bashing" is frowned upon because, frankly, it's immature. It would appear that it's just as popular to react to the zealots as to be one. In short, this article was very slanted. "...and OS/2 proponents (a very vocal, technical crowd) were never short on conspiracy theories about Microsoft's covert efforts to wipe out the operating system." Well, sure. People will tend to do this. But just because the theories were inaccurate doesn't mean there wasn't a conspiracy. Check your PC history, I think you'll find Microsoft had an agenda of their own that has propelled them to being the single-most influential technology company of all time. "Now, the same appears to be happening with Linux PCs. Despite Microsoft's overwhelming market share--somewhere north of 90%--there's an effort underfoot to make a dent in Windows with Linux PCs. And with that effort comes a return of the conspiracy theories." So? How is this a bad thing? Competition is at the heart of capitalism. It breeds innovation. It drives the market forward. Goodness, from a business magazine one would think this fact alone might be recognized. Linux or Microsoft is irrelevant: people discredit themselves any time they are closed-minded, agenda-driven or reactionary. I love to see balanced, fair, honest and transparent communications in any medium, including reporting, and I just can't help but take a moment to speak out when I see the opposite. ------------ On Sun April 4 2004 10:02, Curtis Sloan wrote: > Right on, man! I don't see any problems with your rebuttal. (/me didn't > RTFA ;-) > > Do they have a reply forum? I would say if there's a place to provide > feedback, these comments would do nicely. > > Grrrr. Now I'm likewise steamed. Guess I must be a OS/2 zealot. Or > something. ;-P > > Curtis > > On Sun April 4 2004 05:50, Brian Horncastle wrote: > > Heya, > > > > This isn't the first anti-linux article I�ve seen on Forbes, but this one > > seemed particularly harsh, in my opinion. > > > > http://www.forbes.com/2003/06/17/cx_ld_0617linux.html > > > > This article makes all kinds of inflammatory comments such as: > > > > QUOTE: "Judging from the holy war being waged by proponents of Linux PCs, > > it's clear that Linux is becoming the OS/2 of its time." > > RESPONSE: How is Linux anything like OS/2? I don't see similarities on > > any level. This comment is completely unsupported. > > > > QUOTE: "There is also a lack of mainstream applications for Linux PCs, > > and that's not going to change anytime soon. Sure, there are open-source > > software suites like StarOffice and OpenOffice, but beyond that it's slim > > pickings." > > RESPONSE: Hrmmm... I guess the 90084 applications on Sourceforge and the > > 51482 applications on Freshmeat don't count then? I guess all those Open > > Source applications used in industry today don�t count? This reporter so > > easily dismisses the whole Open Source model, implying that Open Source > > software is somehow inferior� just because she doesn�t see software in a > > box she assumes there is none. > > > > QUOTE: �To be sure, computer users have been tempted to smash their > > Windows PCs to bits. After all, freeze-ups, shutdowns and fatal errors > > are still an all-too-frequent part of the everyday computing experience. > > And because Microsoft tends to take a kitchen-sink approach to software > > development, most users pay for features they will never use or don't > > even know exist. But, for most, it's better than the Linux alternative.� > > RESPONSE: In this article she completely contradicts herself. On one > > hand she says how frustrated people are with Windows and then suddenly > > jumps to saying that it�s still better than Linux. Well why? Why is it > > better than Linux? She doesn�t explain or support this comment at all. > > > > QUOTE: �Mainstream computer users (those uncomfortable opening, > > programming or reconfiguring a computer) would not be satisfied with > > Linux PCs. Large and medium-sized corporate customers are probably not a > > good fit either.� RESPONSE: This statement makes me wonder if she has > > ever seen or done anything with Linux. If she had used Linux any time in > > the past 4-5 years she would be well aware of the advancements with > > desktop environments such as KDE and Gnome, which are easy to use for > > both �mainstream� and corporate users. Not to mention the constant > > improvements being made in Linux distributions. She just needs to look > > at Knoppix, Red Hat, Mandrake, and Suse to know that configuration is > > anything but difficult�. certainly no more so than on Windows. In most > > cases configuration is easier. Heck Knoppix auto-detects and > > auto-configures practically everything. Sure if someone wants to spend > > the time recompiling their kernel all the more power to them, but the > > fact is it�s not required. > > > > QUOTE: �That leaves technically savvy individuals and Microsoft haters to > > make a market for Linux PCs.� > > RESPONSE: Well considering her previous comment that �computer users have > > been tempted to smash their Windows PCs to bits� I guess that means that > > everyone is on our side. > > > > > > Overall this article seemed to be somewhat all over the place. Most of > > the points made were either contradicted or ill informed. Anyway, this > > article got me a bit steamed up so I thought I would share. Be > > interested to hear what others think. > > > > Regards, > > > > Brian > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > > Add photos to your messages with MSN Premium. Get 2 months FREE* > > http://join.msn.com/?pgmarket=en-ca&page=byoa/prem&xAPID=1994&DI=1034&SU= > >ht tp://hotmail.com/enca&HL=Market_MSNIS_Taglines > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > clug-talk mailing list > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > http://clug.ca/mailman/listinfo/clug-talk_clug.ca > > _______________________________________________ > clug-talk mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://clug.ca/mailman/listinfo/clug-talk_clug.ca _______________________________________________ clug-talk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://clug.ca/mailman/listinfo/clug-talk_clug.ca
