Have you met some kind of resistance in a company, when you suggested Solaris instead of Linux? Why this resistance?
Frankly, Linux is not on par with Solaris, and also Solaris is cheaper than Linux, and still Linux prospers. The same with FreeBSD, which is more stable and also free. Still it is only Linux that prospers and get all the attention in the media. Why has everyone jumped on the Linux band wagon? What makes Linux so special, while other free and open Unices doesnt get much attention in media? After much research and thinking I believe I have an answer. I claim that Linux propers because of POLITICS. To prove my claim I have to present my proofs in a rigorous fashion, just as in academics. Everything will be clear at the end. But I will have to begin from the beginning. Read on. Have you heard about the mightiest lobby organisation in the world? It is the israeli lobby group called AIPAC. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aipac They used to act in secrecy, but as internet grows the knowledge about AIPAC spreads. "Esse non vidare" - to act but not be noticed. Former Ex President Jimmy Carter on AIPAC: http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2009-01-29/carter-on-iran/2/ "AIPAC is the dominant voice among the Israeli organizations in this country. And if you look at the purpose of AIPAC, it’s not to promote peace, it’s not to bring peace to Israel, it’s to promote and defend the policies of the incumbent government in Israel. And so they defend Israel. It’s politically impossible, as you know, for any member of Congress to make a public statement condemning or criticizing the policies of Israel. It would be political suicidal for them to do so. A lot of the members of Congress agree with me, some very high up in the Congress. But if they came out publicly and said it, their seats would be in danger." Professor from Harvard and Chicago universities on AIPAC in this research article: http://www.lrb.co.uk/v28/n06/mear01_.html "Since the October War in 1973, Washington has provided Israel with a level of support dwarfing that given to any other state. It has been the largest annual recipient of direct economic and military assistance since 1976, and is the largest recipient in total since World War Two, to the tune of well over $140 billion (in 2004 dollars). ... This largesse is especially striking since Israel is now a wealthy industrial state with a per capita income roughly equal to that of South Korea or Spain. ... Washington also provides Israel with consistent diplomatic support. Since 1982, the US has vetoed 32 Security Council resolutions critical of Israel, more than the total number of vetoes cast by all the other Security Council members. It blocks the efforts of Arab states to put Israel’s nuclear arsenal on the IAEA’s agenda." Glasgow University Media Group on AIPAC: http://www.gla.ac.uk/centres/mediagroup/badnews.htm “AIPAC’s power has become the stuff of Washington legend. Fortune magazine consistently puts it in the top five special interest groups. No other foreign policy based lobby group gets into the top twenty-five. ... For many years, pro-Israel organisations have organised letter-writing campaigns to protest against articles and programmes they dislike. With the development of email, this activity has grown enormously. Websites target individual journalists and provide ready-written letters of complaint for subscribers to send out.” Paul Craig Roberts, Assistant Secretary of the Treasury in the Reagan administration, on AIPAC: http://www.counterpunch.org/roberts01142009.html "Israeli politicians have been bragging for decades about the control they exercise over the US government. In his final press conference, President Bush, deluded to the very end, said that the whole world respects America. In fact, when the world looks at America, what it sees is an Israeli colony." Former CEO resigns after been caught. Why would he resign if it were not true? http://www.newyorker.com/archive/2005/07/04/050704fa_fact "in 1992. David Steiner, AIPAC’s president, was caught on tape boasting that he had “cut a deal” with the Administration of George H. W. Bush to provide more aid to Israel. Steiner also said that he was “negotiating” with the incoming Clinton Administration over the appointment of a pro-Israel Secretary of State. “We have a dozen people in his”—Clinton’s—“headquarters . . . and they are all going to get big jobs,” Steiner said. Soon after the tape’s existence was disclosed, Steiner resigned his post. I asked Rosen if aipac suffered a loss of influence after the Steiner affair. A half smile appeared on his face, and he pushed a napkin across the table. “You see this napkin?” he said. “In twenty-four hours, we could have the signatures of seventy senators on this napkin.” The Jerusalem Post: http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1167467657033&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull "You see a Congress that is supportive of Israel, so I don't think you're going to see much of a difference." Every top politician is AIPAC, or else they get no funding. Some AIPAC supporters: Bill Clinton, Hillary Clinton, Barak Obama, George Bush, Bush Senior, Dick Cheney, Madeleine Albreight, Ronald Reagan, etc etc. Barak Obama hastens to declare his support for Israel, again: http://edition.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/06/04/obama.victory/index.html What happens if you critize Israel as a top politician? Then you have to resign. Charles Freeman in National Intelligence Council says in Wall Street Journal: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123672847973688515.html?mod=googlenews_wsj Ok, I think I have proved now that AIPAC has tremendous power. The evidence is numerous. Just google a bit on AIPAC and read yourself. ------------------- How come AIPAC is this powerful? Well, they have very mighty and wealthy supporters. They are extremely influential. The Jerusalem Post writes: http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1191257286817&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull "It's a list of "the world's most powerful people," 100 of the bankers and media moguls, publishers and image makers who shape the lives of billions. It's an exclusive, insular club, one whose influence stretches around the globe but is concentrated strategically in the highest corridors of power. More than half its members, at least by one count, are Jewish." Marlon Brando said: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marlon_brando#Comments_on_Jews_and_Hollywood "on Larry King Live in April 1996, saying "Hollywood is run by Jews; it is owned by Jews" "How jewish is Hollywood", in Los Angeles Times: http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/sunday/la-oe-stein19-2008dec19,1,7113597.column The comments are interesting: "As someone who has had dealings with Several of the Studios in Hollywood and not being Jewish I can tell you not being Jewish feels like a disadvantage. Now I do not know this for a fact since I have not felt what it is like to be Jewish and try to talk to the studio's. However it seems like a few of my Jewish friends ideas get taken considerably further then those of my non-Jewish friends. ... I personally know of two producers, trying to either get their projects approved/distributed or work a deal with a major studio, and both were told (by people mentioned in this article) that there is no way it was going to happen because they were not Jews... NO JOKE!!!" Why does Hollywood always focus on the Holocaust? Why that many movies about the Holocaust? Why not other exterminations? As soon as Israel wages war, there are movies about the Holocaust in media. Always. Why are there a Holocaust centre in every state in the USA? A MUST READ: A MUST READ: A MUST READ: Article about the ownerships in big Media companies in Hollywood. http://www.natall.com/who-rules-america/index.html Talks about AOL, Time Warner, CNN, Walt Disney, Viacom, NBC Universal, Fox Television, Dreamworks, "New York Times", "Wall Street Journal", "Washington Post", etc. All Western media are Pro Israel: http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Israel/Media_Cover_Israel.html The Israelis has as much power in Finance, or even more, than in Media. (Lehman, Soros, Rotschild, etc) CONCLUSION ---------------------- As the Israeli has much power in finance, it affects SUN. What happens if an Israeli company begins to develop a new Operating System and sell it? As we have seen, the Israeli prefers to help each other (which is natural and nothing wrong). All Media companies prefer Google. And Finance companies prefer... RedHat. Recently SuSE was bought, so now I expect SuSE to receive lots of orders too. I think it is hard to build a company around FreeBSD or Solaris and sell it. But Linux is ok to build an Israeli company around. RedHat doesnt have to fight for orders, all finance companies switch from Unix to Linux. RedHat gets all the orders without asking. And the Israeli naturally give Linux and RedHat much attention in media. And support the RedHat stock via finance companies. It is politics. Next time an Israeli company is created, buy stock immediately, because it will get lots of orders without asking for them, see RedHat and Google stock. And SUN dies. For SUN to survive, the Israeli must be on the train with SUN. If they bought SUN, SUN would prosper. THE SOLUTION, TO SAVE SUN: Now, SUN must get the Israeli on the train. Soon the entire finance industry switches to Linux and SUN will die. Or SUN has to get new market where the Israeli are not active; not media, not finance. SUN must let the finance industry go. SUN can not compete against RedHat on technical merits or price. It is politics. What do you say? Am I well researched? Could this be true? Does it make sense? SUN is loosing because of POLITICS? -- This message posted from opensolaris.org _______________________________________________ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
