Why has the Linux community become the biggest source of FUD
|
| Author | Content |
|---|---|
| cjcox May 08, 2007 7:16 AM EDT |
I do not understand why the Linux community has become the
source of all FUD lately. The assertions made in this story
are so far from the truth that it is very sad... not funny. Perhaps Microsoft has won.. but I'll tell you they are winning because the Linux community has turned cannibalistic. If the idea of free software is now equal to "kill Microsoft" and anyone who deals with Microsoft, then Linux will get very, very, very lonely. |
| dcparris May 08, 2007 7:29 AM EDT |
There is no doubt that MS have asserted themselves once again. The question in my mind is, does it really matter? Is their assertion all Sam has it cracked up to be? |
| jsusanka May 08, 2007 7:29 AM EDT |
here is some fud for you "Executable images created for the DOS/Wintel environment, using the GNU GCC compilers and language standards (but not linking to the Win32 API), are subject to failure (or performance degradation) when executed in Microsoft Windows Vista, because Vista arbitrarily restricts the memory space for the GCC executable to 32 MB (33,554,432 bytes). Attempts to allocate more memory than this using the malloc(...) function (or related functions, such as calloc(...)) will fail. This limitation applies whether the application is executed with the Run command, within a Command Prompt box (DOS box), or with the Start command. This limitation does not appear in Windows XP, Windows 98SE, or standalone DOS; the exact same executable, running under Windows XP SP2 or Win98SE, is capable of allocating several hundred megabytes of physical memory (if present on the machine). The limitation appears to apply to any compiler and linker not employing Microsoft's proprietary Win32 API." I am sure it is just a bug (cough cough!!) who needs more than 32mb of memory anyway? |
| bigg May 08, 2007 7:37 AM EDT |
One sentence sums up the entire article. "Now it is obvious that Microsoft allowed Dell to sell Ubuntu only on condition that it also sold SUSE." Okay, so Microsoft tells Dell everything they can do. Microsoft allowed them to sell one Linux distro only if they sell a different Linux distro. If Microsoft can tell Dell what to do, why not just tell Dell to sell Windows and not sell Linux? The twists and turns in the stories are hard to follow. First Dell would never consider selling Linux desktops and laptops because of fear of Microsoft. Then Dell announced that they would offer Ubuntu. Today the story is that they get permission to offer Ubuntu as long as they offer SUSE. What will the story be tomorrow? |
| dinotrac May 08, 2007 8:08 AM EDT |
> What will the story be tomorrow? I'm thinking that we'll learn: A) Microsoft has perfected time travel, which is why they didn't have enough time to make Vista work right. B) Steve Ballmer was on the grassy knoll at Dealey Plaza on November 22, 1963. C) Microsoft has blocked the creation of large cars and SUVs that can get 65 mpg while emitting no pollutants whatsoever because cars that efficient and friendly would make people demand more from their computers. D) Microsoft has hacked into the Mars Rovers' computers to prevent anyone from discovering that Mars is home to a noble and benevolent civilization that wants to partner up with mankind in order to eliminate poverty, war, disease, and --ooops! -- unequal distribution of wealth. |
| jdixon May 08, 2007 8:11 AM EDT |
>> Now it is obvious that Microsoft allowed Dell to sell Ubuntu only on condition that it also sold SUSE. Not obvious, but a reasonable conclusion. > Okay, so Microsoft tells Dell everything they can do. By and large, yes. Dell is absolutely dependent on Microsoft selling them Windows at a competitive price. That gives Microsoft a great deal of control over their business. > Microsoft allowed them to sell one Linux distro only if they sell a different Linux distro. No. They allowed them to sell Ubuntu only if they purchased SuSE licenses from Microsoft. > If Microsoft can tell Dell what to do, why not just tell Dell to sell Windows and not sell Linux? They did so for years. Times have changed, and Dell's not doing too well. They're desperate enough to try something new. Microsoft, not wanting to lose one of their man customers, was willing to negotiate. None of this can be proven one way or the other, but based upon what we know of the way both Dell and Microsoft have operated in the past, they're perfectly reasonable conclusions to reach. |
| SFN May 08, 2007 8:12 AM EDT |
dino, Your crystal ball needs some polishing. What we find out in B is that Ballmer is a greasy troll. |
| jdixon May 08, 2007 8:14 AM EDT |
> B) Steve Ballmer was on the grassy knoll at Dealey Plaza on November 22, 1963. No, no, no! That was Ray Ozzie. Ballmer would never do something like that himself. |
| dinotrac May 08, 2007 8:14 AM EDT |
SFN - Sorry, man, you're out of date. Since losing his hair, he's a shiny troll. |
| SFN May 08, 2007 8:20 AM EDT |
Hmmmmm. I envision a children's book. Kind of a Brothers Grimm/Cyberpunk thing. |
| dinotrac May 08, 2007 8:26 AM EDT |
>I envision a children's book. Kind of a Brothers Grimm/Cyberpunk thing. You sure that's not grim brothers? |
| bigg May 08, 2007 8:26 AM EDT |
> they're perfectly reasonable conclusions to reach Yes, but here's another. Dell thought they could increase profit by offering computers with Ubuntu rather than Windows. I keep mocking the conspiracy theories because an outside observer viewing the LXer forums would conclude "they're nuts" and walk away. Only someone anti-Microsoft to the point of insanity could stomach many of the posts here. |
| SFN May 08, 2007 8:34 AM EDT |
By your own admission we have two reasonable conclusions. Yet also by your own admission, you keep mocking one of them. Do you not see the problem there? |
| jdixon May 08, 2007 8:37 AM EDT |
> Yes, but here's another. Bigg, notice I didn't say the conclusions were correct, merely that they were reasonable, based on the past actions of both companies. We're not Dell or Microsoft insiders. We don't know what they're actually thinking. All we can do is observe and theorize. In any case, most of the questions concerning Dell will be answered over the next few months. The story does appear to be wrong about one thing though. Dell selling SuSE is nothing new. While it's possible that I'm misremembering, I believe Dell has already been selling SuSE as an option on their servers for some time. Added: Now, if anything, that makes the deal even more suspicious, but... |
| Abe May 08, 2007 9:31 AM EDT |
Quoting:Dell selling SuSE is nothing new. While it's possible that I'm misremembering, I believe Dell has already been selling SuSE as an option on their servers for some time. Very true and valid, but what's new is the contract that Dell is being obligated to sign with MS. Why does Dell need to sign such an agreement to distribute Ubuntu? Shouldn't Cannonical do that? Does Dell need such a contract to sell Suse when Novell already has one to protect users from MS suing them? Or does the Novell-MS contract require the purchase to be done through MS to collect their tax? Lots of fishing stuff that Novell-MS agreement created and some still want to ignore its foul odor. |
| dinotrac May 08, 2007 9:38 AM EDT |
>Dell is being obligated to sign with MS. Huh? Obligated by whom, what, where or how? Maybe, just maybe, Microsoft made it worth Dell's while to sign a deal. It's all business in the end. |
| helios May 08, 2007 10:16 AM EDT |
"...It's all business in the end." Ah...and there it is...accepted illegitimation of anything regardless of purpose, law or MS invective. |
| bigg May 08, 2007 10:35 AM EDT |
> Why does Dell need to sign such an agreement to distribute Ubuntu? Actually, my reading was that if Dell wanted to sell SUSE, Microsoft was demanding that they distribute Ubuntu. |
| Abe May 08, 2007 11:34 AM EDT |
Quoting:Huh? Obligated by whom, what, where or how? Obligated by whom => "MS" what => "a la Novell-MS agreement" Where => "Universal" How => "Dell & MS to figure it out" Quoting:It's all business in the end. Of course it is, but we don't have to like it, do we? and we can respond to it, can't we? |
| DarrenR114 May 08, 2007 11:37 AM EDT |
@bigg
Quoting: > Why does Dell need to sign such an agreement to distribute Ubuntu? It's kind of hard to continue villifying Novell and SUSE if your reading is the case, so you must be wrong because we all *know* Novell is the bad guy, even worse than MS. |
| Abe May 08, 2007 11:39 AM EDT |
Quoting:Actually, my reading was that if Dell wanted to sell SUSE, Microsoft was demanding that they distribute Ubuntu. Are you saying MS wants to put Canonical on the spot to sign an agreement similar to Novell-MS one? I think you have a point. |
| bigg May 08, 2007 12:06 PM EDT |
I'm just applying the logic of previous posts. The Novell/MS/Dell deal was announced around the same time as Dell is installing Ubuntu. Because the two deals happened at the same time, one must be the cause of the other. Everyone is just assuming that selling SUSE is a requirement for selling Ubuntu. Why not the other way around? Of course > we all *know* Novell is the bad guy, even worse than MS. so I guess I must be wrong. |
| Abe May 08, 2007 12:42 PM EDT |
Bigg, Many of us are doing a lot of reasonable deductions and speculation, that is normal considering that everything is being done in secrecy. We wanted so much to have a big OEM to pre-install Linux and everyone got excited about Dell's move. But sometimes we need to be careful what we wish for. This Dell move could be one of those cases. MS tried to get closer to FOSS but wasn't welcomed due to its persistent bad habits. Now they are the un-invited guest into FOSS and they are doing that using their big influence in the industry, which is still substantial. They started with Novell, then Red Hat (failed) and now they are on it with Dell. Although they appear to be winning, they are not. We went through such stage when SCO sued IBM, where is SCO now? Its just a phase and MS will run out of options. At that point, the real battle will begin because MS will start suing. I hope we are ready. |
| dcparris May 08, 2007 12:52 PM EDT |
Actually, Abe, MS started with Red Hat, and went to Novell after that failed. Or maybe you forgot about the infamous dinner between Matt & Steve way back when. |
| Abe May 08, 2007 1:05 PM EDT |
Quoting:Actually, Abe, MS started with Red Hat I think you are right Don. but it doesn't really matter! Old age is my excuse, I am losing track here.:) |
| bigg May 08, 2007 1:11 PM EDT |
> Many of us are doing a lot of reasonable deductions and speculation, that is normal considering that everything is being done in secrecy. I guess we have different definitions of 'reasonable', and you have a broad definition of 'speculation'. "We KNOW Dell does anything Microsoft tells them to do" is hardly speculation. Speculation should start with a disclaimer: "I actually don't know anything at all about this topic, but here is just one of many possible explanations for the facts." There's not a single post accusing Dell of wrongdoing on LXer the last couple of days that is backed up evidence. > But sometimes we need to be careful what we wish for. I'm sure you will be careful, I won't worry about it to much. Dell could give away Linux computers and most LXers wouldn't accept it out of fear that Microsoft paid Dell to do it. There would be many confident assertions about Dell's motives on these boards. |
| jdixon May 08, 2007 1:14 PM EDT |
> Dell could give away Linux computers and most LXers wouldn't accept it out of fear that Microsoft paid Dell to do it. That's a gross exaggeration. I'm absolutely certain than no more than 49.99 % of LXer's would feel that way. |
| bigg May 08, 2007 1:17 PM EDT |
> That's a gross exaggeration. I'm absolutely certain than no more than 49.99 % of LXer's would feel that way. Good idea, let's do a poll. Everybody can tell us whether or not they would accept a computer from Dell if it had Linux but not Windows installed. If not, please state your reasons. Edit: I'm not actually serious about this. |
| tracyanne May 08, 2007 1:17 PM EDT |
Actually if DELL were giving away computers with Linux pre installed, and I suspected Microsoft of paying DELL to do it, I'd write a thank you note to Steve Ballmer. |
| jdixon May 08, 2007 1:20 PM EDT |
> Everybody can tell us whether or not they would accept a computer from Dell if it had Linux but not Windows installed. If Dell were giving away computers, I'd take it whether it had Linux on it or not. I can always load Slackware myself. Added: Oh, and I think you missed my point, which is that you are at least partially correct. :) |
| Sander_Marechal May 08, 2007 2:15 PM EDT |
Quoting:Good idea, let's do a poll. Everybody can tell us whether or not they would accept a computer from Dell if it had Linux but not Windows installed. If not, please state your reasons. I'd take one. Or more. Or a truckload. MS is paying so no sense in hiding my greed :-) I know of a bunch of schools that could use the computers. |
| Abe May 08, 2007 3:40 PM EDT |
Quoting:Dell could give away Linux computers and most LXers wouldn't accept it out of fear that Microsoft paid Dell to do it Before I say I will definitely take one, I need to ask you whether I have to sign any contract or agreement. If no strings attached, I definitely want one. If I have to sign, then I have to check thinks out first. You see Bigg, there is a long history we can learn from and makes us skeptical and cautious. ‘those who ignore the lessons of history are bound to repeat them’. MS certainly has a long history and so does Dell, both are not trustworthy or comforting. I hope you see where many of us are coming from. |
| Libervis May 08, 2007 4:21 PM EDT |
I'll try to play a role of a vague predictor here. What Microsoft is doing with these deals is all they can really do before completely letting go and joining the GNU/Linux bandwagon. This stage will last for a while, but it will ultimately fail to deliver to Microsoft what they wish it to deliver. It seems like many have missed what may be a hidden point behind these sentences of the article: "The spread of Linux on the desktop is not going to come from the efforts of any big industry player; it is only going to come from concerted efforts by smaller players. Linux became what it is today by such efforts and it isn't going anywhere by any other methods." This is really the key. It is the thing Microsoft should fear the most. It is the reason why Microsoft really can't defeat us. It is the community and its desire and consequent ability to change the world. Microsoft can try grabbing onto the power it inherited from the old world, but in a new world WE are creating, this cannot last for too long. Microsoft will fail. What we are seeing is merely a process of leading to their failure. If it were winning, we wouldn't be seeing them making deals with GNU/Linux related vendors and companies, would we? If we, the community, didn't make GNU/Linux THAT important and threatening, why would they do that? It is THEM who are reacting to us, not us to them. So, tell me, who is the boss, really? |
| pat May 08, 2007 4:33 PM EDT |
Libervis, finally some sanity. Thanks. BTW, all this talk about Dell? Why there is a whole database of Linux vendors on this site. We should be supporting them instead of the devil. |
| jimf May 08, 2007 4:37 PM EDT |
> We should be supporting them instead I agree. I'm not up for a new rig, but if I were, there are some sweet hardware deals in that list, with or without Linux. Dell quality doesn't even come close. |
| jdixon May 08, 2007 5:40 PM EDT |
> BTW, all this talk about Dell? For the same reason Ken is pursuing Tux500. Dell is known vendor with name recognition. When you say Dell is selling Linux, people will do a double take. How many of the vendors in the database can you say that about? You and I know that the Linux machine from the vendor in LXer's database is just as good. The average person doesn't. |
| jimf May 08, 2007 5:55 PM EDT |
> The average person doesn't. So you're saying that to promote Linux to the average person, we should push mediocre computer hardware? Sorry, I'm not gonna do that. Truthfully, I'd never buy or recommend Dell. I didn't when I ran Windows, and, I'm sure not doing it now. |
| SFN May 08, 2007 6:08 PM EDT |
Quoting:Truthfully, I'd never buy or recommend Dell. I didn't when I ran Windows, and, I'm sure not doing it now.I was just having this conversation with someone today. We were talking about how, before we even used Linux, we loathed the products Dell made. Why would we be thrilled to have Dell selling Linux boxes? Suppose E-Machines started selling Linux. |
| jimf May 08, 2007 6:42 PM EDT |
> Why would we be thrilled to have Dell selling Linux boxes? Well, not only that, but personally, I'd just rather support a small business that's busting it's butt to supply decent hardware and Linux than I would to support a corporate mega-giant anyday. |
| jdixon May 08, 2007 6:45 PM EDT |
> So you're saying that to promote Linux to the average person, we should push mediocre computer hardware? No. We don't have to. Like it or not, Dell will do that for us. |
| pat May 09, 2007 2:51 AM EDT |
You'd be surprised how many people have a Dell horror story. Gateway, burned them first, btw. |
| helios May 09, 2007 6:41 PM EDT |
LXer's database is just as good. The average person doesn't know..." That's about to change. When Dell said no to our request, and I don't have any solid evidence that their reasons were anything BUT what they said they were, I got to thinkin'. Now usually, that means someone is about to get hurt and I'm going to spend the afternoon filling out insurance forms, but in this case, it worked out for the best. check out the last few blogs at boh blog of helios. AND...a response posted below from someone up in the Exec-U-Culture of ZaReason.com: Wow, you know how to generate traffic! Please accept a profuse thank you. Here's the About section I promised..... ZaReason, Inc. It does my heart good to see things like this. Yeah, I was excited about Dell at first too, Ubuntu or not. However, the perennial Christmas article warning people away from Dell still is valid due to their proprietary assembly line procedures and machine blueprint plans. I have to go into the archived old L4L site and see if I can dust it off and put it back into service. It outlines several things Dell does to thwart the do-it-yourselfer from rebuilding or upgrading her computer. If memory serves me correctly, and there's no reason to think that it's going to start doing so now, I believe it was the Dell Dimension 2400 with the numerous hardware hacks that precluded after-market parts to be used. If you managed to McGuyver your way out of that, you had to deal with a Dell-hacked bios which proved to be the show stopper. Were they going (or ARE they going) to do the same with Linux computers? That's gonna go over like poop in a punchbowl. I like the folks we are working with now...specifically ZaReason and PricePC.com. My man is right...better parts, better support, better price and we don't (knowingly) have to worry about MS pulling their strings for anything. h |
Posting in this forum is limited to members of the group: [ForumMods, SITEADMINS, MEMBERS.]
Becoming a member of LXer is easy and free. Join Us!