Linux Today: Rik van Riel: FUD counter
[ headlines |
features |
commercial |
security |
jobs |
volt |
contribute/submit |
media kit |
search |
site digests |
mailing lists |
about us |
link us ]
Rik van Riel: FUD counter
Oct 7, 1999, 16:38 UTC
Date: Thu, 7 Oct 1999 16:02:15 +0200 (CEST)
From: Rik van Riel riel@nl.linux.org
To: Linux Kernel
Hi,
After the recent FUD attacks (by SCO, Microsoft and others) where
the "attackers" have resorted to outright lies and half-truths, it
has become apparent that the Open Source community can simply
counter such articles with friendly, well-worded responses that
are purely based on easily verifyable facts.
It's also quite clear that there are several dozen people on
these lists who like to spend time getting angry about the FUD
attacks and sometimes writing down replies. This is not only
inefficient, it also gets in the way of people who just want to
code and now have to cope with extra traffic on the lists.
Putting one and one together, it would probably be best to set
up a mailing list (and maybe later a web site) dedicated to
setting straight the facts that were bent so horribly against
us by marketing departments in various companies.
This not only gives us some sort of "marketing department" of
our own, it also makes sure that the regular FUD attacks don't
take time away from the developers. Of course, we cannot work
like a "normal" marketing department. We do all of our work
out in the open and, as such, are exposed to much more scrutiny
than any commercial company could ever be. This means that we
will have to limit our responses facts that are 100% true and
easily verifyable. I suspect this will be easy and fun for
most of us anyway, so I'll just stick to that rule :)
People wanting to join in the fud countering effort can join the
fud-counter@nl.linux.org mailing list by sending a message to:
"majordomo@nl.linux.org"
with the following text in the body of the message:
"subscribe fud-counter"
And remember, from now on there's no reason to post fud alerts
to linux-kernel, linux-future or any other of the development
lists...
regards,
Rik
--
The Internet is not a network of computers. It is a network
of people. That is its real strength.
--
work at: http://www.reseau.nl/
home at: http://www.nl.linux.org/~riel/
Related Stories:
Les Barstow: MS Linux Myths - The Truth Revealed (Oct 07, 1999)
DoLinux.org: A Response to Microsoft on Linux Myths (Oct 06, 1999)
Martin Hebrank: My take on the MS Linux Myths document (Oct 06, 1999)
LWN: A look at Microsoft's Linux Myths (Oct 06, 1999)
Martin Brooks: Response to Microsoft's Linux Myths Statement (Oct 06, 1999)
Microsoft.com: Linux Myths (Oct 05, 1999)
Return to today's headlines.
Comments from readers:
mike - Subject: Good idea (1999-10-07 16:51:01) |
Good idea. Now how do we get the PHB's to read the truth? |
Frobozz - Subject: The nth rebuttal and Microsoft (1999-10-07 17:04:04) |
Folks, we're playing RIGHT into Microsoft's hands with these endless streams of rebuttles. I haven't read any that were really good from start to finish...too much anger gets mixed in. Worst, some of the rebuttles are playing the same game Microsoft did...FUD.
Linux did not become a big thing by playing the FUD game, nor the counter-factoid game. Linux succeeded in SPITE of marketing, funds and hype. There iss no dedicated 'lab' where the code is written, and of course, no fixed address. Do we need to counter Microsoft's FUD? I'm not so sure. Linux has always been a smashing success in spite of it before (Of course, back then it was just 'Unix' that was the 30-year-old technology, not 'linux'). When you grapple with an 800-pound gorilla you better be sure that you're at least 801 pounds.
Microsoft wants to distract us from making a great operating system, and building a strong user community. They WANT us to appear like a rabid group of 'punk kids'. They WANT these angry rebuttles. Anything they can do to detract from the community that created Linux is what they want. I say, forget it...go the Amazon way and just respond "oh." to Microsoft's pages and pages of FUD. Then, get back to coding and making a real difference.
Microsoft and the rest of the industry can't understand what the Linux movement is. We aren't a corporation, yet they want us to play like a corporation. They want us to believe we have a product and a timeline. Nothing could be further from the truth...we have a concept, a movement, and a tool to fill our needs. Forget about 'products' and IPO's...linux was never about that. It's always been about creating a tool that we, the users/hackers/sysadmins/whatever could USE to accomplish our goals...and those needs are changing and growing all the time. Microsoft can sit back and pick Linux apart and say "you're missing this, this and this"...but they're missing the point. They're in the business of providing a static package that masquerades as a swiss army knife...Linux is organic. We may lack one 'feature' today, but tomorrow we'll have it (look at how fast PPPoverE is growing, and in such a short time!).
I've read some people saying that Linus himself should respond...but WHY? Linus has better things to do...let's not distract him with this cruft.
Bottom line: the success of Linux was never written on a web page, nor glossed on some marketing pamphlet. We've worked our way into the server rooms and desktops of the world on word-of-mouth. What company in the world has ever been able to do THAT?
And honestly...if you were investigating what Linux can do for you, would you really go to microsoft.com to find out?
(this is just my opinion of course...the nice thing is, we, the Linux community, have many.)
|
Rares Marian - Subject: Fight FUD with Fire (1999-10-07 17:30:26) |
I think it's a decent compromise to have the FUDcounter list. The day I see /.ers post lines of code and other things like that is the day things will seriously change. |
wass - Subject: Re: the nth rebuttal and MSFT (1999-10-07 17:45:44) |
Frobozz wrote:
Microsoft wants to distract us from making a great operating system, and building a strong user community. They WANT us to appear like a rabid group of 'punk kids'. They WANT these angry rebuttles. Anything they can do to detract from the community that created Linux is what they want. I say, forget it...go the Amazon way and just respond "oh." to Microsoft's pages and pages of FUD. Then, get back to coding and making a real difference.
I agree with you that MSFT wants to disrupt the linux community, but I don't think we should outright ignore the FUD. The FUD Counter article suggests revealing "friendly, well-worded responses that are purely based on easily verifyable facts." Many of the other rebuttals came from single members of the Linux community who were so displeased with MSFT and also eager to get something out to counter the FUD that they let their anger for MSFT mix in with their rebuttals. They may also have provided non-factual data and/or counter FUD.
This FUD Counter suggestion would allow a group think-tank to apply well-conceived rebuttals to each FUD accusation one at a time. This would also help alleviate any anti-MSFT feelings and general angst that may be embedded if people single-handedly posted their rebuttals with no central organization. This also creates a group to take care of such things such that full-time developers (eg, Linus) don't have to waste time refuting illogical FUD claims.
I personally think this is a great suggestion for the community, because it will not only counter the anti-linux FUD, but also help calm the stereotype of the linux-advocate as the crazed anti-MSFT zealot who criticizes/flames all that downplay linux. I believe anything well-organized and factual like this cannot go wrong. Plus, if any of the supposed FUD accusations turn out to be non-obvious truths, it's just that much easier to pass on the info to the linux coders. However, we cannot just stand idly by and watch inferior technology take over, due to superior marketing. Can anyone say Betamax?
As an aside, another possible suggestion is to include expected release dates of unfinished projects (such as ext3fs, etc). I know lots of this type of info is available in the weekly kernel news and kernel cousins. But if a list of specific linux-deficient packages and it's coding status is maintained, it can help alleviate people's fears that are buying into the FUD. More importantly, however, would be the reliability factor of these numbers. If such projects are sketched out, and then shown to achieve their goals, it only serves to increase linux's credibility. That is, products in the works won't just be looked at as vapourware, because of the history of successfully-completed projects. This is pure theory, I don't know if it can work or not. But it can help nullify some of the anti-anti-MSFT accusations, which claim that linux advocates refer to vapourware products as well. Just my 2 cents.
|
Arty - Subject: M$ hasn't done FUD, this is a desperate cry (1999-10-07 18:04:11) |
I think M$ has really understood LINUX is something very, very big; in fact, much bigger than a $500.000.000.000 company. And they are affraid, very much.
Form M$, Linux is not a single target enemy, not anything money can buy (their billions are not worth in this game..!)
And LINUX is growing, and growing, and growing, and getting better than Windows, and better, and *faster* ...!!!
They only have a sure way to stop LINUX: make something better and/or cheaper. But this is something they know they are not able to do.
No wonder M$ has passed from worried to afraid. |
Paul - Subject: The real problem (1999-10-07 18:19:54) |
The problem about responding to vendor propaganda is that you inevitably end
up fighting them in exactly the areas they have chosen! Thats why the
mindcraft fiasco did us little good as we set out to prove that Linux could
work as well or better than NT in area that nobody cares about. Only a
tiny fraction of users are interested in solving that particular problem
with those parameters.
Here we go again. Don't try and rebut their propaganda, write better propaganda
in an area of your choosing.
Paul |
Robert Crawford - Subject: False Dichotomy (1999-10-07 18:31:46) |
I keep hearing complaints that we should ignore MS and concentrate on the code. Good idea -- concentrating on the code -- but a false choice. People read these things when they're taking a break from code, or when they don't feel like coding, or -- gasp -- the people writing the code don't read these things.
[I don't think we'll ever see /.'ers posting code because they aren't, by and large, coders.] |
Mike Cornall - Subject: All Work And No Play . . . (1999-10-07 19:55:27) |
Don't deny me the simple pleasure of puncturing that big bag of wind. :^)
I do agree, however, that there are right places and wrong places to post a rebuttal. For example, posting to the Linux Today story that links to the MS FUD -- good, posting to the linux-kernel mailing list -- bad. |
Tony O'Bryan - Subject: FUD Counter (1999-10-07 21:17:14) |
This seems to be a good idea if there are people willing to maintain it. Such maintainers have the responsibility of verifying contributions for accuracy/correctness and acting as a filter for unfriendly (though possibly technically correct) rebuttals.
|
Esko Woudenberg - Subject: Best FUD Response... (1999-10-08 05:13:07) |
Linux is not going away... For a honest comparison of Linux and Windows take a left-over machine and set up a "dual-boot" configuration of Linux and Windoze on it. Work with both until you properly understand them. Then you can decide for yourself which OS is best for which tasks...
Esko Woudenberg
|
db - Subject: Friendly well worded (1999-10-08 12:58:57) |
has he actually read any of the "counters" to the "MS FUD?" They are the WORST written, anger filled, NO facts based responses I've ever read. ANY professional who had the MS article in one hand and any/all of these replies in teh other would probably go with the MS claims perhaps only because the MS version is not laced with direct attacks, unsupported rebuttles and filled with anecdotal claims (despite that being listed as a weakness in their very article they are rebutting??)
Ouch - I keep waiting for a "friendly, well written" rebuttel but have not see one yet. |
Tom Henderson - Subject: Good idea... (1999-12-20 22:27:23) |
There's always a good reason to have a central point of information to counter natural dissonance. This is what I've been trying to point out in my Byte.Com article.
Unless there's a perceived authority to discount myths, rumors, and the results of natural gossip and banter, it moves unchecked.
Tom |
Post your comments using the form below.
[ Return to Today's Headlines | Top of Story ]
All times are recorded in UTC.
Copyright ©1999 by Linux Today
(webmaster@linuxtoday.com)
Linux is a trademark of Linus Torvalds.
Powered by Linux 2.2.9 and Apache 1.3.6.
Linux Today is a corporate member of Linux International.