Microsoft's Masterpiece of FUD

Discussion in 'NZ Computing' started by MaHogany, Sep 24, 2006.

  1. MaHogany

    MaHogany Guest

    http://www.linuxjournal.com/node/1000097

    "" This, then, is Microsoft's FUD masterstroke: by focusing attention
    squarely on the overall costs to society, and redefining them as
    "cascading economic benefits", it has finally managed to come up with a
    way of looking at things where free software is always inferior. ""

    A very perceptive article, IMHO.


    Ma Hogany

    --
    "The average user doesn't know what he wants. The average user wants
    fries with that, if prompted."
    MaHogany, Sep 24, 2006
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. MaHogany

    Phil Guest

    MaHogany wrote, On 24/09/06 10.35 p:
    > http://www.linuxjournal.com/node/1000097


    I don't think *anybody* reads these white papers anymore... except the
    fair & balanced Linux press.

    I also fail to see the FUD: Microsoft is telling six countries how it's
    found a way to get people to spend $40bn on /taxable/ computer software
    and hardware -- which is probably going to happen. That's got to be
    pretty attractive to any government.

    -Phil
    Phil, Sep 24, 2006
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. MaHogany

    thingy Guest

    Phil wrote:
    > MaHogany wrote, On 24/09/06 10.35 p:
    >> http://www.linuxjournal.com/node/1000097

    >
    > I don't think *anybody* reads these white papers anymore... except the
    > fair & balanced Linux press.


    I agree, I Dont think anybody reads white papers these days...I now find
    they are so biased and so full of marketing speak that I just do not
    bother.....they have no value.

    > I also fail to see the FUD: Microsoft is telling six countries how it's
    > found a way to get people to spend $40bn on /taxable/ computer software
    > and hardware -- which is probably going to happen. That's got to be
    > pretty attractive to any government.
    >
    > -Phil


    Follow the money a bit further....

    That taxable money that is leaving the EU bound for America and MS's
    coffers...that's an even bigger tax take.....in just the first round....

    Then consider the money Govn's will spend on upgrading the hardware and
    software....bye bye all that "extra" tax anyway it will go inthe forced
    upgrades....net winner is MS....

    I think the Samba leader summed up MS's and the big corps profit margins
    quite well when he displayed a $100 black box running as an AD domain
    controller.....instead of a server at 10k and a $800 MS Server licence....

    regards

    Thing
    thingy, Sep 25, 2006
    #3
  4. MaHogany

    -=rjh=- Guest

    Phil wrote:
    > MaHogany wrote, On 24/09/06 10.35 p:
    >> http://www.linuxjournal.com/node/1000097

    >
    > I don't think *anybody* reads these white papers anymore... except the
    > fair & balanced Linux press.
    >
    > I also fail to see the FUD: Microsoft is telling six countries how it's
    > found a way to get people to spend $40bn on /taxable/ computer software
    > and hardware -- which is probably going to happen. That's got to be
    > pretty attractive to any government.


    Regardless, this is the broken window fallacy at work (how appropriate):

    http://bastiat.org/en/twisatwins.html

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parable_of_the_broken_window
    -=rjh=-, Sep 25, 2006
    #4
  5. MaHogany

    jasen Guest

    On 2006-09-24, Phil <> wrote:
    > MaHogany wrote, On 24/09/06 10.35 p:
    >> http://www.linuxjournal.com/node/1000097

    >
    > I don't think *anybody* reads these white papers anymore... except the
    > fair & balanced Linux press.
    >
    > I also fail to see the FUD: Microsoft is telling six countries how it's
    > found a way to get people to spend $40bn on /taxable/ computer software
    > and hardware -- which is probably going to happen. That's got to be
    > pretty attractive to any government.


    any government whose country doesn't have a deficit.

    money spent on implementing a linux solution is taxable too, and more of it
    will remain in the economy.

    Bye.
    Jasen
    jasen, Sep 25, 2006
    #5
  6. MaHogany

    MaHogany Guest

    On Mon, 25 Sep 2006 01:32:19 +1200, Phil wrote:

    > I also fail to see the FUD: Microsoft is telling six countries how it's
    > found a way to get people to spend $40bn on /taxable/ computer software
    > and hardware -- which is probably going to happen. That's got to be
    > pretty attractive to any government.


    Yes - but hardware purchases would be taxable in any case - Vi$ta or no
    vi$ta.

    Support contracts for Linux systems likewise would be taxable. Remember -
    support contracts would be ongoing whereas purchasing a one-off license is
    just that - one off.

    Also, much of that support can be done with local companies, which keeps
    the money within the country, unlike the Microsoft tax which is money
    permanently taken out of the economy for no real economic gain.


    Ma Hogany

    --
    "The average user doesn't know what he wants. The average user wants
    fries with that, if prompted."
    MaHogany, Sep 25, 2006
    #6
  7. In message <ef7rcm$lt6$>, jasen wrote:

    > money spent on implementing a linux solution is taxable too, and more of
    > it will remain in the economy.


    That's exactly one of the major points about Open Source versus Closed
    Source. Buying Closed Source software inevitably means giving away
    hard-earned foreign exchange to North-American-based multinationals,
    whereas buying Open Source can rely on paying local expertise to manage it
    and set it up.

    Brainpower is not a monopoly of the rich countries, thank goodness.
    Lawrence D'Oliveiro, Sep 25, 2006
    #7
  8. MaHogany

    Phil Guest

    thingy wrote, On 25/09/06 11.43 a:
    > That taxable money that is leaving the EU bound for America and MS's
    > coffers...that's an even bigger tax take.....in just the first round....


    But only after the tax has been taken (from retail, or regional
    Microsoft company tax, etc.)

    > Then consider the money Govn's will spend on upgrading the hardware and
    > software....bye bye all that "extra" tax anyway it will go inthe forced
    > upgrades....net winner is MS....


    Of course, otherwise they wouldn't be sponsoring a white paper ;)

    > I think the Samba leader summed up MS's and the big corps profit margins
    > quite well when he displayed a $100 black box running as an AD domain
    > controller.....instead of a server at 10k and a $800 MS Server licence....


    But: Is that black box as manageable as a Microsoft server? Does it have
    the same feature-set and support as the MS server? When it breaks, who
    are you going to call? When your third-party software breaks, what do
    you say to the vendor who says they only support their product with a MS
    server?

    (Of course, if you're a small business who doesn't care - go nuts).

    -Phil
    Phil, Sep 25, 2006
    #8
  9. MaHogany

    Phil Guest

    MaHogany wrote, On 25/09/06 6.05 p:
    > Support contracts for Linux systems likewise would be taxable. Remember -
    > support contracts would be ongoing whereas purchasing a one-off license is
    > just that - one off.


    But Microsoft contracts are *a lot* more expensive.

    > Also, much of that support can be done with local companies, which keeps
    > the money within the country, unlike the Microsoft tax which is money
    > permanently taken out of the economy for no real economic gain.


    Microsoft support contacts are typically done through regional offices.

    -Phil
    Phil, Sep 25, 2006
    #9
  10. MaHogany

    MaHogany Guest

    On Mon, 25 Sep 2006 23:51:29 +1200, Phil wrote:

    > But: Is that black box as manageable as a Microsoft server?


    If it's running Linux it will be more manageable.


    > Does it have the same feature-set and support as the MS server?


    Samba, of course, does not have the entire feature set of AD - because
    they've had to reverse engineer much. What remains, of course, will be
    added in eventually.


    > When it breaks, who are you going to call?


    The local company that you've got a support contract from - asuming you
    cannot do it yourself.

    But why do you say "when" rather than "if"?

    Do you expect a Windows box to break so much and so often that you say
    "when"?


    Ma Hogany

    --
    "The average user doesn't know what he wants. The average user wants
    fries with that, if prompted."
    MaHogany, Sep 25, 2006
    #10
  11. MaHogany

    MaHogany Guest

    On Mon, 25 Sep 2006 23:53:09 +1200, Phil wrote:

    >> Support contracts for Linux systems likewise would be taxable. Remember -
    >> support contracts would be ongoing whereas purchasing a one-off license is
    >> just that - one off.

    >
    > But Microsoft contracts are *a lot* more expensive.


    If so then that's another reason to dump Micro$oft.

    A company would be much better off investing that money in something that
    will generate income rather than paying a microsoft tax.


    Ma Hogany

    --
    "The average user doesn't know what he wants. The average user wants
    fries with that, if prompted."
    MaHogany, Sep 25, 2006
    #11
  12. MaHogany

    impossible Guest

    "Lawrence D'Oliveiro" <_zealand> wrote in
    message news:ef88cu$82r$...
    > In message <ef7rcm$lt6$>, jasen wrote:
    >
    >> money spent on implementing a linux solution is taxable too, and
    >> more of
    >> it will remain in the economy.

    >
    > That's exactly one of the major points about Open Source versus
    > Closed
    > Source. Buying Closed Source software inevitably means giving away
    > hard-earned foreign exchange to North-American-based multinationals,
    > whereas buying Open Source can rely on paying local expertise to
    > manage it
    > and set it up.


    Got any actual case studies to back this claim up? Or should we take
    it to be just another piece of Linux FUD? The most lucrative
    open-source service contracts do not go to "local expertise" but to
    the likes of IBM, Hewlett-Packard, Sun, Novell, RedHat, and other
    giants in North America, Europe and Asia.
    >
    > Brainpower is not a monopoly of the rich countries, thank goodness.


    Alas, that's never mattered. Brainpower + investment capital is what
    makes the world go round.
    impossible, Sep 25, 2006
    #12
  13. MaHogany

    Earl Grey Guest

    impossible wrote:

    >
    > Got any actual case studies to back this claim up? Or should we take
    > it to be just another piece of Linux FUD? The most lucrative
    > open-source service contracts do not go to "local expertise" but to
    > the likes of IBM, Hewlett-Packard, Sun, Novell, RedHat, and other
    > giants in North America, Europe and Asia.


    What ?
    Giant multinationals supporting Linux ??
    ;-)
    Earl Grey, Sep 25, 2006
    #13
  14. MaHogany

    Shane Guest

    Earl Grey wrote:

    > impossible wrote:
    >
    >>
    >> Got any actual case studies to back this claim up? Or should we take
    >> it to be just another piece of Linux FUD? The most lucrative
    >> open-source service contracts do not go to "local expertise" but to
    >> the likes of IBM, Hewlett-Packard, Sun, Novell, RedHat, and other
    >> giants in North America, Europe and Asia.

    >
    > What ?
    > Giant multinationals supporting Linux ??
    > ;-)



    Does Debian count as a MultiNational?
    http://www.computerworld.com/action...articleId=9003515&taxonomyId=89&intsrc=kc_top
    The configuration is based on Linux Distribution Debian GNU/Linux 3.1, the
    KDE 3.5 user interface and OpenOffice 2.

    --
    Professor Farnsworth: ...or should I say Captain Fry? No, I shouldn't.
    Because Bender is the new captain!

    blog: http://shanes.dyndns.org
    Shane, Sep 25, 2006
    #14
  15. MaHogany

    Earl Grey Guest

    Shane wrote:
    > Earl Grey wrote:
    >
    >> impossible wrote:
    >>
    >>> Got any actual case studies to back this claim up? Or should we take
    >>> it to be just another piece of Linux FUD? The most lucrative
    >>> open-source service contracts do not go to "local expertise" but to
    >>> the likes of IBM, Hewlett-Packard, Sun, Novell, RedHat, and other
    >>> giants in North America, Europe and Asia.

    >> What ?
    >> Giant multinationals supporting Linux ??
    >> ;-)

    >
    >
    > Does Debian count as a MultiNational?
    > http://www.computerworld.com/action...articleId=9003515&taxonomyId=89&intsrc=kc_top
    > The configuration is based on Linux Distribution Debian GNU/Linux 3.1, the
    > KDE 3.5 user interface and OpenOffice 2.
    >


    What ?
    Giant multinationals supporting Debian ??
    ;-)

    http://www.hp.com/hpinfo/newsroom/press/2006/060814a.html?jumpid=reg_R1002_USEN
    http://www.desktoplinux.com/news/NS6957752431.html
    http://www-304.ibm.com/jct09002c/gsdod/solutiondetails.do?solution=23312&expand=true&lc=en
    Earl Grey, Sep 25, 2006
    #15
  16. On Tue, 26 Sep 2006 06:50:13 +1200, MaHogany <> wrote:

    >Do you expect a Windows box to break so much and so often that you say
    >"when"?


    Of course.
    --
    Rupert Boleyn <>
    Rupert Boleyn, Sep 26, 2006
    #16
  17. MaHogany

    impossible Guest

    "Shane" <-a-geek.net> wrote in message
    news:ef9kh0$ng6$...
    > Earl Grey wrote:
    >
    >> impossible wrote:
    >>
    >>>
    >>> Got any actual case studies to back this claim up? Or should we
    >>> take
    >>> it to be just another piece of Linux FUD? The most lucrative
    >>> open-source service contracts do not go to "local expertise" but
    >>> to
    >>> the likes of IBM, Hewlett-Packard, Sun, Novell, RedHat, and other
    >>> giants in North America, Europe and Asia.

    >>
    >> What ?
    >> Giant multinationals supporting Linux ??
    >> ;-)

    >
    >
    > Does Debian count as a MultiNational?
    > http://www.computerworld.com/action...articleId=9003515&taxonomyId=89&intsrc=kc_top
    > The configuration is based on Linux Distribution Debian GNU/Linux
    > 3.1, the
    > KDE 3.5 user interface and OpenOffice 2.
    >


    LOL. IBM was one of the original sponsors of this project.
    impossible, Sep 26, 2006
    #17
  18. MaHogany

    thingy Guest

    Phil wrote:
    8><----

    >> I think the Samba leader summed up MS's and the big corps profit
    >> margins quite well when he displayed a $100 black box running as an AD
    >> domain controller.....instead of a server at 10k and a $800 MS Server
    >> licence....

    >
    > But: Is that black box as manageable as a Microsoft server? Does it have
    > the same feature-set and support as the MS server? When it breaks, who
    > are you going to call? When your third-party software breaks, what do
    > you say to the vendor who says they only support their product with a MS
    > server?
    >
    > (Of course, if you're a small business who doesn't care - go nuts).
    >
    > -Phil


    In a word, appliances. There are lots of black boxes based on Linux you
    can buy to do specific jobs and get support....a DC would seem to be a
    very easy one....so you call the manufacturer.

    Managability, yes

    Feature set is one thing that the samba team are arguing that MS has not
    been forthcoming with.

    AD is "just" LDAP at the end of the day + some "embraced and extended"
    bits....

    Vendor, you tell the Vendor up front that the systems is AD based but
    not MS based, if the vendor does not offer a written guarantee to
    support you can shop elsewhere. Surprising just how many vendors dont
    argue when a decent sized $ contract is involved....and again just how
    many vendors now supply their application for Linux...

    Besides which there are lots of applications that do not need a AD
    environment. So tell the vendor to take a running jump when they off a
    MS only based solution.....there are usually lots of alternatives out
    there....you dont have to buy their product....

    regards

    Thing
    thingy, Sep 26, 2006
    #18
  19. MaHogany

    thingy Guest

    Phil wrote:
    > MaHogany wrote, On 25/09/06 6.05 p:
    >> Support contracts for Linux systems likewise would be taxable. Remember -
    >> support contracts would be ongoing whereas purchasing a one-off
    >> license is
    >> just that - one off.

    >
    > But Microsoft contracts are *a lot* more expensive.


    Funny but MS tells us that its TCO is cheaper than Linux....are you
    saying they are lying?

    ;]

    Truth is lots of companies are walking if not running from MS and indeed
    other proprietary vendors.....

    regards

    Thing
    thingy, Sep 26, 2006
    #19
  20. MaHogany

    Shane Guest

    impossible wrote:

    > "Shane" <-a-geek.net> wrote in message
    > news:ef9kh0$ng6$...
    >> Earl Grey wrote:
    >>
    >>> impossible wrote:
    >>>
    >>>>
    >>>> Got any actual case studies to back this claim up? Or should we
    >>>> take
    >>>> it to be just another piece of Linux FUD? The most lucrative
    >>>> open-source service contracts do not go to "local expertise" but
    >>>> to
    >>>> the likes of IBM, Hewlett-Packard, Sun, Novell, RedHat, and other
    >>>> giants in North America, Europe and Asia.
    >>>
    >>> What ?
    >>> Giant multinationals supporting Linux ??
    >>> ;-)

    >>
    >>
    >> Does Debian count as a MultiNational?
    >>

    http://www.computerworld.com/action...articleId=9003515&taxonomyId=89&intsrc=kc_top
    >> The configuration is based on Linux Distribution Debian GNU/Linux
    >> 3.1, the
    >> KDE 3.5 user interface and OpenOffice 2.
    >>

    >
    > LOL. IBM was one of the original sponsors of this project.



    So if I get your argument right
    Linux is bad because it can be supported by locals *and* multinationals
    Microsoft is good because it is supported by multinationals?

    --
    Professor Farnsworth: They say madness runs in our family. Some people even
    call me crazy! And why? Because I dared to dream ... of my own race of
    atomic monsters! Atomic supermen with octagonal-shaped bodies that suck
    blood out of ... [walks out of room]
    Amy: G'uh! It's Mom, the world's most huggable industrialist.

    blog: http://shanes.dyndns.org
    Shane, Sep 26, 2006
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Joel Rubin

    Re: "A Masterpiece of an Internet Genius"

    Joel Rubin, Feb 8, 2005, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    488
    Joel Rubin
    Feb 8, 2005
  2. Mike McGee
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    461
    Mike McGee
    Feb 4, 2004
  3. One-Shot Scot
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    627
    One-Shot Scot
    Dec 21, 2004
  4. Philip
    Replies:
    7
    Views:
    312
    Bette Noir
    Mar 12, 2006
  5. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    You Want FUD, Here’s FUD

    Lawrence D'Oliveiro, Jan 23, 2010, in forum: NZ Computing
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    355
    Lawrence D'Oliveiro
    Jan 23, 2010
Loading...

Share This Page