10.06.07
The Purpose of BoycottNovell.com
As a passionate Free software and GNU/Linux advocate, I sometimes find that my role here leads some people to confusion. Allow me to clarify.
It is very important to have a central point that delivers uncensored information about Novell and its relationship with Microsoft. This information must not be tied to commercial interests, business relationships, and advertisers. There is more than enough of that obedient garbage in what we call the mainstream media. It just doesn’t get it and it doesn’t really want to get it.
That’s where BoycottNovell.com enters the picture. Someone had to do it and we are not the only ‘criticism vector’ that emerged. The information is there. The story needs to be told. I still like Novell, but ironically enough, I have got the wrath of Novell/Opensuse/Linspire/Xandros/others aligned against me now. My Digg submissions, for example, get buried fast (by an angry minority) and people attack me personally in Web sites. Some bloggers are ‘afraid’ of my comments and trackbacks. These sometimes get deleted.
“We try to isolate the poison in Novell from the talent.”Let us go further and explain that Novell is not the only target. It seems to be possessed by a malicious entity and individuals who have their own independent agenda and allies. As long as we find that Boycottnovell.com’s message is hurting Microsoft’s plan to destroy Linux, then we know that we help. With about 150,000 Web pages delivered to human readers per month, it definitely has impact and it probably hurts the pocket of those who plot to subvert Linux. If you look at BoycottNovell.com long enough, you’ll see that Microsoft is attacked far more often then Novell’s staff, to whom we even offer praises every Saturday. We try to isolate the poison in Novell from the talent. Characters like Justin Steinman, for example, are the seed which spreads a lot of damage. I am not a great believer in Miguel de Icaza’s plan either. To paraphrase a reader of LXer, he is a Novell entrepreneur looking for opportunities at Microsoft.
These issues with Novell are being discussed quite extensively in some recent E-mail exchanges that I’ve had. I would share them in the spirit of transparency, but this requires permission to be received from other parties. People would still love to believe that while the code out it there, Linux cannot be stolen. But I beg to differ — it gets licensed. Lobbyists have introduced a whole new dimension and forced it into the equation. Software patents were introduced and companies like Novell (not SuSE) agreed to sign exclusive and exclusionary patent deals with a long-time enemy (yes, given the stories, “enemy” would be more appropriate a word than “rival”, especially as far as Novell and Linspire go). And therein lies the reason to boycott Novell et al. This way the world should show that — as a community — these companies which sold out do not represent us and that their actions are by no means an indication of a more collective consensus.
If only OpenSUSE took PJ’s analysis seriously and stepped away from Novell’s management as well… instead they mock her analysis, the FSF, and the GNU GPL. We have covered a lot of this in this Web site.
Darth Chaos said,
October 6, 2007 at 10:05 pm
Roy, you have been the unfortunate victim of the infamous Digg Bury Brigade.
BTW, didn’t Digg make some advertising agreement with Microsoft? If so, then Digg is just one of the many sell-outs. I remember when Digg’s Kevin Rose was on G4/Tech TV talking about Linux and “dark tips” (his way of saying “hacking tips”). But since then, Rose has become yet another corporate ass-kisser.
Ian said,
October 7, 2007 at 5:18 pm
“If only OpenSUSE took PJ’s analysis seriously and stepped away from Novell’s management as well…”
You have to keep in mind that many of those people are paid employees, paid to do something they like. Many also probably have families they need to provide for. Some things are more important than trying to walk the software morality tightrope. Is that wrong for them to do that? Well clearly, and I think you would agree, it’s a matter of opinion.
Why should they take PJ’s analysis seriously?
Roy Schestowitz said,
October 7, 2007 at 5:24 pm
@Ian: yes, i agree with you and I understand, but it is frustrating nonetheless because for each such individual serving a monopoly, there is another that suffers. In other words, many parties may gradually liaise with ‘the other side’ for a pittance just in order to hurt everybody else. Strong principles are what enables one to escape a cycle of abuse rather than become part of it.
Kevin Dupuy said,
October 7, 2007 at 10:33 pm
Rob: I don’t get it.
“t is frustrating nonetheless because for each such individual serving a monopoly”
Who is the monopoly? Microsoft is a monopoly. Novell is not Microsoft. Is that seriously hard to understand?