08.27.08
Novell as Microsoft’s Orwellian Revisionist
Novell’s PR Director has made some mistakes recently when he used GNU/Linux patent FUD to market Novell and SUSE [1, 2]. In one of his first postings, he appears to be forgetting (or not knowing) that there is room for more appeals against OOXML. Having witnessed so many scandals from beginning to end, for Novell to take this stance is dangerous. it has already helped Microsoft push/standardise OOXML.
Here is what Ian Bruce wrote:
Accelerating demand for virtualization solutions that cut across Windows and Linux, and the recent ISO adoption of Microsoft’s OOXML standard document format, are just two examples of why interoperability is so vital and our partnership increasingly relevant.
The dissenting comment below this post is interesting. The new PR guy makes mistakes that even Bruce Lowry did not make before quitting the company. At Novell, lying to the public is a standard procedure. For example, they unsuccessfully pretend that a patent deal they gave a nod to has nothing to do with patents, yet their new PR Director mistakenly admits that it is. He says the truth, but saying this truth is treason at Novell.
Meanwhile, another OOXML scandal is being highlighted. It never seems to end.
Physical meetings are the ISO way to exclude participation. Don’t expect public online discussions on how HP and Microsoft will change the ISO rules for Fast Track. Mr ECMA has already been the responsible person to change the ISO Fast Track rules in 2006, remember?
Never let the deniers get away with it. There is a lot more to be learned about how Microsoft uses the press to rewrite history. This is an old example:
Here, only the headlines of the newspaper articles really disagree. You actually have to do some research (about 5 minutes worth) to find web-retrievable documentation that absolutely refutes Microsoft’s orwellian revision of NT 5.0/Windows 2000 release schedule.
This time, I have to say that the Business Editor didn’t slip up. The Bloomberg News wire service slipped up by not checking what it had previously run on the topic, and by not checking rather easy to find citations on the topic.
There are very recent examples of this too. Related external stories:
- The Gates Transition
- The BBC, Gates and revisionism
- Bill Gates and the importance of source code
- Beeb slammed for ‘fawning’ to Bill Gates
- Microsoft and the BBC: A letter of Complaint
- BBC Corrupted
Don’t let corporate press rewrite history on behalf of its benefactors. █
Content is available under CC-BY-SA
Saul Goode said,
August 27, 2008 at 2:02 pm
I believe the link (http://linuxfud.wordpress.com/2008/08/26/vista-fud/) provided for “what Ian Bruce wrote” is erroneous. The target does not mention Mr Bruce and does not provide the cited comments.
Roy Schestowitz said,
August 27, 2008 at 2:14 pm
Thanks, I’ve just fixed it.