Pay-to-say Gillen et al return
Summary: Novell pays IDC for GNU/Linux studies, but it mistakenly feeds one of the most FOSS-hostile and corruptible groups out there
AL Gillen and his goons are showing up in the “Linux” news again. They were fed last year by the Linux Foundation and this time they are fed by Novell. Most of the time, however, they are fed by Microsoft and the proprietary software cartel. Wherever there is money, their opinion will naturally swing.
Welcome to the world of ‘analysis’, where money drives a CIO’s opinion which is based on so-called ‘whitepapers’. Microsoft puts it best when it says
“Analysts sell out – that’s their business model… But they are very concerned that they never look like they are selling out, so that makes them very prickly to work with.”
Another Microsoft analyst, Paul DeGroot from “Directions On Microsoft” said last year that “there’s a lot of Linux out there — much more than Microsoft generally signals publicly — and their customers are using it….”
“…Microsoft is paying IDC a lot of money to manufacture dirt against GNU/Linux.”Under certain circumstances, analysts are inclined to tell some truth, but truth does not drape one’s pocket. As we’ve shown before [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7], using very solid courtroom evidence, Microsoft is paying IDC a lot of money to manufacture dirt against GNU/Linux (c/f Analysts Cartel part 1, part 2, part 3, part 4, and part 5). Comes exhibits show this too, so it is far from an empty allegation; it’s a substantiated fact and we urge readers to examine the evidence and reach their own conclusions.
As we explained back when IDC — headed by Al Gillen in this particular area — had thrown FUD at Free software, paying IDC is playing with fire (or fighting against fire using more fire). Whoever pays them the most will ‘win’, but the only big winner — in financial terms — is IDC, which uses its media platforms to promote Microsoft [1, 2, 3, 4, 5].
Anyway, regarding some new “Linux” survey that percolates through the news right now, bear this in mind:
Novell, the distributor of SUSE Linux Enterprise System, was the sponsor of the survey and made a draft of the IDC white paper available to InformationWeek today. But it had no role in selecting survey respondents, said Markus Rex, senior VP of Novell’s Open Platforms Solutions.
“Had no role,” eh? Would Novell have sponsored a study that is favourable to its competition? Was IDC expected to deliver results that flatter the prospective customer/s? Or choose methods and criteria that are favorable by design (not advantageous based on merit)?
“Do better, clean up inherently-unethical and corruptible systems.”Questionnaires from Novell are shamelessly ‘cooked’, as evidenced two years ago. Microsoft too has used IDC to inquire with a highly-biased populations regarding GNU/Linux, thus knowing what answers to expect. There are other, more recent examples like push polling.
This probably all begs the question, how to improve rather than just complain? What to do other than to fund?
Refuse to play the corrupt game. Do better, clean up inherently-unethical and corruptible systems. IDC is part of this system and by funding it, Novell gives this group credibility which it does not deserve. For Novell, to dismiss IDC studies while paying the very same group is not just hypocritical; it’s dangerous and it is almost uncanny. █
Freedom is about truthfulness and
honesty, not cartels and ‘junk science’