07.12.09
Gemini version available ♊︎IDG’s Microsoft Subnet Spreads Linux FUD, Cites Microsoft Pundits
Summary: Rob Enderle’s lies echoed/propagated by IDG
MICROSOFT’S vandalism of Java is well documented and it continues to this date according to the following article, whose author was ‘kind’ enough to include Microsoft FUD from Rob Enderle [1, 2, 3].
With nearly no explanation, Microsoft sent out an alert notifying customers that it was removing download information for 10 security patches “because Microsoft Java Virtual Machine is no longer available for distribution from Microsoft.” The revised bulletins are rated as critical and affect patches from the years 1999 through 2003.
The affected patches are: MS03-011, MS02-069, MS02-052, MS02-013, MS00-081, MS00-075, MS00-059, MS00-011, MS99-045, MS99-031.
[...]
It is sheer speculation as to why, on July 1 2009, Microsoft has suddenly discovered, and removed, software that contained the MSJVM. Can this have anything to do with the pending sale of Sun to Oracle? In April, the latest scuffle between the proprietary and open source worlds was more remarks about the so-called ownership of Linux, made by none other than industry pundit Rob Enderle. He seemed to think that much of the code in Linux belongs to Sun, and therefore will soon be owned by Oracle, who will turn around and use its so-called power to control Linux.
Commenters quickly pounce at this unnecessary inclusion of FUD — a series which Groklaw debunked some months ago.
The comments on the article above add:
Enderle also believes that
[...]
Enderle also believes that the moon is made of green cheese, and that the SCO Group will be rolling in cash after they beat IBM in court.
Another one:
Enderle said SCO owned Linux back in 2003
[...]
Enderle was impressed with the code that SCO was showing to the select few who would sign an NDA. Enderle believed that SCO would own Linux. Enderle and Didio are two people who should not be paid for their ‘contributions’ to the IT world.
And yet another (among more):
Who is this “Microsoft Subnet” person? Are they really that desperate to churn page hits to link to a quack like Enderle? That guy fell off the wagon long ago and suffered a bit of brain damage in the process. It would not surprise me in the least if “Microsoft Subnet” turned out to be Enderle. Is that you Bobby? You put the “L” in lame.
A year ago, “Microsoft Subnet” called for Microsoft bloggers to unite and probably just praise the company in an outlet that makes the news feeds.
There are a lot of poison pens out there. As one reader points out by mail, “Microsoft [spreads] Open Source Licenses FUD.” Here is what Microsoft writes about Open Source licenses over at Microsoft.com [DOC]:
Contrary to popular belief, most open source software does not give users complete freedom to do with it as they please [...]
2. Viral open source licenses inhibit innovation.
3. Government-funded research should not be licensed using the GPL.
As the reader points out, “An endless river of piss flowing out of Redmond. Most probably room full of trained legal monkeys typing this drivel. Delivered fresh daily to the likes of Microsoft Jack.” The reader is referring to this chap [1, 2], a pundit who is hostile towards Microsoft’s competitors and writes favourably about everything Microsoft. █
“Analysts sell out – that’s their business model.”
–Microsoft, internal document [PDF]
ᶃ Gemini Space
This post is also available in 
Content is available under CC-BY-SA