07.31.09
Does Microsoft Accuse Free Software of Fraud?
Summary: Microsoft shows more shameless hypocrisy, vanity
WE HAVE been made aware of Microsoft’s Worldwide Partner Conference, which took place a fortnight ago. The transcripts are revealing because they contain bits where Microsoft’s Kevin Turner says: “As this environment came down, you know, everybody heard, well, Linux and open source and those type of things are going to become the hot commodity. And you know what? We’ve competed with the fraudulent perception of free really, really well.”
Fraudulent? Really?
“Is it not ironic that a corrupt company accuses its opponents of “fraudulent perception”?”Here’s the same talking point being repeated: “And getting the facts out about the fraudulent perception of free is something that’s really resonating with customers. Our TCO (total cost of ownership) story, our security story, where we’re headed from a platform standpoint. It feels so good for customers to finally understand the truth about open source and Linux and we’re making incredible progress in this space, and we’re going to continue to drive that.”
There’s that ugly word again and also a reference to studies which Microsoft bought, along with yardsticks that Microsoft paid Gartner a fortune for. “They’re still banging the TCO drum,” writes Eruaran. We last wrote about it on the very same day as the conference above.
Is it not ironic that a corrupt company accuses its opponents of “fraudulent perception”? The above TCO benchmarks may be as bad as Microsoft's benchmark fraud, which is part of a pattern of slamming opposition by lying.
And speaking of daemonising opposition, here is a new report from Wired Magazine about Google and Varney, whom we wrote about before.
Google is playing nice so far. Its public policy blog soothingly acknowledges regulators’ concerns. “As Google has grown,” it reads, “the company has naturally faced more scrutiny about our business principles and practices. We believe that Google promotes competition and openness online, but we haven’t always done a good job telling our story.” Schmidt is a regular presence in Washington; he served as a member of Obama’s transition team and now sits on his technology advisory council. And publicly, Schmidt welcomes the oversight. “We understand the role here,” he says. “We are not judge and jury.”
On the issue of oversight, a couple of weeks ago we complained to the FTC about Microsoft AstroTufers in this Web site. There is mere progress on the case as we have just been given a reference numbers and a letter [PDF].
From – Fri Jul 31 18:15:41 2009
X-Account-Key: account11
X-UIDL: UID4591-1237770691
X-Mozilla-Status: 0001
X-Mozilla-Status2: 10000000
X-Mozilla-Keys:
[...]
Delivery-date: Fri, 31 Jul 2009 18:20:38 +0100
[...]
Message-Id: <200907311720.n6VHJSVb012152@ftcsmtp1.lmbps.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
From: no-reply@consumersentinel.gov
[...]
Date: 31 Jul 2009 13:20:33 -0400
Subject: Response to your complaint Ref No. 23560730
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary=–boundary_494_ebde6dd9-5021-40c8-8f35-9623c5ef1e6d—-boundary_494_ebde6dd9-5021-40c8-8f35-9623c5ef1e6d
Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printableThank you for contacting the Federal Trade Commission. Please find attached information that may assist you.
According to this PDF, the FTC will take further action if/when more such complaints are filed and make up a pattern. █
zatoichi said,
July 31, 2009 at 6:26 pm
In other words, the FTC is taking no action whatsoever on your bogus complaint.
aeshna23 said,
August 1, 2009 at 7:37 am
Complaining to the FTC about the posts here is far too thin skinned. You just have to accept people like Zatoichi are going to be here to oppose our values about software and intellectual property, Roy. Not only do they add spice to the boycottnovell website, but on those rare occasions we they make good point, they help us refine our argument against them! I’m no mindless of advocate of “tolerance”, but hearing opposing arguments is good for people.
zatoichi Reply:
August 1st, 2009 at 8:06 am
He’s not complaining about me, he’s complaining about someone who clearly identified himself, right up front, as working for Microsoft. It was a completely frivolous complaint on Roy’s part.
And, based on the complete lack of response, no one here has “heard an opposing argument” yet. When Roy is backed into a corner by questions he can’t answer, he simply posts four more stories to try to push the “opposing argument” off the front page.
zatoichi Reply:
August 1st, 2009 at 9:24 am
…people like Zatoichi are going to be here to oppose our values about software and intellectual property…
I’d be very interested in hearing you detail the “values about software and intellectual property” (doesn’t the FSF demand that you not use that term…?) that you imagine I oppose.