Summary: A couple of new examples of Microsoft breaking rules to break Linux or break apart Linux contracts
Antitrust complaints have already been filed against Microsoft in response to blocking of Linux through UEFI [1, 2, 3, 4], so ZDNet’s Microsoft’s bloggers start disinformation campaigns (two of them so far). It is like a coverup attempt.
Over in Tamil-Nadu [1, 2, 3] there are some interesting developments going on and Glyn Moody, having read an article we helped research, compared this to Newham's Microsoft fiasco. Another thing he said in his blog post about Microsoft’s response to GNU/Linux adoption:
This looks like an important win for free software – not least because it could give impetus to similar plans elsewhere in Latin America. No surprise, then, that the FUD had already started appearing even before this decision was made public – for example this article on the “risks” of free software – which calls for “technology neutrality” and “interoperable standards”.
But isn’t it interesting that the same groups never called for such “neutrality” and “interoperability” between open source and closed source when it was the former that was completely locked out by biased procurement specifications? Strange that….
We wrote about this deception before. Lobbyists of Microsoft use this semantic trick a lot. It is important to be familiar with the common FUD tactics. █
Send this to a friend
“The hardest thing about replacing Windows 7 with Linux is getting the damn sticker off,” Tim wrote. (credit: OpenBytes)
Summary: More evidence of the declining impact of Microsoft Windows
IN OUR page about Vista 7 we have accumulated many reports about the variant of Vista that enjoyed a huge marketing budget. Pogson writes about the desktop monopoly sinking in relation to Vista 7, which according to this report does not received a warm welcome from businesses, still. To quote:
Computerworld’s survey reveals that only one quarter of businesses have migrated to ’7′ and most are still using XP. The reasons are many, but they all boil down to one thing. The migration to ’7′ is not a good investment.
In relation to Vista 8, Steven J. Vaughan-Nichols adds that it is a “bad bet” for the following reasons:
Given my choice of desktops, I’m running Linux, but over the years Windows has gone from being a bad joke of a desktop operating systems–Windows ME and Vista–to being a reasonably good choice-Windows XP SP3 and Windows 7. But Windows 8? What the heck is Microsoft thinking?
After looking at Metro, Windows 8’s default interface, for the last month, all I see a lame, reactionary response to iPad and Android. In a broader sense, it’s Microsoft’s response to the move away from the desktop to smartphones and tablets.
This is why we choose to focus on Apple quite so increasingly. Microsoft is still chasing a form factor that is not quite growing. Within a few years it seems likely that Microsoft won’t be around to hurt Linux/Android as much as Apple does. We used to focus more on Novell as well. The goal has always been the same — to defend software freedom, whoever its greatest foes may be. █
Send this to a friend