Microsoft is 'open' like BP is 'green' (openwashing follows greenwashing tactics)

Summary: Microsoft's charm offensives against Free/libre software are proving to be rather effective, despite them involving a gross distortion of facts and exploitation of corruptible elements in the corporate media

SIX days ago we published a series of six articles which are listed in order below:

• Microsoft Hates Linux - Part I - The UEFI Attack on GNU/Linux
• Microsoft Hates Linux - Part II - Patent Lawsuits Against Android/Linux Still Going On, New Ones Filed
• Microsoft Hates Linux - Part III - Abducting the Competition (Android)
• Microsoft Hates Linux - Part IV - Deleting, Attacking Android/Linux From Within
• Microsoft Hates Linux - Part V - Dumping and Surveillance to Counter GNU/Linux Insurgence
• Microsoft Hates Linux - Part VI - Propaganda Wars Against Free Software Facilitated While Media Control is Secured and Abused

The issue discussed in part 1 receives a lot of media attention, even from corporate media (in this case, GOP-leaning media). To quote one such report: "The feature we’re concerned with is called Secure Boot, and it’s designed to protect you: The installed OS becomes locked to the hardware itself, and if any other OS attempts to interfere (like a low-level malware app for example) then the system simply won’t start up. OEMs were ordered to make Secure Boot optional with Windows 8 but it looks like they are going to be given the opportunity to make it mandatory in Windows 10."

"Microsoft is pretending to be Open Source because of new policies that require procuring Open Source software, e.g. in India."What the corporate media gets wrong is the part about security. It's not "designed to protect you". In fact, much of the recent press coverage serves to show that UEFI reduces security in many cases. Some media sites/conglomerates such as IDG already explained (last year) how it can be used for remotely bricking PCs (pretty much at hardware level). We have covered several examples over the past 3 years, so evidence continues to mount. IDG's Microsoft booster Andy Patrizio wrote: "I suspect if you are smart enough to use Linux, you are smart enough to shut off Secure Boot in the UEFI."

That's not an excuse. It also perpetuate myths about GNU/Linux being "hard to use". "Still," he continues, "it's a PR hit for Microsoft, a company that has been earning a lot of goodwill lately."

That's utter nonsense as well. As pointed out in part 6 above, Microsoft just manipulates the media (or relies on boosters like Patrizio) to make it seem as though it changed its attitude. As we've pointed out in 3 recent articles, there are changes in tendering processes worldwide. Microsoft is pretending to be Open Source because of new policies that require procuring Open Source software, e.g. in India. Yesterday KV Kurmanath planted a Microsoft puff piece in The Hindu Business Line, relaying the bogus narrative of Microsoft as "Open Source". People must react and counter these lies or else Microsoft will become indistinguishable from Free/libre software, based on a reality-distorting campaign. Microsoft already pretends that Windows, its common carrier, is 'Open Source' or something along these lines. ⬆