There has been something fishy about LinuxInsider ever since ECT took over (mentioned here). This is actually pointed out by other independent observers as well because the whole news network gives the impression that GNU/Linux is problematic, either because it serves the advertisers better or because the editor was not even a GNU/Linux user until some time ago (true story). Last week it was claimed that an article sought to give the impression that Mono opposition is irrational and hateful and this week we find an article starts with phrases like "Conspiracy Theories" in the headline (we wrote about this dismissive term before).
It basically seeks to dismiss Groklaw's fundamental claims that Microsoft worked behind the scenes to derail GNU/Linux. Groklaw may have not offered the piles of evidence that we have, but it does put forth a claim which is obvious to those who have been following the saga closely enough.
Groklaw's reaction: "Mystery solved. Totally blatant... next time you hear Microsoft bragging that people *prefer* their software to Linux on netbooks, you'll know better. If they really believed that, they'd let the market speak, on a level playing field."
Consumer Watchdog managed to get hold of the slides that Google is touting around earlier this month, and it's clear that Google wants us all to think that it's just a minnow compared to giants like Microsoft and IBM. Interestingly, it doesn't include Intel in the figures - Paul Otellini, Intel's CEO is on Google's board.
There you have it: that well-known friend of teensy-weensy companies everywhere, Microsoft, is a “sponsor” of ACT. That would probably explain the fact that ACT's position, notably in Europe, has been resolutely pro-Microsoft, and anti everything that is anti-Microsoft.
Zumobi, a Microsoft spin out, has been on a roll lately with a number of high-profile apps for media brands and retailers. It also recently unveiled the iPhone app for the Today show, also a property of NBC.
Comments
G. Michaels
2009-06-30 01:50:48
As opposed to "slated" and "twitter" and "trmanco" and "ohiaohm" and "daemonxp", all of whom are constantly passed off as authoritative sources by you?
Reads to me like the "advocate" quoted there managed to discredit himself quite thoroughly. Not unlike a few of your friends. I can cite cites if you want :)
To put it another way, imagine that the people whose opinions you disagree with repeatedly used terms like "open sores" or "linsux". The effect is the same.
Wait, I thought Intel was an evil entity. You've said this yourself, have you not? Literally. And don't you have dozens of articles that smear companies that have or had or will have former Microsoft employees working for them? You know, guilt by association? Isn't it quite natural then to extrapolate this one and claim Google is evil because someone from Intel works for them? So what's the problem there? Seems quite appropriate to me.
Sometimes this is too easy :)
twitter
2009-06-30 02:04:30
lalala
2009-06-30 02:15:43
twitter
2009-06-30 02:48:34
G. Michaels
2009-06-30 03:13:32
Your primary Slashdot account was modded down because people were sick and tired of your tone, your lies and your abrasive "advocacy". Pretending that anything else led to that is more of the same lies.
Just because you're doing it doesn't mean everyone else is too. Right about now you're going to paste some proof that someone else did that, for a nefarious purposes, right? Something more tangible than "I don't like what these two people are saying, therefore they are nym trolls. Let's go shopping". Something along the lines of this.
You want a cookie?
I don't think you understand what slander means, Will. Slander is when someone lies about you deliberately to discredit or hurt you. I fail to see how documenting your dozens of Slashdot accounts and how you used them to shill your own comments and generally crap all over the place is "slander" in any way. Otherwise, you'd be able to explain things like these. But you can't, can you?
Just because your gracious host Roy here goes out of his way to justify your trolling and nymshifting (shades of Mark Fink here) in other online communities (while of course whining that his blog is being attacked that way) doesn't mean you get out of jail free. The reality of what you did there for years isn't going away any time soon, especially when you actually brag about it and then insult people who think that's lame.
lalala
2009-06-30 03:20:26
I didn't read everything you wrote. After the nth time seeing "M$", I stopped, because only jealous children type it like that. I would say that if you stopped using the dollar sign, people might start to take you seriously, but the damage is already done.
I never bragged about anything. I don't even have a slashdot account.
I'll have to make up something else to "slander" you with? So, when someone doesn't agree with you and dares to call you out, it's "slander"?
The "harassment" won't stop. You brought it all on yourself by making all those accounts.
notzed
2009-06-30 04:06:14
I wonder if the author actually got paid for that aggregation of random anonymous opinion.