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."
“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."
[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-printable
Thank you for contacting the Federal Trade Commission. Please find attached information that may assist you.
Comments
zatoichi
2009-07-31 23:26:38
aeshna23
2009-08-01 12:37:36
zatoichi
2009-08-01 13:06:14
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
2009-08-01 14:24:45
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.