8 YEARS ago Gartner publicly predicted that Vista would be a smashing success. It was a lie (not really a prediction), albeit a promotional lie because the Gartner Group is Bill Gates- and Microsoft-connected (they fund Gartner). It only ever pretends to be an independent analysts firm. PR is a more suitable label. We have had particular interest in Michael Silver because he and his cronies worked on blocking the competition, such as GNU/Linux, in large European cities. They also pressured companies to embrace Vista 7 (Silver did that himself) and OOXML lock-in. Silver is a liar with a career. Somehow he is still around, despite bad 'predictions' (sales pitch).
"Silver is once again acting not like an analyst but like a salesperson of Windows, giving the impression of cost parity between Windows and GNU/Linux (this time without the "TCO" buzzword)."Only a couple of weeks ago Gartner also amplified popular FUD against Android. Those who claimed that Apple was gaining at Android's expense were playing a nasty game that warps statistics because to only make a comparison when there's a major new release of iPhone is highly misleading (even narrowing down to one quarter despite the infrequent releases of new iPhone models). Gartner played a special role in this FUD, badmouthing Android not for the first time (we covered similar examples before). Two weeks ago we also saw a Microsoft-linked site letting an admitted Apple shareholder bash Android with this misleading propaganda. What we see here is an information war and Gartner plays a big role in it.
What bothers us the most is that people from Gartner, Michael Silver in particular, are willing to just lie in order to sell an operating system that is blocking the competition (GNU/Linux) at UEFI level. See the latest in the saga.
Responding to what Vista 10 means to GNU/Linux, Sam Varghese writes that "Microsoft will leave the option of including a switch to turn off secure boot in computers that are loaded with Windows 10 up to the manufacturer, leaving open the possibility of locking out users of alternate operating systems."
Paul Hill says that "Microsoft tries to block Linux" and starts by stating: "Remember the most talked about story of 2014? It was Microsoft loves Linux. It looks like Microsoft’s love for Linux is more like Mark Wahlberg’s love for Reese Witherspoon as we saw in the movie Fear."
Hill reminds us that "Red Hat had to pay [Microsoft] for the privilege of getting Fedora signed."
The world needs Vista 10 like dogs need rabies and if we allow liars from Gartner to mislead the public about Vista 10, then the Free software-destined future will remain further away. Windows is not free at all, it's just a marketing charade and corporate media is happy to give it a hand. Why do journalists from IDG give the liars a platform without a challenge (let alone fact-checking)? Is it enough to put the "Gartner" label on a lie to make it seem credible? ⬆