Biased Windows centric BBC article about OSS

According to the usual "advocates" the BBC is biased against OSS. As if by magic they then post a very pro OSS article about Red Hat. Are the "advocates" ever right?!?!?! http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/maggieshiels/2010/06/the_open_source_entrepreneur.html

On Jun 16, 11:56=A0pm, Hadron<hadronqu...@gmail.com> wrote: > According to the usual "advocates" the BBC is biased against OSS. > > As if by magic they then post a very pro OSS article about Red Hat. Are > the "advocates" ever right?!?!?! > > http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/maggieshiels/2010/06/the_open... Good point Hadron. The article itself I found sickening coy and sentimental. Selected quotes below. "Bob Young is a self-confessed contrarian with a strong desire to change the world by allowing people to share and collaborate. The approach has served him well and has helped turn the Canadian into a multi-millionaire." MULTI-MILLIONAIRE. Got it? No different from Ballmer, except in size. "Inspiration came from the legal profession: "If a lawyer comes up with a new argument that gets his client off and wins a case in front of the Supreme Court, every other lawyer on the planet can use his argument without asking his permission. "So how does a lawyer make money? Well, lawyers obviously make lots of money - there's towers in New York and towers in London full of lawyers because it is a very valuable service."" TRANSLATION: Linux sucks, and this guy's company gets paid for cleaning up the mess--with "service support". RL

On 6/16/2010 4:56 PM, Hadron wrote: > > According to the usual "advocates" the BBC is biased against OSS. > > As if by magic they then post a very pro OSS article about Red Hat. Are > the "advocates" ever right?!?!?! > > > http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/maggieshiels/2010/06/the_open_source_entrepreneur.html No. Not once in the 6 years I've been reading cola have they made even the most slightly prescient statement about technology: "MS Office killer" "iPod killer" "iPhone killer" "iPad killer" "Linux-ARM netbooks mean WinTel is toast" "MS is above the law" "Linux won/is winning/will win" And of course the famous "MS is doomed" The most ridiculous of all was uttered by Linus Torvalds himself "Really, I'm not out to destroy Microsoft. That will just be a completely unintentional side effect."

RayLopez99 wrote: > On Jun 16, 11:56 pm, Hadron<hadronqu...@gmail.com> wrote: >> According to the usual "advocates" the BBC is biased against OSS. >> >> As if by magic they then post a very pro OSS article about Red Hat. Are >> the "advocates" ever right?!?!?! >> >> http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/maggieshiels/2010/06/the_open... > > Good point Hadron. The article itself I found sickening coy and > sentimental. Selected quotes below. > > "Bob Young is a self-confessed contrarian with a strong desire to > change the world by allowing people to share and collaborate. The > approach has served him well and has helped turn the Canadian into a > multi-millionaire." > > MULTI-MILLIONAIRE. Got it? No different from Ballmer, except in > size. > > "Inspiration came from the legal profession: > "If a lawyer comes up with a new argument that gets his client off and > wins a case in front of the Supreme Court, every other lawyer on the > planet can use his argument without asking his permission. > > "So how does a lawyer make money? Well, lawyers obviously make lots of > money - there's towers in New York and towers in London full of > lawyers because it is a very valuable service."" > > TRANSLATION: Linux sucks, and this guy's company gets paid for > cleaning up the mess--with "service support". If you want to make that argument then Windows must really really suck then with the amount of companies trying to help keep this crapware running :- Norton Mcafee AVG PCWorld Techguys http://www.cptutor.com/ http://www.support1000.com/ Avira http://www.iobit.com/ http://www.pchell.com http://www.computerhope.com/ http://www.askdrtech.com/ http://www.techsupportforum.com/ http://www.pcbuyerbeware.co.uk/ http://vistasupport.mvps.org/ http://forums.techguy.org/ http://www.windowvistarepair.com/ http://www.officerecovery.com/ http://www.webtechgeek.com/ http://www.mytechsupportstore.com/ http://www.savemysystem.co.uk/ http://www.stellarinfo.com/ http://www.computerrepairuk.co.uk/ http://www.3bsoftware.com/ http://www.datadoctor.in/ http://windowserrorsadvisor.org/ http://www.reimage.com/ http://www.ptdd.com/ http://michaelstevenstech.com/ http://www.5starsupport.com/ http://www.regtool.com/ http://www.diskinternals.com/ http://www.britec.co.uk/ And that's just a small sample from 5 minutes of googling, there are probably a lot more companies trying to keep Windows systems running than there are Linux Distro's even counting every release of obsolete and unavailable ones dating back over 10 years.

On 2010-06-17, the following emerged from the brain of DFS: > > The most ridiculous of all was uttered by Linus Torvalds himself > "Really, I'm not out to destroy Microsoft. That will just be a > completely unintentional side effect." You're still missing the enormous tongue in the cheeck. -- BOFH excuse #442: Trojan horse ran out of hay

On 6/17/2010 1:19 PM, TomB wrote: > On 2010-06-17, the following emerged from the brain of DFS: >> >> The most ridiculous of all was uttered by Linus Torvalds himself >> "Really, I'm not out to destroy Microsoft. That will just be a >> completely unintentional side effect." > > You're still missing the enormous tongue in the cheeck. I miss nothing. He truly believed it, and like most Linux wackjobs who have no grasp of reality, he probably still does.

TomB <tommy.bongaerts@gmail.com> writes: > On 2010-06-17, the following emerged from the brain of DFS: >> >> The most ridiculous of all was uttered by Linus Torvalds himself >> "Really, I'm not out to destroy Microsoft. That will just be a >> completely unintentional side effect." > > You're still missing the enormous tongue in the cheeck. I agree with you there. I seem to recall certain "advocates" damning Torwalds recently because of his objections to GPL 3. Linus has his head screwed on and IS one hell of a programmer and designer. Git alone is testimony to that : fast, practical and works.

DFS <nospam@dfs_.com> writes: > On 6/17/2010 1:19 PM, TomB wrote: >> On 2010-06-17, the following emerged from the brain of DFS: >>> >>> The most ridiculous of all was uttered by Linus Torvalds himself >>> "Really, I'm not out to destroy Microsoft. That will just be a >>> completely unintentional side effect." >> >> You're still missing the enormous tongue in the cheeck. > > I miss nothing. > > He truly believed it, and like most Linux wackjobs who have no grasp of > reality, he probably still does. I normally agree with you, however I think you're wrong on that one. Linux despises "advocate" types for a start.

On 6/17/2010 1:24 PM, Hadron wrote: > DFS<nospam@dfs_.com> writes: > >> On 6/17/2010 1:19 PM, TomB wrote: >>> On 2010-06-17, the following emerged from the brain of DFS: >>>> >>>> The most ridiculous of all was uttered by Linus Torvalds himself >>>> "Really, I'm not out to destroy Microsoft. That will just be a >>>> completely unintentional side effect." >>> >>> You're still missing the enormous tongue in the cheeck. >> >> I miss nothing. >> >> He truly believed it, and like most Linux wackjobs who have no grasp of >> reality, he probably still does. > > > I normally agree with you, however I think you're wrong on that > one. Linux despises "advocate" types for a start. He truly believes it. He's made several statements that clearly show he thinks Linux/OSS will destroy MS: "Open source is a model for how to do things, and I happen to believe that it's just a much better way to do things and that open source will take over not because of any battle, but simply because better ways of doing things eventually just replace the inferior things."

On 2010-06-18, the following emerged from the brain of DFS: > On 6/17/2010 1:24 PM, Hadron wrote: >> DFS<nospam@dfs_.com> writes: >> >>> On 6/17/2010 1:19 PM, TomB wrote: >>>> On 2010-06-17, the following emerged from the brain of DFS: >>>>> >>>>> The most ridiculous of all was uttered by Linus Torvalds himself >>>>> "Really, I'm not out to destroy Microsoft. That will just be a >>>>> completely unintentional side effect." >>>> >>>> You're still missing the enormous tongue in the cheeck. >>> >>> I miss nothing. >>> >>> He truly believed it, and like most Linux wackjobs who have no >>> grasp of reality, he probably still does. >> >> >> I normally agree with you, however I think you're wrong on that >> one. Linux despises "advocate" types for a start. > > He truly believes it. He's made several statements that clearly > show he thinks Linux/OSS will destroy MS: > > "Open source is a model for how to do things, and I happen to > believe that it's just a much better way to do things and that open > source will take over not because of any battle, but simply because > better ways of doing things eventually just replace the inferior > things." Okay, no tongue in that cheeck. But I see nothing wrong with that statement. The man honestly believes that open source is the best model for software development, and he's optimistic enough to believe that the best way will take the upperhand. I do agree with his opinion on open source, but I don't share his optimism. The best stuff rarely is the most popular stuff. -- BOFH excuse #259: Someone's tie is caught in the printer, and if anything else gets printed, he'll be in it too.

TomB stated in post 20100618124014.171@usenet.drumscum.be on 6/18/10 3:46 AM: >>> I normally agree with you, however I think you're wrong on that >>> one. Linux despises "advocate" types for a start. >> >> He truly believes it. He's made several statements that clearly >> show he thinks Linux/OSS will destroy MS: >> >> "Open source is a model for how to do things, and I happen to >> believe that it's just a much better way to do things and that open >> source will take over not because of any battle, but simply because >> better ways of doing things eventually just replace the inferior >> things." > > Okay, no tongue in that cheeck. But I see nothing wrong with that > statement. The man honestly believes that open source is the best > model for software development, and he's optimistic enough to believe > that the best way will take the upperhand. > > I do agree with his opinion on open source, but I don't share his > optimism. The best stuff rarely is the most popular stuff. If and when a free system can serve people as well or better than the commercial alternatives we will see it grow a lot. We have seen this in servers, embedded devices, etc. The same is true of the desktop market. -- [INSERT .SIG HERE]

On 2010-06-17, DFS <nospam@dfs_.com> wrote: > > > On 6/16/2010 4:56 PM, Hadron wrote: >> >> According to the usual "advocates" the BBC is biased against OSS. >> >> As if by magic they then post a very pro OSS article about Red Hat. Are >> the "advocates" ever right?!?!?! >> >> >> http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/maggieshiels/2010/06/the_open_source_entrepreneur.html > > > No. > > Not once in the 6 years I've been reading cola have they made even the > most slightly prescient statement about technology: > > > "MS Office killer" ....such designations are usually false strawmen usually trotted around by the Lemmings themselves. They're generally just a reflection of how these Lemming Trolls are divorced from reality and estranged from honesty. [deletia] -- ||| In a free market, the herd should be irrelevant. / | \

On 2010-06-18, TomB <tommy.bongaerts@gmail.com> wrote: > > > On 2010-06-18, the following emerged from the brain of DFS: >> On 6/17/2010 1:24 PM, Hadron wrote: >>> DFS<nospam@dfs_.com> writes: >>> >>>> On 6/17/2010 1:19 PM, TomB wrote: >>>>> On 2010-06-17, the following emerged from the brain of DFS: >>>>>> >>>>>> The most ridiculous of all was uttered by Linus Torvalds himself >>>>>> "Really, I'm not out to destroy Microsoft. That will just be a >>>>>> completely unintentional side effect." >>>>> >>>>> You're still missing the enormous tongue in the cheeck. >>>> >>>> I miss nothing. >>>> >>>> He truly believed it, and like most Linux wackjobs who have no >>>> grasp of reality, he probably still does. >>> >>> >>> I normally agree with you, however I think you're wrong on that >>> one. Linux despises "advocate" types for a start. >> >> He truly believes it. He's made several statements that clearly >> show he thinks Linux/OSS will destroy MS: >> >> "Open source is a model for how to do things, and I happen to >> believe that it's just a much better way to do things and that open >> source will take over not because of any battle, but simply because >> better ways of doing things eventually just replace the inferior >> things." > > Okay, no tongue in that cheeck. But I see nothing wrong with that > statement. The man honestly believes that open source is the best > model for software development, and he's optimistic enough to believe > that the best way will take the upperhand. > > I do agree with his opinion on open source, but I don't share his > optimism. The best stuff rarely is the most popular stuff. If that were really the case, then Linus would never have had any motivation for starting Linux to begin with. Linux was started because Linus decided to choose a platform based on "compatability" and then found that choice lacking. I came to Linux by the same path. -- ||| In a free market, the herd should be irrelevant. / | \

On 6/18/2010 12:52 PM, JEDIDIAH wrote: > On 2010-06-17, DFS<nospam@dfs_.com> wrote: >> >> >> On 6/16/2010 4:56 PM, Hadron wrote: >>> >>> According to the usual "advocates" the BBC is biased against OSS. >>> >>> As if by magic they then post a very pro OSS article about Red Hat. Are >>> the "advocates" ever right?!?!?! >>> >>> >>> http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/maggieshiels/2010/06/the_open_source_entrepreneur.html >> >> >> No. >> >> Not once in the 6 years I've been reading cola have they made even the >> most slightly prescient statement about technology: >> >> >> "MS Office killer" > > ...such designations are usually false strawmen usually trotted around > by the Lemmings themselves. Every such designation was blabbered by multiple Linux idiots on cola and/or around the Internet. > They're generally just a reflection of how > these Lemming Trolls are divorced from reality and estranged from > honesty. They're actually just the bullshit projections of success-hating, MS-hating, Apple-hating, broke, freetard Linux fanbois.