Funkenbusch - proven liar, fud spreader and microsoft ass licker - Linux

This is a discussion on Funkenbusch - proven liar, fud spreader and microsoft ass licker - Linux ; * Tim Smith fired off this tart reply: > In article , > Jim Richardson wrote: >> it's not the study that's being objected to, is my impression from the >> post, but the payment for it. > > But ...

+ Reply to Thread
Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 LastLast
Results 41 to 60 of 86

Thread: Funkenbusch - proven liar, fud spreader and microsoft ass licker

  1. Re: Why does Roy ignore IBM?

    * Tim Smith fired off this tart reply:

    > In article ,
    > Jim Richardson wrote:
    >> it's not the study that's being objected to, is my impression from the
    >> post, but the payment for it.

    >
    > But it is only being objected to when MS does it, not when Sun or IBM or
    > Apple do it. It's perfectly normal to give the participants in a
    > usability study (or pretty much any other kind of study that takes more
    > than a few minutes time and is done at your facility) some freebies,
    > such as software.
    >
    > This is simply another example of Roy purposefully being misleading
    > about Microsoft.


    You're making the mistake of thinking that, because a poster
    concentrates on one entity, his lack of treatment of other entities
    constitutes agreement about those entities.

    If you have doubts about a given post by Roy, all you have to do is read
    it and reply.

    --
    Tux rox!

  2. Re: Why does Roy ignore IBM?

    Linonut wrote:

    > While this may be a somewhat valid method of provide some guidance in
    > product development, it is hardly a study. Microsoft may well find
    > itself fooled by its own biased observations.


    It seems to have worked well for them so far.





  3. Re: Why does Roy ignore IBM?

    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
    Hash: SHA1

    On Fri, 21 Dec 2007 17:04:32 -0800,
    Tim Smith wrote:
    > In article ,
    > Jim Richardson wrote:
    >> it's not the study that's being objected to, is my impression from the
    >> post, but the payment for it.

    >
    > But it is only being objected to when MS does it, not when Sun or IBM or
    > Apple do it. It's perfectly normal to give the participants in a
    > usability study (or pretty much any other kind of study that takes more
    > than a few minutes time and is done at your facility) some freebies,
    > such as software.
    >


    Then your position should have been (imho) that there was nothing wrong
    with it. Not "neener neener they do it too, jump on them"


    For me, I don't care either way, as long as all the relevant details are
    released. I don't care that a private company tries to buy votes from a
    consumer with freebies. That's free market. Doing same with a standards
    body is a bit different, but is another discussion.

    > This is simply another example of Roy purposefully being misleading
    > about Microsoft. He posts a few links arguing that they improperly have
    > paid people, and then he throws in that story, about a usability study
    > for some software related to blogging, and does it such a way as to try
    > to give the impression that it means MS is bribing bloggers to control
    > their writing.
    >


    The Ferrari laptop thing was pretty blatant, and was condemned on all
    sides. Handing someone a free copy of your flagship Office software in
    return for a review is one thing, handing out a top of the line gaming
    laptop is a bit different in appearance don't you think?

    > He does this a lot--put one or two articles in a post that support his
    > point, and then throw in others that have nothing to do with it, but
    > that, by careful manipulation, will LOOK like they do if you just skim
    > past them (which is what most people will do). The result is that the
    > reader that doesn't actually check everything out will get the
    > impression that Roy has many references backing up his point, when in
    > fact he has one or two, at most.
    >


    I mostly skip Roy's news posts, I find them repetitive and often
    inaccurate, that has nothing to do with this (sub) discussion however. I
    do the same with Rex, but that doesn't mean that everyone who disagrees
    with Rex is right, or that I will ignore sub threads that spin off when
    they interest me.

    Don't make the mistake Erik has made of thinking (or stating) that
    because I don't comment on something I must agree with it.


    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
    Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)

    iD8DBQFHbahWd90bcYOAWPYRAijNAKCY2f8kzDB5NfmDV/vtDnQDeel0KQCeIXd+
    h0NXkqwO4gjBt7f1Vh9rIQE=
    =xXFy
    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

    --
    Jim Richardson http://www.eskimo.com/~warlock
    Do I LOOK like a damn people person?

  4. Re: Funkenbusch - proven liar, fud spreader and microsoft asslicker

    Erik Funkenbusch wrote:

    > On Fri, 21 Dec 2007 11:03:30 -0600, chrisv wrote:
    >
    >>>> Is security really binary, Erik?
    >>>
    >>>In my opinion, yes.

    >>
    >> I say you're lying. No one in their right mind could honestly believe
    >> that.

    >
    > So, stating my opinion is lying.


    I say you're lying when you claim it's your opinion. I think you lie
    through your teeth to FUD for Micro$oft.

    Can I make it any more clear for you, Fuddie?

    > Nice job there, moron.


    Are you claiming that's it's impossible for you to lie about what your
    opinion is, Erik? Sorry, but it's quite possible. For example, if I
    were to claim "in my opinion, Erik Funkenbusch is an ethical person", it
    woulld be a lie.

    >>>> Does it really take Dell "thousands of man hours" to develop the
    >>>> manufacturing process for a PC that has, for example, a harddrive
    >>>> loaded with Linux instead of Windows?
    >>>
    >>>Yes, it does.

    >>
    >> Lie. Documented.

    >
    > Then provide the documentation.


    Already done it, Fuddie. Review the parts about "it bolts-in".

    >>>That's why Dell only offers Linux on select models in select
    >>>configurations. 1000 man hours is only 10 people working for 2.5
    >>>weeks. You find that hard to believe?

    >>
    >> I find it impossible to believe, you bald-faced liar.
    >>
    >> It's a different hard drive. It bolts-in the same as any other
    >> harddrive. There is no difference in the manufacturing process. It's
    >> simply a different part number on the BOM. You fsckwitted, lying,
    >> FUD'ing troll.
    >>
    >> "Thousands of man hours" indeed. LOL

    >
    > Uhh.. what?


    Uhh.. what?

    > You seem to not understand what developing a manufacturing
    > process is.


    Irony meter pegged.

    > Do you think hard drives just mysteriously appear out of
    > thin air with whole OS configurations on them? No. Someone has to
    > create the base image, and base images are chosen carefully and much
    > time is spent deciding which options to include.


    Dumb****. That's product design.

    And even what you describe does not take "thousands of man hours" you
    twit. It is NOT that difficult to take a reasonable base install (hell,
    the nice Ubuntu people have already DONE IT FOR YOU), and let the
    CUSTOMER change it from that.

    > I suppose you think Dell just dumps a default Red Hat configuration on
    > the disk and says "There, we're done". That's not how it works.


    You are a fscking idiot Fuddie.

    >>>> The dishonest FUD and lies from you are almost endless.
    >>>
    >>>Sounds more like your claims of my lies to me.

    >>
    >> See above, liar.

    >
    > You should really seek help for that condition.


    Calling-out liars is a "condition"?


  5. Re: Why does Roy ignore IBM?

    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
    Hash: SHA1

    On Fri, 21 Dec 2007 19:57:21 -0800,
    Tim Smith wrote:
    > In article ,
    > Linonut wrote:
    >> Actually, I feel I'm rational, and I have an objection. Combining this
    >>
    >> >> Seattle Area Bloggers Needed for Microsoft User Research Study

    >>
    >> with this
    >>
    >> > studies? ... usability studies?

    >>
    >> raises the hairs on my back. I don't care who does it, it is not a
    >> valid study to have "Seattle Area Bloggers" getting goodies for using a
    >> product.

    >
    > Why not? You want people to come down to your office, try out some new
    > software for a couple hours while you have people watch them do it and
    > take notes, and then you want them to answer questions about it
    > afterwards, and you don't want to give them some freebies for their time?
    >
    > Here's a description of the process:
    >
    >
    >
    > What's invalid about that?
    >



    Well, it had a broken img when I went there, but I don't think that's
    what you meant

    I haven't seen the NDA, so that would be my main area of concern. If
    it's NDA in the sense of "you can't say bad things about this product"
    that'd be expected, but ****ed up. If it's "we haven't released this
    yet, so don't spill the beans before we do" that's reasonable.

    Understand that in either case, it's *legal* and all, but can
    still be scummy.

    But I wouldn't call it invalid.

    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
    Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)

    iD8DBQFHba6jd90bcYOAWPYRAt0OAJ9UoZrPi578r18vxLZNLq yb9KLRqQCbB6C/
    9rPeBSuO2NvKYUabRBXFSq0=
    =g8VT
    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

    --
    Jim Richardson http://www.eskimo.com/~warlock
    I might be crazier than you think

  6. Re: Funkenbusch - proven liar, fud spreader and microsoft asslicker

    Erik Funkenbusch wrote:

    > chrisv wrote:
    >
    >>>> Does it really take Dell "thousands of man hours" to develop the
    >>>> manufacturing process for a PC that has, for example, a harddrive
    >>>> loaded with Linux instead of Windows?
    >>>
    >>>Yes, it does.
    >>>
    >>>That's why Dell only offers Linux on select models in select
    >>>configurations. 1000 man hours is only 10 people working for 2.5
    >>>weeks. You find that hard to believe?

    >>
    >> I find it impossible to believe, you bald-faced liar.
    >>
    >> It's a different hard drive. It bolts-in the same as any other
    >> harddrive. There is no difference in the manufacturing process. It's
    >> simply a different part number on the BOM. You fsckwitted, lying,
    >> FUD'ing troll.
    >>
    >> "Thousands of man hours" indeed. LOL

    >
    > Uhh.. what? You seem to not understand what developing a manufacturing
    > process is. Do you think hard drives just mysteriously appear out of
    > thin air with whole OS configurations on them? No. Someone has to
    > create the base image, and base images are chosen carefully and much
    > time is spent deciding which options to include.
    >
    > I suppose you think Dell just dumps a default Red Hat configuration on
    > the disk and says "There, we're done". That's not how it works.



    To show how Erik the liar is twisting and changing his story, here's what
    he wrote back than - PROVING that he, back then at least, understood the
    difference between up-front design and the manufacturing process.


    On Oct 20, 2005, Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
    >
    > They spend thousands of man hours defining the purpose of a particular
    > model, then thousands more researching the parts to use to meet the
    > needs of that purpose. Quite often they design a unique (or modify an
    > existing) motherboard, and need to have those built. Then they spend
    > still thousands more man hours building the basic procedures and bill of
    > materials for the model. Then they spend thousands more custom building
    > the image, selecting which drivers and tools work best, what third party
    > software to include, etc...


    Holy cow, Erik. So many LIES there that I don't know where to begin.

    Thousands and thousands and thousands of man hours! Just to develop a PC
    that runs, say, Ubuntu pretty-well! Something the average Linux geek can
    do in a few hours!

  7. Re: Why does Roy ignore IBM?

    * DFS fired off this tart reply:

    > Linonut wrote:
    >
    >> While this may be a somewhat valid method of provide some guidance in
    >> product development, it is hardly a study. Microsoft may well find
    >> itself fooled by its own biased observations.

    >
    > It seems to have worked well for them so far.


    That is not clear, based on some people's reactions to the new Ribbon
    interface.

    Or to Vista's UAC naggings.

    I will give you this, though. The Win 2000 desktop is, if you have to
    have a relatively inflexible desktop, which you do with Win 2000, a nice
    clean look. Most of the people here at work have reverted their XP
    boxes to the classic desktop look.

    --
    Tux rox!

  8. Re: Why does Roy ignore IBM?

    * Tim Smith fired off this tart reply:

    > It looks like you are hung up on the word "study". That's just what
    > this kind of testing is usually called, although I've seen usability
    > test also used. It's not a study like what, say, drug companies do when
    > testing a new drug.
    >
    > And yes, it is for product development. Usually, for developing the
    > user interface to a product. There is no hypothesis to refute--you are
    > just trying to see if people have trouble with your proposed product.


    If you have no hypothesis, then how can you evaluate your observations
    without risking subjective bias?

    > So, if you were, say, amazon.com, testing some changes to your web site,
    > you might give them tasks like:
    >
    > Find a hardback edition of "Moby Dick", and purchase it, using
    > credit card 4512345678901234, with shipment to 123 Fake Street,
    > Seattle, WA, 98102.
    >
    > and then you just look to see if you see anything that people have
    > problems with. You might notice things like people are having to poke
    > around a bit to find the books search among all the other categories, or
    > that they get confused about how the site handles shipping addresses, or
    > things like that, or that they can't figure out how to find different
    > editions of the book.


    That makes sense, if that's what Microsoft is doing.

    > It's not something that you are doing so you can write a journal paper.
    > What you get out of it are observations like "Gee...a lot of the people
    > found the paperback, but couldn't find the hardback...we need to find a
    > way to make it easier to find other editions".


    Ah, now you've slipped a hypothesis into it.

    > You aren't going to need much statistical analysis. At most, you just
    > need simple summaries of how many completed the task, and where the
    > failures occurred. But mostly what you are getting is a chance for your
    > engineers to *see* people using the product.


    I agree, that is helpful. But, again, you need to do it in a real
    systematic way. Otherwise, you'll end up with products that churn the
    user interface from major revision to major revision.

    Like, errr, Microsoft Word/Office.

    --
    Tux rox!

  9. Re: Why does Roy ignore IBM?

    ____/ Jim Richardson on Friday 21 December 2007 22:05 : \____

    > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
    > Hash: SHA1
    >
    > On Fri, 21 Dec 2007 04:23:54 -0000,
    > Tim Smith wrote:
    >> On 2007-12-21, Roy Schestowitz wrote:
    >>> Seattle Area Bloggers Needed for Microsoft User Research Study
    >>>
    >>> ,----[ Quote ]
    >>>| For your participation, we'll give you your choice of retail
    >>>| software and hardware from our extensive list. Current titles
    >>>| include the latest Xbox, Xbox 360, and PC games, keyboards,
    >>>| Microsoft Office, Windows, productivity software and much more.
    >>> `----

    >>
    >> How come you NEVER object when IBM or Sun or Apple do this?


    The key word there is "bloggers".

    > Have you objected when MS does it ?
    >
    > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
    > Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
    >
    > iD8DBQFHbDimd90bcYOAWPYRAizSAJ9z/87o2iKcO73Jrr1S2WOMxferTQCeKl7e
    > vcFlJXsYgbie/fBNtc7Vh1w=
    > =BufH
    > -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----



    --
    ~~ Best of wishes

    Microsoft loves competition.
    "Linux is a cancer that attaches itself in an intellectual property sense to
    everything it touches."
    --Steve Ballmer, Microsoft CEO

  10. Re: Funkenbusch - proven liar, fud spreader and microsoft ass licker

    On Sat, 22 Dec 2007 18:55:15 -0600, chrisv wrote:

    > To show how Erik the liar is twisting and changing his story, here's what
    > he wrote back than - PROVING that he, back then at least, understood the
    > difference between up-front design and the manufacturing process.


    Ok then, Mr. Liar. Where in that paragraph do I use the phrase
    "Manufacturing Process" as you claimed I said?

    I didn't recall the exact words I used, so I took you at your word that you
    were quoting me. Turns out you were lying about what I said instead. Now
    you have the gall to post my actual words, which contradict your claims,
    and then say I lied.

    > On Oct 20, 2005, Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
    >>
    >> They spend thousands of man hours defining the purpose of a particular
    >> model, then thousands more researching the parts to use to meet the
    >> needs of that purpose. Quite often they design a unique (or modify an
    >> existing) motherboard, and need to have those built. Then they spend
    >> still thousands more man hours building the basic procedures and bill of
    >> materials for the model. Then they spend thousands more custom building
    >> the image, selecting which drivers and tools work best, what third party
    >> software to include, etc...

    >
    > Holy cow, Erik. So many LIES there that I don't know where to begin.
    >
    > Thousands and thousands and thousands of man hours! Just to develop a PC
    > that runs, say, Ubuntu pretty-well! Something the average Linux geek can
    > do in a few hours!


    Every word of what I wrote there is true. You really have *NO* freaking
    idea how a major OEM gets from concept to working assembly line, do you?
    Here's a hint for you, there's... oh.. about a billion times difference
    between you jacking off in your basement over some spare parts you threw
    together and what Dell does for a commercial product.

    Hell, Dell even creates a diagnostic software, special installation
    software, etc.. all of which takes a lot of time as well.

    Please, Linux advocates. Why don't you tell Chris the truth here? Why do
    you let him go on making advocates look like stupid idiots?

  11. Re: Funkenbusch - proven liar, fud spreader and microsoft ass licker

    On 21 Dec, 05:58, Erik Funkenbusch
    wrote:

    > I challenge you, prove i've lied about anything ..


    You would agree I've been watching you for some time. I do believe I
    have spotted your game. It's not as if you merely engage in telling
    untruths, everything you say has an agenda, the purpose being to
    inject self serving propaganda into the historical record. Despite
    being repeatidly shot down, you keep coming back with the same lies
    and distortions year after year. I've gone back to 2002/2003 and seen
    you being totally shown up, your lies totally exposed. Yet years
    later, here you are still repeating the same tired old bull****. You
    have to be totally mad or being paid to do this.

    You also turn distinctly nasty when contradicted ..

  12. Giving Roy the benefit of the doubt

    In article <14619421.HT35MDpVJF@schestowitz.com>,
    Roy Schestowitz wrote:
    > >>> Seattle Area Bloggers Needed for Microsoft User Research Study
    > >>>
    > >>> ,----[ Quote ]
    > >>>| For your participation, we'll give you your choice of retail
    > >>>| software and hardware from our extensive list. Current titles
    > >>>| include the latest Xbox, Xbox 360, and PC games, keyboards,
    > >>>| Microsoft Office, Windows, productivity software and much more.
    > >>> `----
    > >>
    > >> How come you NEVER object when IBM or Sun or Apple do this?

    >
    > The key word there is "bloggers".


    Is it possible that you overlooked what the study is for? It's a
    usability test. They are developing some software or service of use to
    bloggers (probably something to do with the blogging facilities on their
    Live Spaces thingy).

    Hence, they want bloggers to come down to their offices, spend a couple
    hours using the new software, while they watch them, so they can see
    what interface problems the software has and fix it. This is routine.
    Most major software companies do it. If you are testing software for
    page layout, you'd ask publishing people down. If you are testing
    software for accounting, you'd ask small businessmen down. And if you
    are testing software for blogging (or an online blogging service you
    offer), you ask bloggers to come on down.

    If they were giving software to have Seattle bloggers come down to
    listen to a presentation about why Linux is bad, or something like that,
    I'd see that you'd have a legitimate beef with them, but I don't see how
    a company the developers software for the blogger market wanting to do a
    usability test on that software is bad. Sure, bloggers can be annoying
    sometime, but to deny them good interfaces is cruel! :-)

    --
    --Tim Smith

  13. Re: Giving Roy the benefit of the doubt

    Tim Smith writes:

    > In article <14619421.HT35MDpVJF@schestowitz.com>,
    > Roy Schestowitz wrote:
    >> >>> Seattle Area Bloggers Needed for Microsoft User Research Study
    >> >>>
    >> >>> ,----[ Quote ]
    >> >>>| For your participation, we'll give you your choice of retail
    >> >>>| software and hardware from our extensive list. Current titles
    >> >>>| include the latest Xbox, Xbox 360, and PC games, keyboards,
    >> >>>| Microsoft Office, Windows, productivity software and much more.
    >> >>> `----
    >> >>
    >> >> How come you NEVER object when IBM or Sun or Apple do this?

    >>
    >> The key word there is "bloggers".

    >
    > Is it possible that you overlooked what the study is for? It's a
    > usability test. They are developing some software or service of use to
    > bloggers (probably something to do with the blogging facilities on their
    > Live Spaces thingy).


    LOL. Come on linonut. Lets see you get out of this one. As usual your
    reply seemed totally at odds with the reality of the subject you replied
    to.

  14. Re: Giving Roy the benefit of the doubt

    In article ,
    Hadron wrote:
    > Tim Smith writes:
    >
    > LOL. Come on linonut. Lets see you get out of this one. As usual your
    > reply seemed totally at odds with the reality of the subject you replied
    > to.


    Great. I've been accused of being Erik. Now I'm being accused of being
    Linonut.

    Hey, Erik and Linonut--if you are ever both in the Seattle are at the
    same time, lets meet somewhere and have our pictures taken together, to
    prove we aren't the same. :-)

    --
    --Tim Smith

  15. Re: Giving Roy the benefit of the doubt

    Tim Smith writes:

    > In article ,
    > Hadron wrote:
    >> Tim Smith writes:
    >>
    >> LOL. Come on linonut. Lets see you get out of this one. As usual your
    >> reply seemed totally at odds with the reality of the subject you replied
    >> to.

    >
    > Great. I've been accused of being Erik. Now I'm being accused of being
    > Linonut.


    No, you're not.

  16. Re: Giving Roy the benefit of the doubt

    On Sun, 23 Dec 2007 15:54:33 -0800, Tim Smith wrote:

    > In article ,
    > Hadron wrote:
    >> Tim Smith writes:
    >>
    >> LOL. Come on linonut. Lets see you get out of this one. As usual your
    >> reply seemed totally at odds with the reality of the subject you replied
    >> to.

    >
    > Great. I've been accused of being Erik. Now I'm being accused of being
    > Linonut.
    >
    > Hey, Erik and Linonut--if you are ever both in the Seattle are at the
    > same time, lets meet somewhere and have our pictures taken together, to
    > prove we aren't the same. :-)


    Sounds like a deal to me. Email me (valid after removing the despam), i
    might actually be in town soon on my way up to Vancouver.

  17. Re: Giving Roy the benefit of the doubt

    * Tim Smith fired off this tart reply:

    > In article ,
    > Hadron wrote:
    >> Tim Smith writes:
    >>
    >> LOL. Come on linonut. Lets see you get out of this one. As usual your
    >> reply seemed totally at odds with the reality of the subject you replied
    >> to.

    >
    > Great. I've been accused of being Erik. Now I'm being accused of being
    > Linonut.


    Hadron is apparently so eager to get a jab in at me that he can't even
    parse the post before hitting the Reply key!

    > Hey, Erik and Linonut--if you are ever both in the Seattle are at the
    > same time, lets meet somewhere and have our pictures taken together, to
    > prove we aren't the same. :-)


    Actually, in spite of the scuffles here, I think that could work, in the
    sense that we wouldn't end up with broken bones and black eyes .

    I'm afraid, though, as I near Seattle, the Tux ring on my finger would
    start to throb and cause me pain.

    --
    Tux rox!

  18. Re: Giving Roy the benefit of the doubt

    In article <1rc06z9ep8pfe$.1hzchklrv6cod.dlg@40tude.net>,
    Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
    > Sounds like a deal to me. Email me (valid after removing the despam), i
    > might actually be in town soon on my way up to Vancouver.


    Amusing idea, but I hate going to Seattle. :-) Besides, the conspiracy
    idiots would then just start hounding us for proof that the photo is
    really us!


    --
    --Tim Smith

  19. Re: Giving Roy the benefit of the doubt

    In article ,
    Linonut wrote:
    > I'm afraid, though, as I near Seattle, the Tux ring on my finger would
    > start to throb and cause me pain.


    Just keep Google's Seattle and Kirkland offices between you and Redmond
    at all times, and it should be safe. :-)


    --
    --Tim Smith

  20. Re: Why does Roy ignore IBM?

    Linonut wrote:

    >Most of the people here at work have reverted their XP
    >boxes to the classic desktop look.


    Definately. The XP defaults appear to have been designed by Fisher
    Price. Micro$oft seems to prefer to treat it's customers like idiots
    (not to mention, like thieves).


+ Reply to Thread
Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 LastLast