Microsoft Dirty Tricks Compendium - Linux

This is a discussion on Microsoft Dirty Tricks Compendium - Linux ; On Sun, 25 May 2008 23:17:07 -0400, DFS wrote: > nessuno@wigner.berkeley.edu wrote: >> On May 24, 5:11 pm, alt wrote: >>> On Sat, 24 May 2008 20:18:45 +0100, Roy Schestowitz wrote: >>>> How can Microsoft defend itself? Oh, well... say ...

+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2
Results 21 to 32 of 32

Thread: Microsoft Dirty Tricks Compendium

  1. Re: Microsoft Dirty Tricks Compendium

    On Sun, 25 May 2008 23:17:07 -0400, DFS wrote:

    > nessuno@wigner.berkeley.edu wrote:
    >> On May 24, 5:11 pm, alt wrote:
    >>> On Sat, 24 May 2008 20:18:45 +0100, Roy Schestowitz wrote:
    >>>> How can Microsoft defend itself? Oh, well... say that "everyone's
    >>>> doing it."
    >>>
    >>> Tu Quoque is not a valid argument. It insinuates that two wrongs make
    >>> a right (they don't).
    >>>
    >>> If the best Microsoft can do is a Tu Quoque argument, then they have
    >>> lost already.

    >>
    >> Except everyone's *not* doing it, at least not with the same disregard
    >> for ethics as Microsoft.

    >
    >
    > Here's a total lack of ethics in action: "We will give them the free
    > software so your non-free software will fail"
    >
    > http://itmanagement.earthweb.com/osr...le.php/3737586


    "Knife the baby"
    "Cut off their air supply".
    Paraphrase: the idea is for the developer to see the error and think the
    problem is with their code (AARD).
    Halloween papers



    --
    Rick

  2. Re: Microsoft Dirty Tricks Compendium

    * Tim Smith peremptorily fired off this memo:

    > Sections with major errors:


    I'll just answer one, just for time's sake:

    > * VFAT. Their complaint is that it is covered by patents. So having
    > patents is now a dirty trick?


    No, but the big noise made about enforcing it, awhile back, certainly
    was.

    As for the rest, I do see a lot of seams in it, and many entries need
    some supporting links. I won't be able to help them out at this time,
    however.

    Observations:

    1. All material posted to the web, be it by Roy, Tim, Linonut (also
    known as Chris Ahlstrom), is suspect.

    2. Almost no material posted on the web is 100% correct, even in
    technical material.

    3. There is no substitute for doing one's own research.

    4. Unfortunately, there is precious little time to research properly
    all the interesting material that is out there.

    Sad. But, on the other hand, stimulating!

    --
    Until we're educating every kid in a fantastic way, until every inner city
    is cleaned up, there is no shortage of things to do.
    -- Bill Gates

  3. Re: Microsoft Dirty Tricks Compendium

    In article ,
    Linonut wrote:
    > Observations:
    >
    > 1. All material posted to the web, be it by Roy, Tim, Linonut (also
    > known as Chris Ahlstrom), is suspect.
    >
    > 2. Almost no material posted on the web is 100% correct, even in
    > technical material.
    >
    > 3. There is no substitute for doing one's own research.
    >
    > 4. Unfortunately, there is precious little time to research properly
    > all the interesting material that is out there.


    I'm close to concluding that the web is almost worthless as a news
    source. It is at best a place to gets hints as to things that might be
    news.

    I realized this when I observed an incident that went something like
    this (I may have the order of events slightly wrong):

    1. Company X and company Y get involved in a dispute.

    2. In a comment to a blog post on a somewhat obscure blog that mentioned
    #1, someone *speculates* that company Z might be helping company X. I
    happened to have inside information on company Z and knew that this
    speculation was not correct.

    3. Groklaw mentions #2. Groklaw does not say it is true--just points it
    out as something perhaps interesting.

    4. A blogger at CNET mentions #3.

    5. Other blogs note #4, but they do not say it was a CNET *blog* post.
    Rather, they say that CNET is reporting company Z is helping company X.

    6. Others pick up #5, reporting company Z is helping company X as a
    verified fact. It enters the blogosphere as such.

    (As I said, I may have the order slightly wrong. It may have went
    through a CNET blogger before Groklaw, and the blogs in #5 picked it up
    there, citing it as CNET news, not CNET blogs).

    I'd like to see all sites that are actual news sites, reporting stories
    written by journalists following journalistic standards, get rid of
    their blogs. Too many people on the web confuse blogs with news, and
    having blogs at a real news site leads to situations like I described
    above.

    --
    --Tim Smith

  4. Re: Microsoft Dirty Tricks Compendium

    On Mon, 26 May 2008 10:34:41 -0700, Tim Smith wrote:

    > In article ,
    > Linonut wrote:
    >> Observations:
    >>
    >> 1. All material posted to the web, be it by Roy, Tim, Linonut (also
    >> known as Chris Ahlstrom), is suspect.
    >>
    >> 2. Almost no material posted on the web is 100% correct, even in
    >> technical material.
    >>
    >> 3. There is no substitute for doing one's own research.
    >>
    >> 4. Unfortunately, there is precious little time to research properly
    >> all the interesting material that is out there.

    >
    > I'm close to concluding that the web is almost worthless as a news
    > source. It is at best a place to gets hints as to things that might be
    > news.
    >
    > I realized this when I observed an incident that went something like
    > this (I may have the order of events slightly wrong):
    >
    > 1. Company X and company Y get involved in a dispute.
    >
    > 2. In a comment to a blog post on a somewhat obscure blog that mentioned
    > #1, someone *speculates* that company Z might be helping company X. I
    > happened to have inside information on company Z and knew that this
    > speculation was not correct.
    >
    > 3. Groklaw mentions #2. Groklaw does not say it is true--just points it
    > out as something perhaps interesting.
    >
    > 4. A blogger at CNET mentions #3.
    >
    > 5. Other blogs note #4, but they do not say it was a CNET *blog* post.
    > Rather, they say that CNET is reporting company Z is helping company X.
    >
    > 6. Others pick up #5, reporting company Z is helping company X as a
    > verified fact. It enters the blogosphere as such.
    >
    > (As I said, I may have the order slightly wrong. It may have went
    > through a CNET blogger before Groklaw, and the blogs in #5 picked it up
    > there, citing it as CNET news, not CNET blogs).


    You've just described Roy Schestowitz's entire operation in a NUTshell.
    The only think you left out is that he often refers back to his own
    websites for *proof* of his insane claims.

    > I'd like to see all sites that are actual news sites, reporting stories
    > written by journalists following journalistic standards, get rid of
    > their blogs. Too many people on the web confuse blogs with news, and
    > having blogs at a real news site leads to situations like I described
    > above.


    As long as the paranoid COLA Cult types exist you will never see it happen.

    Why?

    Because when a journalist disagrees with their agenda, they quickly
    mobilize to discredit this journalist.
    However should this same journalist make a totally inaccurate report that
    just happens to agree with the Linux loons, then they will categorically
    ignore the errors and proclaim the article as proof Linux is succeeding.

    So effectively we are right back to square one.



    --
    Moshe Goldfarb
    Collector of soaps from around the globe.
    Please visit The Hall of Linux Idiots:
    http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/

  5. Re: Microsoft Dirty Tricks Compendium

    * Tim Smith peremptorily fired off this memo:

    > I'm close to concluding that the web is almost worthless as a news
    > source. It is at best a place to gets hints as to things that might be
    > news.


    Yeah, I tend to agree.

    > I'd like to see all sites that are actual news sites, reporting stories
    > written by journalists following journalistic standards, get rid of
    > their blogs. Too many people on the web confuse blogs with news, and
    > having blogs at a real news site leads to situations like I described
    > above.


    On the other hand, blogs are a good source of finger-pointing humor.


    --
    Success is a lousy teacher. It seduces smart people into thinking they can't
    lose.
    -- Bill Gates, The Road Ahead (1995)

  6. Re: Microsoft Dirty Tricks Compendium

    Moshe Goldfarb (flatfish) in real life Gary Stewart

    http://colatrolls.blogspot.com/2008/...arb-troll.html
    http://colatrolls.blogspot.com/2007/...ish-troll.html

    Traits:

    * Nym shifting (see below)
    * Self confessed thief and proud of it
    * Homophobic
    * Racist
    * Habitual liar
    * Frequently cross posts replies to other non-Linux related newsgroups
    * Frequently cross posts articles originally not posted to COLA

    ** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **

  7. Re: Microsoft Dirty Tricks Compendium

    ____/ Linonut on Saturday 24 May 2008 15:26 : \____

    > http://www.grokdoc.net/index.php/Dirty_Tricks_history
    >
    > Contents
    >
    > * 1 A History of MS' Standards 'Dirty Tricks'
    > o 1.1 Standards Bodies and Windows APIs
    > o 1.2 Standards covered
    > * 2 MS OfficeOpenXML
    > o 2.1 Licensing
    > o 2.2 (In-)Compatibility with other standards
    > o 2.3 Office2007 implementation
    > o 2.4 Alternative Implementations
    > o 2.5 Summary and epilogue
    > * 3 MPEG
    > * 4 OpenDoc
    > * 5 HTML and WWW
    > * 6 Kerberos standard with proprietary extension
    > * 7 The Sender ID flap
    > * 8 Ecmascript
    > * 9 RTF
    > * 10 LDAP
    > * 11 CIFS
    > * 12 OpenGL
    > * 13 C#/CLI
    > * 14 .NET
    > * 15 Java
    > * 16 ODBC API
    > * 17 ActiveX standardization
    > * 18 NTP, the Network Time Protocol
    > * 19 RIFF (WAV)
    > * 20 VFAT
    > * 21 C++
    > * 22 RC4 encryption
    > * 23 Rdesktop
    > * 24 Boot sector pain
    > * 25 PNG
    >
    > Not sure if it is truly comprehensive, though. For instance, I see nothing
    > in the above list about
    >
    > * Violating non-disclosure agreements
    > * Buying out the competition and killing them
    > * Using brain-drain on the competition
    > * Slinging mud, astroturfing, channel-stuffing, stove-piping, and
    > legal threats (direct, via press release, and by proxy)
    > * Strong-arming vendors
    > * Cooking their accounting numbers (pretty standard for all business,
    > I suppose)
    >
    > But, I suppose Grok's list is a technical list. So here's another:
    >
    > http://www.groklaw.net/staticpages/i...05010107100653
    >
    > Microsoft Litigation.
    >
    > Teach me Billy! Teach me!
    >

    Speaking of compendiums, someone sent me this one this morning, to be
    maintained as a static page. Lots packed in one single page.

    http://boycottnovell.com/microsoft-critique-resources/

    Hopefully she'll keep it updated.

    --
    ~~ Best of wishes

    Roy S. Schestowitz | "No, I didn't buy that from eBay"
    http://Schestowitz.com | RHAT GNU/Linux | PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
    run-level 2 2008-04-15 01:48 last=
    http://iuron.com - help build a non-profit search engine

  8. Re: Microsoft Dirty Tricks Compendium

    Verily I say unto thee, that Roy Schestowitz spake thusly:

    > http://boycottnovell.com/microsoft-critique-resources/
    >
    > Hopefully she'll keep it updated.


    BTW, the iowaconsumercase.org link (near the end, above the long
    Slashdot quote) is defunct. You should replace it with one of these:

    http://edge-op.org/iowa/www.iowaconsumercase.org/
    http://antitrust.slated.org/www.iowaconsumercase.org/

    --
    K.
    http://slated.org

    ..----
    | 'When it comes to knowledge, "ownership" just doesn't make sense'
    | ~ Cory Doctorow, The Guardian. http://tinyurl.com/22bgx8
    `----

    Fedora release 8 (Werewolf) on sky, running kernel 2.6.23.8-63.fc8
    18:54:11 up 158 days, 15:30, 6 users, load average: 0.05, 0.08, 0.08

  9. Re: Microsoft Dirty Tricks Compendium

    ____/ Homer on Tuesday 27 May 2008 18:54 : \____

    > Verily I say unto thee, that Roy Schestowitz spake thusly:
    >
    >> http://boycottnovell.com/microsoft-critique-resources/
    >>
    >> Hopefully she'll keep it updated.

    >
    > BTW, the iowaconsumercase.org link (near the end, above the long
    > Slashdot quote) is defunct. You should replace it with one of these:
    >
    > http://edge-op.org/iowa/www.iowaconsumercase.org/
    > http://antitrust.slated.org/www.iowaconsumercase.org/


    Oh, when Microsoft assassinated that Web site, it became SPAM (almost
    literally), so as I went through the links I turned it to just text (stripped
    off the hyperlink). I'll put Slated on it.

    --
    ~~ Best of wishes

    Roy S. Schestowitz | #ff0000 Hot Chilli Peppers
    http://Schestowitz.com | Open Prospects | PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
    Tasks: 180 total, 1 running, 179 sleeping, 0 stopped, 0 zombie
    http://iuron.com - knowledge engine, not a search engine

  10. Re: Microsoft Dirty Tricks Compendium

    On Wed, 28 May 2008 02:42:33 +0100, Roy Schestowitz wrote:


    > Oh, when Microsoft assassinated that Web site, it became SPAM (almost
    > literally), so as I went through the links I turned it to just text (stripped
    > off the hyperlink). I'll put Slated on it.


    Ooooooo you're going to put Slated on it??

    I'll bet Microsoft is just soooooo scared....

    Jeeze Roy, do you have act like an idiot 24x7 ?


    --
    Moshe Goldfarb
    Collector of soaps from around the globe.
    Please visit The Hall of Linux Idiots:
    http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/

  11. Re: Microsoft Dirty Tricks Compendium

    Moshe, Goldfarb. wrote:
    > On Wed, 28 May 2008 02:42:33 +0100, Roy Schestowitz wrote:
    >
    >
    >> Oh, when Microsoft assassinated that Web site, it became SPAM (almost
    >> literally), so as I went through the links I turned it to just text
    >> (stripped off the hyperlink). I'll put Slated on it.

    >
    > Ooooooo you're going to put Slated on it??
    >
    > I'll bet Microsoft is just soooooo scared....
    >
    > Jeeze Roy, do you have act like an idiot 24x7 ?


    If he didn't, he couldn't in good conscience call himself a Linux
    "advocate".




  12. Re: Microsoft Dirty Tricks Compendium

    Moshe Goldfarb (flatfish) in real life Gary Stewart

    http://colatrolls.blogspot.com/2008/...arb-troll.html
    http://colatrolls.blogspot.com/2007/...ish-troll.html

    Traits:

    * Nym shifting (see below)
    * Self confessed thief and proud of it
    * Homophobic
    * Racist
    * Habitual liar
    * Frequently cross posts replies to other non-Linux related newsgroups
    * Frequently cross posts articles originally not posted to COLA

    ** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **

+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2