03.28.08
Om[icrosoft] M[unchkin]alik’s Open Source Blog Calls Us ”Conspiracy Theorists” (Updated)
How ‘dare’ anyone criticise Mono, which Microsoft says it “reserves the right to sue” over?
Just spotted this new bit of text from a blog of Om Malik, who was recent caught accepting Microsoft money for reciting Microsoft slogans in his blog/s (without disclosure)…
It’s akin to those academic kickbacks we brought up recently. Anyway, here are the bits of relevance:
The conspiracy theorists [link to BoycottNovell] argue among other things that the Mono license may be a trick by Microsoft and Novell and that Mono may imperil GNU/Linux. These are all ivory tower arguments that don’t necessarily pass the smell test in the real world.
Using labels with negative connotations against hard evidence is something we saw before. Need we recall the Bruce Byfield saga? It’s probably not worth repeating the same arguments, so here are links to what was said and cited at the time:
- Bruce Byfield at it Again with “Conspiracy Theorists”
- A Look Back at Well-documented Microsoft Briberies
- There is No Community and There is No Communism, Either
- Bruce Byfield Misattributes Quotes (Updatedx4)
- Speaking of So-called 'Conspiracy Theories' and 'Coincidences'
- Fighting Inconveinient Truths Using Labels and Stereotypes.
- Since When Does Microsoft Not Sabotage GNU/Linux?
It is important to keep track of those who try to stick labels onto us. It’s means of creating an embargo or questioning one’s credibility using words alone. In extremity, this is even used for blacklisting at ISP/filtering service-level. If you notice someone badmouthing this Web site without solid arguments or basis, please do inform us. Groklaw is already being filtered by some ISPs for unknown/unspecified reasons. Maybe it was going ‘too far’ saying the truth. █
Update: Oh, what do you know? Om Malik is now speaking directly with Microsoft. It’s useful to know who you’re dealing with. Mary Fo Foley sort of told me recently that only the ‘Microsoft-obedient’ (or faithful) can get to speak to high Microsoft executives. Microsoft keeps dossiers on journalists.
Highlight: Novell was the first to acknowledge that Microsoft FUD tactics had substance. Novell then used anti-Linux FUD to market itself. 
Highlight: Xandros let Microsoft make patent claims and brag about (paid-for) OOXML support. 
Highlight: Linspire's CEO not only fell into Microsoft arms, but he also assisted the company's attack on GNU/Linux. 
Highlight: Microsoft craves pseudo (proprietary) standards and gets its way using proxies and influence which it buys. 
Highlight: The invasion into the open source world is intended to leave Linux companies neglected, due to financial incentives from Microsoft. 
Analysis: Xen, an open source hypervisor, possibly fell victim to Microsoft's aggressive (and stealthy) acquisition-by-proxy strategy.
Victor Soliz said,
March 28, 2008 at 8:38 am
It’s easy to be a conspiracy theorist when you got plenty of evidence in favor of the conspiracy in question.
I am delighted by the fact he had moonlight in his blog title considering moonlight is the ultimate piece of evidence that there are problems in MONO, so much that I don’t even feel the need to go into further detail.
Roy Schestowitz said,
March 28, 2008 at 8:47 am
I was just about to post an update about Moonlight in like… 5 minutes. I’m still editing a little and I believe it’s fairly significant.
SubSonica said,
March 28, 2008 at 9:00 am
Dear Roy: Let me quote a fellow countrymen of yours:
“In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.”
So the opposition of the established monopolists and its financial ecosystem is expected. Let’s keep up the good fight!!!
Roy Schestowitz said,
March 28, 2008 at 9:05 am
Well, either that or I’ll have to fight WebSense et al, which people try to shove opposition sites into… to have a Web-wide filter applied to them.
Victor Soliz said,
April 4, 2008 at 12:51 pm
So, you know MONO is fine because Miguel Icaza says so! http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=743385
I think we need some sort of FAQ where we could debunk all of these ‘proofs’ MONO is not a treat to FLOSS.