07.27.08
Visibility is Not FUD
The difference between fighting FUD and spreading FUD
The term “FUD” is being overused and misused these days. What’s also forgotten (or misunderstood) is its actual meaning and original purpose.
Similarly, people have developed an affinity for the use of words like “SPAM” and “terrorism” as assignments to just about everything they do not like, no matter what the words actually mean and how strong — in terms of severity or even legality — their meaning can be. This leads to term dilution (like brand erosion) and it’s deceiving.
Anonymous posters sometimes have us faced with an accusation that this site takes an alarmist approach. Some go as far as calling it or comparing it to “FUD”.
This is totally wrong. Here is a simple explanation.
“Knowledge and understanding reduce uncertainty, alleviate doubt and thus reduce fear.”There’s a big different between “bad it happened” and “bad to know about”. There’s a huge difference between sabotaging FOSS adoption and telling about this (reporting) to a wider audience. There oughtn’t be an informational barrier because knowledge is power. Only by understanding these vicious attacks can we respond accordingly.
Would you rather someone hurt you and you didn’t know about it? To use an analogy, is a cheating spouse that’s never caught any better? And in the same vein, had Groklaw not covered the SCO case (and the case then treated in the media as justified yet low-profile), would Linux be better off?
We make special efforts to keep things gentle and polite (no incitation, aggravation and provocation), but sometimes it is hard not to make implicit or subtle accusations against those who you know are stealing from you, assaulting you, or trying to turn the law against you.
FUD stands for “fear, uncertainty and doubt.” Knowledge and understanding reduce uncertainty, alleviate doubt and thus reduce fear. Equipped with knowledge we can defeat the movement that stifles Free software. This site is not FUD; it strives to put an end to it. █
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.