07.31.08
Lies, Damn Lies, and Windows Vista
According to one source (ZDNet), the latest marketing budget for Windows Vista has increased to $500,000,000. One of the first publicity gigs, which many publications just parrot free of charge, is some fluffy project called “Mojave”. We won’t describe here as that would only mean more publicity to it. However, it seems to be backfiring. Firstly, as explained in Microsoft Watch:
The reasons why the Mojave Experiment fails should have been obvious. They are:
1. Microsoft treats its customers like they’re stupid. I’ve had this complaint for a decade.
[…]
2. Microsoft embarrasses Mojave participates.
[…]
3. The marketing campaign blames customers for Vista’s problems.
[…]
4. Microsoft denies there is a real problem.
[…]
5. Mojave seethes with arrogance.
There is evidence that may suggest ‘massaging’ of statistics, too. The numbers reported are inconsistent, which may or may not imply that observations not supporting the hypothesis simply got discarded.
Last night, as I was drifting off to sleep, something stuck me about Microsoft’s Mojave Experiment that hadn’t clicked when I first watched it. Out of the 140/120 participants (the number varies depending on the source) that Microsoft say took part in this experiment, we don’t actually seem to hear from that many. Why?
Remember the bogus Novell/Microsoft survey, which enables sales people to pretend that people like this deal? See the quote at the very bottom.
Just days ago there was this report, which shows that Microsoft is still paying for ’studies’.
Quocirca, a research and analysis firm, released a comprehensive report sponsored by Microsoft (News - Alert) titled, “On Premise and On Demand”.
As for Novell/Quocirca, there is only a very loose tie here. In Microsoft’s case, on the other hand, manufacturing of ’studies’ is routine. Remember Forrester attacking GNU/Linux on Microsoft’s budget? How about Gartner and the Yankee Group? This industry of analysts and so-called researchers is a joke as long as it shamelessly serves companies rather than genuine curiosity. It’s marketing in suits, not research.
We do not typically write about (or bash) Microsoft products because that brings attention to them. Negative publicity too is publicity and we made rare exceptions when we looked at SP1 of Windows Vista and at Home Server.
For what it’s worth, Microsoft also deceives its shareholders with bogus number that misrepresent sales of Windows Vista. Published the other day:
“From the 30th of June, we have no longer been able to ship a PC with an XP licence,” said Jane Bradburn, a marketing manager for HP Australia. “However, what we have been able to do with Microsoft is ship PCs with a Vista Business licence but with XP pre-loaded. That is still the majority of business computers we are selling today.”
Therefore the Vole’s claims for high Vista sales figures are merely so much steer manure. The major PC vendors are still preloading Windows XP, but Microsoft is counting those XP preloads as Vista sales.
There’s a much broader history to Vista lies, but we won’t explore it further in this post.
Also worth a read (old articles):
- Currys group blames Vista for poor sales
- Dell casts doubts on Vista
- Lenovo offers downgrade from Windows Vista to Windows XP
- Windows Vista kicked out of Olympics PCs
- Acer: PC industry ‘disappointed’ with Vista
When all else fails, resort to lies and delusion. █
“I think the vast majority, and I’d quantify that at about 80 percent to 85 percent, of the open source community actually supports this deal [with Microsoft].”
–Justin Steinman, Novell
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.
Chris Lees said,
August 2, 2008 at 6:22 am
This article has nothing to do with Novell. Oh lookie, here’s a completely off-topic quote from someone from Novell. Whoo, a quote about something that happened a year ago and is not even related to the story. Now it all makes sense.
You guys *are* joking, aren’t you?
Roy Schestowitz said,
August 2, 2008 at 8:24 am
What Novell and Microsoft did at a time was a very serious case of deception, or manufacturing conclusions that are not true. It’s akin to false advertising, which is an offence. I’m comparing this to the latest from Microsoft to show a pattern.
Chris, you obviously never supported the site, but it didn’t prevent you from reading and then leaving cticitical feedback (it’s far from the first time). The Internet is a big place; you don’t have to read everything, certainly not for spite. I welcome you to be vocal, but this is more like protesting.