10.15.08
Microsoft Mouths in the Press: Michael Gartenberg
‘Analyst hat’ for attacks on GNU/Linux
There are some harsh words for GNU/Linux in this new IDG article. [rel="nofollow"]
Is IDG, whose parent company does a lot of business with Microsoft, badmouthing GNU/Linux? Well, not so fast! It’s more likely to do with the writers among their ranks. As we mentioned before [1, 2, 3, 4], Michael Gartenberg is a former Microsoft employee (evangelist even). This is not the first time that he bashes GNU/Linux in the press and there are similar examples of Microsoft-oriented ‘analysts’ or former employees who do this.
In other FUD sightseeing, yesterday we wrote about an article from Ars Technica, which Preston Gralla is echoing now. Some readers described him as a “shill”, but we don’t subscribe to this assessment based on his long posting/publishing history. Either way, he chose the provocative headline “Is version 3.0 the last great version for OpenOffice.org?” He is citing only a blog from which the badmouthing came (a Novell employee). Thank you, Novell, for fueling OpenOffice.org FUD. █
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.
Needs Sunlight said,
October 15, 2008 at 10:10 am
Can a place be found in society be found for MSFTers and former MSFTers, such as Gartenberg?
They gravitate to positions of responsibility and then abuse the trust granted that role in order to advance an agenda shown time and again to be harmful. Fraud it is, but a whole new level of fraud and apparently one that current processes for handling white-collar crime are unprepared to deal with.