| ActiveMac | Anonymous | Create a User | Reviews | News | Forums | Advertise |
|
|
|
User Controls |
|
New User |
|
Login |
|
Edit/View My Profile |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ActiveMac |
|
Articles |
|
Forums |
|
Links |
|
News |
|
News Search |
|
Reviews |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
News Centers |
|
Windows/Microsoft |
|
DVD |
|
ActiveHardware |
|
Xbox |
|
MaINTosh |
|
News Search |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ANet Chats |
|
The Lobby |
|
Special Events Room |
|
Developer's Lounge |
|
XBox Chat |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ's |
|
Windows 98/98 SE |
|
Windows 2000 |
|
Windows Me |
|
Windows "Whistler" XP |
|
Windows CE |
|
Internet Explorer 6 |
|
Internet Explorer 5 |
|
Xbox |
|
DirectX |
|
DVD's |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TopTechTips |
|
Registry Tips |
|
Windows 95/98 |
|
Windows 2000 |
|
Internet Explorer 4 |
|
Internet Explorer 5 |
|
Windows NT Tips |
|
Program Tips |
|
Easter Eggs |
|
Hardware |
|
DVD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Latest Reviews |
|
Applications |
|
Microsoft Windows XP Professional |
|
Norton SystemWorks 2002 |
|
|
|
Hardware |
|
Intel Personal Audio Player 3000 |
|
Microsoft Wireless IntelliMouse Explorer |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Site News/Info |
|
About This Site |
|
Affiliates |
|
ANet Forums |
|
Contact Us |
|
Default Home Page |
|
Link To Us |
|
Links |
|
Member Pages |
|
Site Search |
|
Awards |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Credits |
 |
OSDL Turns Down Microsoft's Study Offer | |
|
||
| Time: 07:26 EST/12:26 GMT | News Source: eWeek | Posted By: John Quigley | ||
|
At LinuxWorld Conference & Expo this August, Microsoft approached the Open Source Development Labs about conducting a jointly funded research study to compare and contrast Windows and Linux. OSDL's head turned Microsoft down flat. In a recent statement, OSDL (Open Source Development Labs) CEO Stuart Cohen said that he had nixed the offer from Microsoft. "As far as working with Microsoft on a study, I explained that Microsoft could probably find one negative line on Linux in a 100-page research report that it would spend $10 million marketing while ignoring the other 99 pages," he said. "Why would OSDL want to participate in that?" | ||
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 1 through 25 of 343 Last | Next |
The time now is
12:20:03 AM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
| #1 By 9549 (12.150.6.130) at 8/31/2005 7:37:58 AM |
| Instead we have an article that will freely be distrbuted throughout the internet about how Linux is scared to go up against Microsoft in a research project comparison which both could benefit from the disapointing news that both OSes need alot of work. |
| #2 By 7754 (65.27.90.2) at 8/31/2005 8:19:12 AM |
| I can understand his reasoning, but I think their unwillingness will work against them. Sure, it's possible that Microsoft would focus on "one negative line" (although by just about anyone's standards, there would be FAR more than one negative line), but as long as the report was freely available, any marketing money spent trying to spin the situation otherwise would be unwise--it would VERY quickly end up as egg on Microsoft's face. Anyone worth their salt and interested in the comparison would read the article themselves, not taking EITHER side's word for it--just as with previous studies that have been examined critically at length. If the OSDL is confident in their product, they would have no problem with a joint study--something that many people have either directly or implicitly requested. |
| #3 By 7797 (68.142.9.161) at 8/31/2005 8:20:18 AM |
| Why not listen with an open mind to the reasons for the refusal instead of taking a cheap shot comment? Furthermore its neither disapointing nor "news" that both OS's need a lot of workl; Everyone knows it and has known it and the same will still be true in 5 years. |
| #4 By 6859 (206.156.242.39) at 8/31/2005 9:24:54 AM |
| OSDL screwed up on this one. They should have accepted the offer, then openly publish the reports as a retort to anything MS might say. This *could* have been the big deal they really needed, but instead fear took over. Sad, really. |
| #5 By 7797 (63.76.44.6) at 8/31/2005 10:11:53 AM |
| Maybe they didn't "TRUST" Microsoft's offer was more than a Trojan horse? Personally I can't blame them for their distrust. Can you? |
| #6 By 7754 (216.160.8.41) at 8/31/2005 10:20:22 AM |
| tgnb, as I said in #2, I don't think that line of reasoning holds water. If the results were freely available, MS would have nothing to hide behind, regardless of how much marketing money they threw at it. |
| #7 By 15406 (216.191.227.68) at 8/31/2005 10:28:52 AM |
|
The OSDL has nowhere near the marketing might of MS. Any rebuttal of bogus MS spin would be lost in the noise. Pretty much everything on MS' 'Get the FUD' site has been discredited, yet it's still there and there is no egg on MS' face. It was a lose-lose proposition for OSDL. If OSDL declines, MS loudly trumpets "They're afraid to compete with us". If OSDL complies, MS loudly trumpets any wins while totally disappearing any losses. Why doesn't MS approach Novell or Red Hat for this comparison instead of the generally little-known OSDL? Could it be because they have a much higher profile, marketing clout and money? Nah, couldn't be.
|
| #8 By 9589 (68.17.52.2) at 8/31/2005 11:37:52 AM |
|
Ha ha ha ha, Latch you're too funny. Red Hat and Novell have marketing clout and money! Ha ha ha ha!
Plonk! |
| #9 By 15406 (216.191.227.68) at 8/31/2005 1:06:58 PM |
| #8: I wish you could plonk me, that way you wouldn't respond to my posts with immature nonsense. |
| #10 By 7754 (216.160.8.41) at 8/31/2005 1:18:38 PM |
|
Latch... nice spin.
- MS's site discredited? No. The studies are like any other--information that you can use as it is applicable to your environment. The onus is upon the reader to decide what is valuable to THEM and what is not. You make it sound as if MS made up the information, and that's just plain FUD on YOUR part. - No egg on MS's face? Well, not if anyone asked you, or if they asked the vast majority of Linux enthusiasts. But there shouldn't be, since the information is presented in detail and in plain view for anyone's critical eye. Of course you'll take it with a grain of salt--just as you should with any study, because sponsored or not, nearly all have some element of bias. - MS "loudly trumpets"? Very funny. SHOW me where they "loudly trumpet" that "they're afraid to compete with us." Besides in your mind. |
| #11 By 15406 (216.191.227.68) at 8/31/2005 3:16:14 PM |
| #10: I was describing the lose-lose scenario. I did not say it has happened yet, however the week is only half-over. We will see if MS uses the OSDL's refusal to work with them as an attack point. |
| #12 By 7797 (68.142.9.161) at 8/31/2005 7:48:45 PM |
|
bluevg,
TRUST http://blogs.zdnet.com/open-source/?p=425 "On Friday, I had a chance to have a short talk with Cohen, and got a definitive answer. Cohen said that "there is no way we would do a joint research project with Microsoft." If OSDL were to participate in such a project, Cohen said that when the report came out, no matter what the broad outcome of the report was, anything negative about Linux would be exploited for marketing purposes by Microsoft." Its a loose loose situation for the OSDL. They simply don't TRUST microsoft NOT to use the results to try and smear Linux, whatever they may be. Can you blame them for not trusting them? "Setting aside the marketing implications, Cohen also stressed that "no one is clamoring for" OSDL to do a market research paper with Microsoft. (Other than, I suppose, Microsoft…) OSDL does commission white papers and studies from time to time, when it makes sense to do so for their member organizations — but "nobody's been asking" for OSDL to produce a research project like what Taylor proposed." "It's also worth noting that Cohen's conversation with Taylor was supposed to be off the record, and that he was surprised to see it turn up in the press a short while later." So much for TRUST I don't think the OSDL is interested to be sucked into a mud slinging match with Microsoft and IMO thats what the result would be. I think the OSDL made the right decision by not letting themselves get pulled into such "games". |
| #13 By 20 (24.173.210.58) at 8/31/2005 8:02:07 PM |
|
This cracks me up.
The same people who slam MSFT for every little thing and even make up stuff to slam them about (or slam them for problems that existed in Win95), don't want to have pie thrown at them (imagine the uproar if MSFT published comments about problems that existed in the Linux 1.5 kernel). Sounds like they can dish out all kinds of lies and half-truths, but can't take it and start crying and whining about MSFT's marketing machine. Hint: The Linux/OSS underdog are media darlings and get all their marketing and press for free. The real truth is, they know they'd get slammed by any objective analisys and prefer to keep things subjective and unsubstantiated that way the press has plausible deniability whens supporting Linux/OSS as they can claim ignorance on any technical matters. |
| #14 By 3653 (68.52.61.116) at 8/31/2005 10:55:13 PM |
|
"The OSDL has nowhere near the marketing might of MS. Any rebuttal of bogus MS spin would be lost in the noise"
BS. the tech rags would have it on their front covers for months. You show your bias... little buddy. This looks very bad for OSDL. Not that they had a ton of credibility to start with, but now... NONE. |
| #15 By 3653 (68.52.61.116) at 8/31/2005 10:55:26 PM |
|
double post bug ... again This post was edited by mooresa56 on Wednesday, August 31, 2005 at 22:58. |
| #16 By 116 (24.173.215.234) at 8/31/2005 11:17:50 PM |
|
For anyone that watches South Park...
"YOU JUST GOT SERVED OSDL" Wow how funny is that? I can't believe they passed at the opportunity. |
| #17 By 7754 (65.27.90.2) at 9/1/2005 12:21:32 AM |
|
tgnb... Cohen's remarks reek of fear/uncertainty more than anything. But as I said several times already, the real outcome is obvious. NO AMOUNT OF MONEY that MS can muster could turn a joint study--freely available to all--towards their favor if the true result of the study did not favor MS. The "one negative line" proposition simply doesn't hold water when anyone with any sort of critical reading skill can go in themselves and find out the full outcome of the study. It has nothing to do with trust. Of course they don't trust MS, and MS likely doesn't trust them... they are competitors, right? Again, if the OSDL had nothing to fear in the outcome of a study for which they'd share responsibility, then trust of MS is a moot point.
"'...no one is clamoring for' OSDL to do a market research paper with Microsoft." I wouldn't say that. It's obvious from the sound and fury generated by the release of any Microsoft-sponsored study comparing Windows and Linux that there is a GREAT demand for a study that both sides can consider as legit, at least to the extent that it wasn't commissioned by only one side. |
| #18 By 7797 (68.142.9.161) at 9/1/2005 7:47:09 AM |
|
"The "one negative line" proposition simply doesn't hold water when anyone with any sort of critical reading skill can go in themselves and find out the full outcome of the study."
Someone with critical reading skills can already read up enough about the topic to make an informed decision. No study needed. These studies are mostly for people who DON"T have such skills and are lazy. Nobody should rely on any such study and should figure it out for themselves because everyone's situation is different. No study can capture every possible situation. People with critical reading and thinking skills will do their own research based on their exact situation and figure out what systems are best for it. "It has nothing to do with trust." It has everything to do with trust. Microsoft has proven themselves to be untrustworthy in the past. OSDL opting NOT to do such a joint study is a direct result of Microsofts past untrustworthy behaviour and doublespeak. "Of course they don't trust MS, and MS likely doesn't trust them... they are competitors, right?" It is possible to cooperate with your competition when you trust them to compete fairly. People do not trust Microsoft to compete fairly. Thats the issue. "then trust of MS is a moot point." See above. trust is not a moot point. "I wouldn't say that (nobody is clamoring for OSDL to do a market research paper with Microsoft). It's obvious from the sound and fury generated by the release of any Microsoft-sponsored study comparing Windows and Linux that there is a GREAT demand for a study that both sides can consider as legit, at least to the extent that it wasn't commissioned by only one side. " I dont care what you would say in this case because obviously the person who made the statement has more authority on the subject than you do. The outrage over Microsoft-sponsored studies really doesn't prove that there is a demand. I would argue the opposite. The fact that Microsoft has to sponsor studies means there is NO such demand. Otherwise more independent organizations would conduct such studies and publicize them. If there was a high demand there wouldnt be a need for Microsoft to sponsor any study. |
| #19 By 7754 (216.160.8.41) at 9/1/2005 10:57:06 AM |
|
tgnb:
"Someone with critical reading skills can already read up enough about the topic to make an informed decision. No study needed." That's entirely untrue. The garbage that's written out there by zealots and media outlets that rarely dig beyond and inch below the surface of any product is useless. These studies don't position themselves as the be-all, end-all, but they do provide very useful feedback for those making evaluations and critical readers. Not everyone has the resources and/or time to conduct detailed pilot studies in their own environment, so these studies provide very valuable information that they can apply as it pertains to their situation. Again, the point is that the behavior of MS is irrelevant. If the study is published for all to see, they can't spin it differently, nor can the OSDL. No amount of marketing can polish the turd that everyone can smell. "I dont care what you would say in this case because obviously the person who made the statement has more authority on the subject than you do." Demand is determined by the buyer, not the seller. "The fact that Microsoft has to sponsor studies means there is NO such demand." The need for clarity--specifically the need for purging the zealotry from the debate--is very great, and you can already see the terms of the debate switching to more substantive and relevant issues. Most corporate IT departments don't have the resources to conduct these sort of studies (try proposing that one in an IT budget!), and the research organizations usually conduct this kind (and scope) of study on a commissioned basis. That hardly means that the demand is not there--as evidenced by the great amount of attention that was paid to the studies on their release. If the demand was not there and the answer was so clear, they wouldn't have received so much attention. But since so many dismiss the studies outright--regardless of the method or content of the study, even though some of the results are complimentary to Linux--the need for a joint study (sponsored by representatives on both sides of the issue) is obvious. |
| #20 By 821588 (120.32.144.65) at 9/4/2012 9:50:48 PM |
|
http://www.montblancpens-sales.org/ mont blanc pens
http://www.prada-australia.org/ prada australia http://www.lisseurstyler-france.com/ lisseur ghd http://www.drdrebeats-singapore.org/ beats by dr dre http://www.prada-outlet.net/ prada handbags http://www.straightenersaustralia-ivstyler.com/ ghd straighteners australia http://www.ergobabycarrier-australia.com/ ergo baby carriers http://www.chihair.ca/ CHI Hair |
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 1 through 25 of 343 Last | Next |
The time now is
12:20:04 AM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
