Actually a pretty good article – and one where I have little complaints against. Roy speaks about some of his background and some views on Linus Torvalds and Richard Stallman.
One of the questions he is asked, though, has a rather funny answer. He is asked:
We write a lot about controversial issues (criticising Apple, MS, Oracle and Mono) and some friends call us biased, how do you see living with that tag?
“Biased” is a word people use to describe one whose convictions are strong and vocal. In order to appeal to the opposition and get one’s point across, one might choose to use subtleties and even humour, even for the mere appearance of being “objective” (“fair and balance” as Fox News laughably calls it). The art of communicating or engaging with those on the other side of the fence is a tricky one. But it can also be an exercise in futility when the ‘opposition’ of a dyed-in-the-wool proprietary software proponent, e.g. Microsoft MVP. People who call you “bias” to discredit a claim are probably not fence sitters, i.e. these are people whom you may never have been able to convince in the first place. The use of the word is a shrewd attempt to discourage fence sitters from assessing the opposing point of view. To be labeled “bias” may sometimes mean that you are effective at what you do. Being called “libelous” is another matter altogether.
Why not actually speak about your biases, Roy? I have been documenting just some of them here. In IP battles you assume Apple and Microsoft are wrong no matter which side of the debate they are on, you call people who disagree with you “Mac cultists”, you make claims about Linux distros which are demonstrably not true and then refuse to comment when your claims are shown to be incorrect. Continue reading
Businesses look for people they admire who have skills and talents they would like to bring in house. There is nothing wrong with this. Some people will want to work for a company that offers them a job and some people will not. It is how a free market system works.
People who are feeble joined Microsoft and they know who they are. They sold out.
It is not selling out for someone to work for a company you, Roy, do not like. Now if these people claim to share your biases and hatred and then later work for Microsoft you might have a point. You never show they share these things with you though.
Moments ago in IRC we also found out that twice in the past Microsoft tried to recruit the community manager of a GNU/Linux distribution (it’s in our IRC logs).
So? Is the community manager someone who is skilled and capable? Do they do good work? If so, what is wrong with Microsoft offering such a person a position?
Roy is on a rant against OpenSUSE, a desktop Linux distro:
Summary: Why OpenSUSE is not a project worth supporting and what it has been up to over the past week
Let’s look at why does Roy say it is not worth supporting… and even worth discouraging others from using it?
As we explained over the past week (e.g. in relation to Microsoft’s deal in China), Microsoft uses its virtualisation deal with Novell to basically add Windows to environments which were GNU/Linux only. Microsoft does the same thing in HPC. So the purpose of SUSE is really to make Windows and Microsoft tax (on GNU/Linux) more widespread. That’s why Microsoft is willing to give SUSE so much money.
Stay away from SUSE to defend software freedom. It’s not about provoking or avenging, it’s about doing the sensible thing, expelling Microsoft intrusion.
Not a word about what it does or does not do for the user, other than allow them to also use Windows. Being able to run software was a good thing the last time I checked. Continue reading
Summary: “I’ve worked with Microsoft on these kinds of matters,” writes Ben Edelman, whose poison pen has one main target: Google
One main target? What else has Mr. Edelman written? Roy does not say. But Mr. Edelman wrote something negative about Google and Roy really likes Google. Thus Mr. Edelman must, in Roy’s mind, be evil. Mr. Edleman’s list of publications is easy enough to find online.
Roy continues: Continue reading
Roy starts with this rather odd “summary:
Summary: Microsoft takes the Apple approach to pushing Java/Linux aside while Nokia gets more litigious as well
This is odd given how he never mentions Java again in the article. Just what does he think he is summarizing? And what does he mean by Apple shoving Java aside? Sure, they no longer include it preinstalled, but given that OS X now gets Java directly from the source, this means it will likely get better on OS X. Why put this down? And many desktop Linux distros do not have Java pre-installed either. Roy does not claim they are pushing Java to the side. It is just an odd and biased claim that has nothing to do with the article he says he is summarizing.
POOR Microsoft and poor Apple. They just do not know how to stop Linux anymore, so they join forces and attack en masse with help from patent trolls.
While each competes with Linux, has either said they want to “stop Linux”? Just yesterday Roy referred to SUSE as “Microsoft Linux” and claimed “It is probably worth emphasising yet again that SUSE is funded by Microsoft and it pays Microsoft for GNU/Linux. If SUSE gets preloaded on a machine, that’s a victory for Microsoft“. Ah, maybe Roy thinks Microsoft if trying to stop Linux by helping to fund, support and profit from a Linux distro. His claims are self-contradictory. Continue reading
Corporate Press Turns Against Patents But Forgets/Neglects to Stress Microsoft and Apple Are an Integral Part of the Problem.
Summary: More patents-hostile coverage from respected publications, but the role of monopolists is de-emphasized, which helps corporations but not parasitic NPEs
Funny how Roy points out Microsoft and Apple, companies he loathes, but ignores the patent-holding companies he likes, such as Google with their recent massive purchase of patents. He repeatedly obsesses over Apple and Microsoft as if they were the only ones suing other companies over patent infringements. This is clearly not the case, as discussed by Thomas Reuters (which was re-imaged elsewhere) and by Forbes. Continue reading
When Apple, Microsoft and others work against the competition, Roy sees that as a sign they are not being innovative and cannot compete. Here we see Roy doing the exact same thing as what he puts down in others.
Summary: SUSE wants to put its Microsoft-backed distro on people’s computers
Of course they want the distro they like and have helped to fund to be used. Why would they not? Continue reading
Roy summarizes his article with this:
Summary: Patents are viewed as anti-competitive and Verizon’s Chief Counsel asks the President of the United States to address the problem
So far so good. The patent system is a mess and it would be fine if the president and congress were to address it and work to improve the very messed up situation. No doubt.
But Roy cannot keep his biases out of his article: Continue reading
Wow… only a couple days old and Roy is already responding to this site. He writes:
Summary: Misguided individuals think that writing about Techrights would cause harm to Techrights
Roy seems to think the purpose of this site is to harm him or the Techrights site. Not at all. I have been very clear with my view that if anything it is likely to help him – even give him some semblance of legitimacy (hey, he is important enough to have people refute him). With every post where I reference him, I am adding links to his article. I think this is the right and honest thing to do – if I am going to quote the article I should provide a link so people can see it in context. I am well aware that such links also benefit Roy. I will note that in Roy’s post he does not do me the same favor – he does not post a link nor quote any material. He just makes things up. Continue reading
Roy has a post where he starts by saying “20 years old kernel finds itself everywhere”. This is a fine opening: Linux is found in many place. It is heavily seen in the server room and in embedded devices and, now with Android, it is seen in the hands of many. It really is quite remarkable how far and wide it has spread and how versatile it has proved to be. The only place Linux has not taken off well on is the desktop (which is a shame, given how Linus Torvalds says that is what he cares about the most).
Roy could have focused on these facts and written a post the celebrated the achievements of Linux and the open source community as a whole. He could have written an article worthy of pointing people new to open source to – to help then to understand how ubiquitous it has become.
But as impressive as the facts about Linux are, and as amazing as the open source community can be, Roy took the low road and decided to exaggerate the truth and make false implications. Continue reading