Home Messages Index
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Author IndexDate IndexThread Index

Re: From Forbes: Ballmer on Linux and OSS

begin  oe_protect.scr 
Roy Schestowitz <newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> espoused:
> __/ [ Linønut ] on Friday 24 March 2006 14:28 \__
>> After takin' a swig o' grog, Ray Ingles belched out this bit o' wisdom:
>>> On 2006-03-24, P. <no.one@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>>> | Ballmer: Well, I think there are experts who claim Linux violates
>>>>> | our intellectual property. I'm not going to comment. But to the
>>>>> | degree that that's the case, of course we owe it to our shareholders
>>>>> | to have a strategy. And when there is something interesting to say,
>>>>> | you'll be the first to hear it.
>>>> What the bloody hell does this mean?
>>>  It doesn't mean *anything* - it's classic FUD. It's meant to spread
>>> Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt, but not to say anything specific that
>>> can be refuted.
> *Uncertainty*.
>> You've been learning in your discussions with billwg, Ray!  LOL!!!
> It's a clear indication that Ballmer is hiding something and has planned to
> avoid the topic and discard the question /a priori/, given one
> mental-strategic consideration or another. It reflects badly on the company.

It's a carefully planned response, designed to spread FUD.  It doesn't
actually say anything, but is intended to carry a hint of a threat.  The
SCO play they paid for has had no discernible effect on Linux take-up,
and I can't see this rather obvious FUD effort having any impact either.

| Mark Kent   --   mark at ellandroad dot demon dot co dot uk  |
I think...  I think it's in my basement... Let me go upstairs and check.
		-- Escher

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Author IndexDate IndexThread Index