"BadVista.org": FSF launches campaign against Microsoft Vista
| From: | John Sullivan <johns-AT-fsf.org> | |
| To: | info-press-AT-gnu.org | |
| Subject: | [GNU/FSF Press] "BadVista.org": FSF launches campaign against Microsoft Vista | |
| Date: | Fri, 15 Dec 2006 13:56:26 -0500 |
Boston, MA -- December 15, 2006 -- The Free Software Foundation (FSF) today launched BadVista.org, a campaign with a twofold mission of exposing the harms inflicted on computer users by the new Microsoft Windows Vista and promoting free software alternatives that respect users' security and privacy rights. "Vista is an upsell masquerading as an upgrade. It is an overall regression when you look at the most important aspect of owning and using a computer: your control over what it does. Obviously MS Windows is already proprietary and very restrictive, and well worth rejecting. But the new 'features' in Vista are a Trojan Horse to smuggle in even more restrictions. We'll be focusing attention on detailing how they work, how to resist them, and why people should care", said FSF program administrator John Sullivan. The campaign will organize supporters into effective and unusual actions drawing attention to this daylight theft of computer users' rights, aggregate news stories cutting through the Vista marketing propaganda, and provide a user-friendly gateway to the adoption of free software operating systems like gNewSense (http://www.gnewsense.org). Peter Brown, executive director of the FSF said, "Whilst Microsoft embarks upon its largest ever product launch, its marketing dollars will be spent in an effort to fool the media and user community about the goals of Vista. Our campaign will ask the important questions. Can you set yourself or your company free? Can you ever be free from Microsoft? As with our campaign against Digital Restrictions Management, we aim to demonstrate that technologists can be social activists, because we know the harm that Vista will cause". Among other harms, BadVista.org will focus on the danger posed by Treacherous Computing in Vista. Commonly called Trusted Computing in the industry, it is an attempt to turn computers from machines controlled by their user into machines that monitor their user and refuse to operate in ways that manufacturers don't authorize. Supporters can sign up to receive more information and participate in the campaign at http://badvista.org. The Free Software Foundation, founded in 1985, is dedicated to promoting computer users' right to use, study, copy, modify, and redistribute computer programs. The FSF promotes the development and use of free (as in freedom) software -- particularly the GNU operating system and its GNU/Linux variants -- and free documentation for free software. The FSF also helps to spread awareness of the ethical and political issues of freedom in the use of software. Their Web site, located at www.fsf.org, is an important source of information about GNU/Linux. Donations to support their work can be made at http://donate.fsf.org. They are headquartered in Boston, MA, USA. Press Contact: For more information about this announcement or to schedule an interview, please contact Peter Brown or John Sullivan at +1-617-542-5942 or pr@fsf.org. -- John Sullivan Program Administrator | Phone: (617)542-5942 51 Franklin Street, 5th Fl. | Fax: (617)542-2652 Boston, MA 02110-1301 USA | GPG: AE8600B6 _______________________________________________ FSF And GNU Press mailing list <info-press@gnu.org> http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/info-press
Posted Dec 15, 2006 22:01 UTC (Fri)
by rogerd (guest, #4170)
[Link] (1 responses)
I wish all of us luck with this campain also. I'll send the link to a few friends that were receptive to OpenOffice.
Posted Dec 16, 2006 1:26 UTC (Sat)
by smitty_one_each (subscriber, #28989)
[Link]
Posted Dec 15, 2006 23:57 UTC (Fri)
by huaz (guest, #10168)
[Link] (3 responses)
Posted Dec 16, 2006 0:12 UTC (Sat)
by Soruk (guest, #2722)
[Link] (2 responses)
(Perhaps they're running it on Vista, to demonstrate how bad it is. ;)
Posted Dec 16, 2006 0:27 UTC (Sat)
by smitty_one_each (subscriber, #28989)
[Link] (1 responses)
Posted Dec 21, 2006 20:50 UTC (Thu)
by Baylink (guest, #755)
[Link]
Not germane.
Posted Dec 16, 2006 0:22 UTC (Sat)
by vblum (guest, #1151)
[Link] (12 responses)
Posted Dec 16, 2006 0:47 UTC (Sat)
by krishna (guest, #24080)
[Link] (3 responses)
I believe here that FSF is trying to preserve the freedoms that allow technical superiority/innovation to take place, and to say why they're important.
Posted Dec 16, 2006 1:09 UTC (Sat)
by emkey (guest, #144)
[Link] (1 responses)
I understand and tend to agree with the arguments as to the GPL's superiority, but I don't think that explains the entire difference in adoption.
Posted Dec 16, 2006 11:20 UTC (Sat)
by khim (subscriber, #9252)
[Link]
Actually it does. Not only BSD camp was hurt by fragmentation itself (a lot of code was in proprietary branches and is lost forever) but the fear of fragmentation was also a big problem. Actually GPL is great because Both are critical: 1 means that there are will be no lock-in and 2 means there are will be no useless duplicates thus no useless waste of resources. Novell's agreement is direct attack on 2 - that's why community is so hostile...
Posted Dec 17, 2006 14:23 UTC (Sun)
by i3839 (guest, #31386)
[Link]
Posted Dec 16, 2006 1:12 UTC (Sat)
by djabsolut (guest, #12799)
[Link] (2 responses)
Technical superiority of the Beta video format didn't get it very far in the competition against VHS. From a maket point of view, it's more important to address a specific problem/need/want in a timely manner, with plenty of backing. Whether a particular solution works worse (though not terribly so) than the best solution, is of secondary importance. A relevant example is Sony's Playstation 2: it still steamrolled Xbox 1, not because it was better, but because it was there first.
The same applies to open source software. As much as I like using it because of the freedom it affords (freedom to mix'n'match, freedom to modify, not costing the earth), the Windows "solution" is good enough for 90% of people. It "works" now and has "worked" for a while. It plays DVDs, let's people play games, do word-processing, send emails and browse the web. There is really no compelling reason (though lots of little reasons) for people to switch en masse away from it. Most people don't care about DRM or other issues that are perceived as esoteric and/or philosophical. They just want the bloody thing to work. Case point: open source software needs more than technical superiority.
Posted Dec 21, 2006 4:14 UTC (Thu)
by Erich_J_Ritzmann (guest, #39670)
[Link]
Interestingly, Linux outshines Windows in many respects. In some ways OS X outshines Linux --
But, more to your point ... wasn't Beta a single company product protected with many patents
Windows has an early lead. However, as it becomes harder to copy, i.e. the company refers to
Posted Dec 22, 2006 15:40 UTC (Fri)
by NRArnot (subscriber, #3033)
[Link]
Had every VHS player cost 10-15% more than a similar Beta one because of a licensing fee, the story would almost certainly have played out differently. In any case it's not relevant to Linux vs M$ - the story there is that the market is already dominated by M$. Linux is the newcomer trying to break in with a better product at a totally unbeatable price (zero). Don't under-estimate how much the average Joe is willing to pay for the familiar (and Microsoft's biggest mistake with Vista may come to be seen as having changed the user interface yet again!)
It's a lot more like Ghandi's struggle for Indian independance: "First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win." Well, we've reached stage 3.
Posted Dec 16, 2006 1:20 UTC (Sat)
by jimmybgood (guest, #26142)
[Link] (3 responses)
Now DefectivebyDesign.org has a real catchy name and it sticks in your head. That's a winner. But BadVista.org? Bo-ring! Dullsville. It's a loser. And like "Bad Santa", it implies that there's really a "Good Vista". Is that what we're supposed to think?
Posted Dec 17, 2006 11:55 UTC (Sun)
by oak (guest, #2786)
[Link] (2 responses)
Posted Dec 18, 2006 3:32 UTC (Mon)
by jimmybgood (guest, #26142)
[Link] (1 responses)
Posted Dec 18, 2006 21:25 UTC (Mon)
by proski (subscriber, #104)
[Link]
Posted Dec 16, 2006 4:05 UTC (Sat)
by ldo (guest, #40946)
[Link]
Yes, I think technical superiority has a lot to do with the long-term success of Free Software.
Notice I said long-term. Note also that there are plenty of examples of commercial products that lost out in the marketplace to rivals that were arguably technically inferior in many ways. There's the hoary old Beta-versus-VHS example; in the era of operating systems, don't forget BeOS, or the earlier OS/2.
However, the operating system and other software examples I can think of are all closed-source. The companies that developed them had only a finite amount of capital to develop and promote their products; after several years without any significant market penetration, their investors got antsy and abandoned them, and that was that.
What makes Free Software different is that it's not beholden to any one company in this way. After all, it's taken fifteen years for Linux to get to the point where it is today. If it had been a closed-source product, would any company have had that much patience to persevere with it? No way.
So, ultimately, Free Software has better staying power than any closed-source product. What keeps the closed-source products in the game is the fact that they make a profit. But that profit comes at a cost, in terms of ever-growing complexity and feature bloat, because those are the only selling points you've got over your competition. At some point you evolve yourself into a cul-de-sac, and I think with Vista, Microsoft has finally reached that point.
Posted Dec 16, 2006 0:58 UTC (Sat)
by TwoTimeGrime (guest, #11688)
[Link] (6 responses)
I think these people need to focus on their message and rethink what they are trying to present.
Posted Dec 16, 2006 1:08 UTC (Sat)
by krishna (guest, #24080)
[Link]
Posted Dec 16, 2006 1:15 UTC (Sat)
by mikov (guest, #33179)
[Link]
Posted Dec 16, 2006 8:12 UTC (Sat)
by allesfresser (guest, #216)
[Link] (3 responses)
Posted Dec 16, 2006 14:06 UTC (Sat)
by vondo (guest, #256)
[Link] (2 responses)
The last one I was looking at was GNU Radio. Never did really understand what that was, but it took me 10 minutes of hunting around to figure out that I didn't think I was interested in it.
Posted Dec 18, 2006 11:11 UTC (Mon)
by Tjebbe (guest, #34055)
[Link] (1 responses)
If the site is mainly visited by developers, this should be development type stuff, like changelogs etc. If the site is mainly visited by people who have visited before, and want to know if there's anything new, this should be news. If the site is mainly visited by people trying to figure out what it's about, then you should open up with an about page.
Of course, the About page should be very reachable within one click on a very visible en clear link.
Posted Dec 18, 2006 16:54 UTC (Mon)
by AJWM (guest, #15888)
[Link]
Nonsense. That's what bookmarks are for. It's okay to have a few lines of "what's new" or headlines on the main page (that helps let the newcomer know whether the site is active or comatose), but the default page shouldn't presume anything about the visitor.
Posted Dec 16, 2006 2:46 UTC (Sat)
by bronson (subscriber, #4806)
[Link] (12 responses)
Posted Dec 16, 2006 6:17 UTC (Sat)
by mdekkers (guest, #85)
[Link] (11 responses)
It's come to a point where I don't bother anymore, as we seem to be our own worst enemy. I would like to see the FSF take a step back, and devise campaigns that promote free software in a positive way, with a strong focus on how it helps business and consumers, how and where it is better, where it isn't, and ultimately, what it can do for your bottom line.
This comes across as an "Oh Noes!!! Micro$oft is teh ev1l emp1r3!!1!LOL" site. Ironically, one of the juniors on my time won't give linux the time of day, but won't touch vista with a bargepole. every week or so he shows me something like this site, and ask me if I really take these people seriously....
Posted Dec 16, 2006 11:38 UTC (Sat)
by linuxrocks123 (subscriber, #34648)
[Link] (7 responses)
The FSF will promote the use of free software and oppose the use of
Given how familiar you are with free software, I'm surprised you were so
Posted Dec 16, 2006 18:25 UTC (Sat)
by mdekkers (guest, #85)
[Link] (6 responses)
Posted Dec 16, 2006 19:24 UTC (Sat)
by Zack (guest, #37335)
[Link] (1 responses)
They don't. They say proprietary software is divisive and harmful to society. If you want to argue that, fine, but please don't set up a strawman.
>they harm not only their own cause, but also through extension the whole of the open source environment.
No, you think their course harms your personal interests, which may or may not be so.
>As always, when you have a very vocal radicalised minority, they only serve to polarise views and preclude any possibility of compromise. Extremeism, whatever shape it takes, is simply not a good thing.
I'm sorry, but from my experience the "Extremism" is usually not to be found in this "vocal radicalised minority".
In case you have failed to notice it, a lot of the "long haired, bearded hippies" are raising an eyebrow at this action. And frankly, for someone riling against "Extremeism" you are dealing out a fair amount of inflammatory language and insulting rhetoric.
As for the rest of your rant about "profesionalism". I'm not sure whether a "sharp professional consultant" like yourself will ever graps this, but your business-case is simply not the FSF's ethical imperative.
Yes, that was ad hominem and irrelevant. Not very nice now, is it ?
Posted Dec 17, 2006 1:30 UTC (Sun)
by nix (subscriber, #2304)
[Link]
(I periodically get told by various uberbosses that I'm `not
Posted Dec 16, 2006 23:10 UTC (Sat)
by njs (subscriber, #40338)
[Link] (2 responses)
I know -- almost as exciting as Constitutional Law or something. I see people get worked up about issues like that, and my idiot-filter kicks in -- it's immediately clear that they can't have anything interesting to say.
>As always, when you have a very vocal radicalised minority, they only serve to polarise views and preclude any possibility of compromise. Extremeism, whatever shape it takes, is simply not a good thing.
Well said -- and the FSF is a particularly egregious example, they've been doing this since the dawn of free software. Just think where we could be by now, if we hadn't had this millstone always hanging around our neck.
Posted Dec 18, 2006 0:56 UTC (Mon)
by drag (guest, #31333)
[Link] (1 responses)
Ya constitutional law is pointless and boring and distracts from the real issues such as economics.
I mean 'freedom of speech', who needs it? After all most media folk are liberals and should be shut down.
'right to keep and bare arms', bah. It just makes it easier for poor people to kill convience store workers.
Your right. Rights and freedoms and trying to point out they are relevent and important in this is day and age is pointless and counter productive to the bottom line. Those dirty hippies just need to stfu so real mean can get their work done and promote open source software properly.
Posted Dec 18, 2006 14:51 UTC (Mon)
by wookey (guest, #5501)
[Link]
Indeed. Every man should stand up for the right to get sunburned if they feel like it.
[A pleasing lack of smileys in this thread - one has to exercise one's comedy detector 'manually'.]
Posted Dec 17, 2006 12:10 UTC (Sun)
by MathFox (guest, #6104)
[Link]
In an ideal project one is aware of licensing issues and business goals in all stages of the project. At the end of the day, it's your task to provide value to your employer. Designing a system that can not be sold because of licensing issues doesn't help anyone.
Posted Dec 17, 2006 15:51 UTC (Sun)
by petegn (guest, #847)
[Link] (1 responses)
Whilst i agree the BadVista site is bad and needs ripping out and starting again (if thats what plone is capable of i am glad i dont touch it)
PS sorry if you dont like what you read but tough Lifes a bitch then you dun go marry one fool.
Pete .
Posted Dec 18, 2006 0:52 UTC (Mon)
by drag (guest, #31333)
[Link]
The only bad thing about that site when compared to others of it's type is a unfortunate choice of colors.
Posted Dec 18, 2006 9:05 UTC (Mon)
by timbulimbu (guest, #42297)
[Link]
This site and badvista.org look like crap. It is so sad, that most Linux
BTW, you can make this (lwn) site look better in just few seconds.
First impression is important in today's superficial world.
If we like to promote OSS and Linux for the rest of the world, we have to
PS! Sorry for my bad English.
Posted Dec 16, 2006 3:48 UTC (Sat)
by orospakr (guest, #40684)
[Link] (1 responses)
Nobody important will take his kind of crap seriously. It will really only hurt the FSF's position, not strengthen it.
Posted Dec 16, 2006 4:14 UTC (Sat)
by Zack (guest, #37335)
[Link]
Campaigns should be pro-freedom, not anti-Microsoft.
The FSF has been on a fairly aggressive course lately and I'm not sure whether it promotes its cause. I sure hope it isn't because someone in charge thinks it is because we need to force an inroad before the next platform shift kicks in a la esr.
We've quietly been building an empire of software freedom over the last twenty years. There's no need to suddenly adopt a "destroy and ridicule" course instead of the "guide and educate" one I've come to expect from the FSF.
Point in case, Vista is alledgedly insecure already according to the badvista site. Be that as it may, the Free Software ethical framework (or doctrine), which I support, states that it's nice to have secure and technical superior software. It is not however, an ethical imperative.
This campaign dilutes the message and may estrange the "zealots" for the sake of popularity, a thing the FSF accuses the "open-source" camp of.
Posted Dec 16, 2006 4:54 UTC (Sat)
by kune (guest, #172)
[Link] (1 responses)
There are other more fruitful causes to campaign about: free software drivers for graphics cards and other devices, open document formats, the fact that software patents violate decisions of the supreme court, etc.
Posted Dec 16, 2006 7:50 UTC (Sat)
by JoeBuck (subscriber, #2330)
[Link]
Posted Dec 16, 2006 8:14 UTC (Sat)
by achitnis (guest, #20)
[Link]
Until now, the free software world has been seen as being supportive of its own products, providing platforms and visibility, and we have been appreciated for it.
But now it is going competitive - product against product - under the very thin and non-credible guise of public awareness. This won't fly, and I think it is going to make life extremely difficult for everyone, while actually placing MS and Vista in a perceived (and comfortable) underdog situation.
Bah!
Posted Dec 16, 2006 9:27 UTC (Sat)
by njs (subscriber, #40338)
[Link] (4 responses)
Also, it doesn't look like this site is intended to be a slick site that markets that message to the public. (I agree that having such a site would be a good thing.) If you check, defectivebydesign.org isn't either (though it has some links to such sites in a sidebar). They're both intended for activists themselves to use, for organizing and share information. Both kinds of site have their place.
Posted Dec 16, 2006 11:30 UTC (Sat)
by khim (subscriber, #9252)
[Link] (3 responses)
Vista takes away your freedoms in exchange for a string of transparent windows This is great text to have on the bumper sticker, but it's not the good basis for such a site. It goes on and on talking about "evilness" of vista without showing any evidence. Do you know anyone else who eploys such tactic ? SCO, right ? If you don't like it when SCO does this the why you are accepting it when FSF does it ? If you want to explain how "evil" Vista is in regard to freedom is - at least put some facts on site! And no, 2GB RAM requirement is not attack on my freedom...
Posted Dec 16, 2006 22:53 UTC (Sat)
by njs (subscriber, #40338)
[Link] (2 responses)
Also, if you can find the FSF saying that a 2GB RAM requirement is an attack on freedom then I will buy you a pony.
Posted Dec 17, 2006 12:45 UTC (Sun)
by khim (subscriber, #9252)
[Link] (1 responses)
It seems this was an overly optimistic assumption about this audience... Not really. They just utterly, totally failed to think about what "press-release" word means! When I see press-release I immediately forget all I know about FSF and their "choir". Press-release is press-release. It's aimed to new users. To the press. Who don't know anything about TPM, DRM and other evil things.If it's not understandable by press - it's a failure. If it's not understandable after site visiting - it's double failure. If after visiting of the site you get the wrong impression - it's triple failure. No wonder people are angry: I've not seen such bungles for a very long time... Also, if you can find the FSF saying that a 2GB RAM requirement is an attack on freedom then I will buy you a pony. It was in first link with any facts: 25 Shortcomings Of Vista. Among these "25 Shortcomings" are
Posted Dec 17, 2006 20:18 UTC (Sun)
by bronson (subscriber, #4806)
[Link]
Posted Dec 16, 2006 10:34 UTC (Sat)
by danieldk (subscriber, #27876)
[Link] (4 responses)
Posted Dec 16, 2006 11:41 UTC (Sat)
by tclark (guest, #32451)
[Link] (2 responses)
Posted Dec 16, 2006 12:29 UTC (Sat)
by danieldk (subscriber, #27876)
[Link]
More general campaigns (like DefectiveByDesign.org) that emphasize the disadvantages of restrictive technology feel a lot more sympathetic.
Posted Dec 16, 2006 13:13 UTC (Sat)
by man_ls (guest, #15091)
[Link]
In other aspects, like security, centering on the relative merits of free software can make us engage in a nonsensical battle about who is worse (more insecure). Think IE and Firefox. I fear this may happen with Vista.
Then there are some places where proprietary software cannot go: free software can be distributed freely, you can adapt it to your needs, you can run it as you like, or change suppliers; you know exactly what it does, and formats are open by default. These are the real winners for free software: centering on these merits you cannot lose.
Posted Dec 17, 2006 1:25 UTC (Sun)
by zotz (guest, #26117)
[Link]
The merit of a Free system is that it is Free (libre) right? What other merit do you think they should promote?
Even copyleft is losing its meaning in the market:
http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=copyleft&...
Look through there and see how many videos are claiming to be copyleft while saying either no commercial use or even no changes.
I am sure people would not repeat themselves so much if they weren't constantly being misrepresented.
Sorry for the ramble, but it is connected in an odd way.
all the best,
drew
Posted Dec 16, 2006 18:17 UTC (Sat)
by ottavio (guest, #42268)
[Link] (2 responses)
Posted Dec 16, 2006 19:34 UTC (Sat)
by dark (guest, #8483)
[Link]
Posted Feb 25, 2007 16:17 UTC (Sun)
by Porfalo (guest, #43616)
[Link]
Posted Dec 17, 2006 1:38 UTC (Sun)
by ccchips (subscriber, #3222)
[Link]
Seriously----I put my vote in against this thing. I plan to write them, because it will do nothing but annoy people. FSF should focus on really serious issues like software patents.
Posted Dec 18, 2006 16:42 UTC (Mon)
by jimwelch (guest, #178)
[Link]
Keep in mind:
Disney stories are racist and the USA is an Evil Empire."BadVista.org": FSF launches campaign against Microsoft Vista
http://badvista.fsf.org/Better URL
The link doesn't work for me. Is it powered by Hurd?"BadVista.org": FSF launches campaign against Microsoft Vista
Not working for me either. I was wondering the same thing."BadVista.org": FSF launches campaign against Microsoft Vista
While Khartoum probably isn't running a DOS, one would be unsurprised to discover they're aware of a Janjaweed attack on the FSF, just for having the temerity to promote this campaign."BadVista.org": FSF launches campaign against Microsoft Vista
Recall that a lot of people have MSFT in their portfolio, and blunting the market impact of Vista amounts to a significant financial blow to the stockholders.
MSFT has gone from the $130's to $25ish with absolutely no help from us badmouthing Vista... and indeed, there's never been a day in MSFT's life when *someone* wasn't badmouthing them about *something*."BadVista.org": FSF launches campaign against Microsoft Vista
I think Linus had a good point when he argued that technical superiority was the really important thing; in the end, that will promote free software best. This here is purely about campaigning against someone else's actual work (and yes, work it is, even if I'm happily not exposed to it). What for?Is this about free software?
Well, without the FSF's GPL, linux would be under a BSD-license. Isn't the existence of the GPL (a legal issue, not one of technical superiority) crucial to the adoption of free software? The campaign here is about freedoms being taken away, not that Vista is packed with eye candy or takes more memory to run.Is this about free software?
Infighting and constant fragmentation didn't help the BSD folk any in regards to "market share". Is this about free software?
Is this about free software?
1. Anyone have the right to fork the projects and
2. Anyone have the right to merge projects
This is nonsense, the early versions of Linux weren't released under the BSD, nor GPL. The license resembled GPL more than BSD, as sharing changes and being free were the main points.Is this about free software?
... technical superiority was the really important thing; in the end that will promote free software best.
Is this about free software?
The prevalence of a product in the marketplace is more about the user experience than about Is this about free software?
something as abstract as technical superiority. The latter, while interesting, is not all important.
out of the box graphics are leagues better than what I've seen on Linux or Windows, for example.
Most OS X software you get with it is well-designed, with excellent attention to how users will
interact with it. It's an excellent environment when you just want to get things done and not
have to assemble the car before driving to the grocery store.
and royalty payments high? Whereas VHS was a standard which a plethora of companies bought
into because it was a more open standard? I simplify slightly to make a point. Linux seems more
like VHS in the early days in many ways. Beta had an early market lead but then was
overwhelmed by the VHS flood.
this as pirating, more people will look for alternatives. Most of the world's population does not
yet use a computer. That is about to change over the next ten years. The key to Linux' success
will in part be determined by early adoption in the developing world. Its price and the ability to
readily localize it for languages which Microsoft will ignore, will be key to its uptake. The other
important point to get -- we need to get the UI consistent and designed from the perspective of
the user -- currently there is too little of that in Linux.
VHS and Beta weren't enough different for consumers to perceive any difference beyond that they were incompatible, and compatibility was the most desirable thing. It was eventually attained by VHS coming to dominate the market, and video rental stores eventually ceasing to offer Beta movies. Is this about free software?
I don't know what world Linus is living in, but technical superiority is certainly not the most important thing in the world I live in. Technical superiority trails marketing, public relations as well as first impressions.Is this about free software?
What about "VisionLessVista"? All the "new&cool" stuff in Vista Is this about free software?
is plagiated from Mac OSX.
Or "DReaMVista.nightmare" and logo of a consumer's heart (shaped
MP3 player) with DRM stake driven through it?
They should have picked, RestrictedVista.org or possibly ObstructedVista.org. After all, it's RS who refers to DRM as digital restrictions management, isn't it?Is this about free software?
ObstructedVista makes more sense, but I like the sound of RestrictedVista better.
I'd go for VistaSux.org. And while at that, somebody make ZuneSux.org as well. Because iPod rulez!
Is this about free software?
Technical superiority
The page is very busy and messy. Why is there so much stuff on the page? For example, why is there a calendar on the left side of the page? I think people could find out what day it is if they really wanted to know. Why is a press release on the page? There's no easy to find information about why I might not want to run Vista."BadVista.org": FSF launches campaign against Microsoft Vista
Ugh -- agreed. Looks like the people designing this page don't seem to "BadVista.org": FSF launches campaign against Microsoft Vista
understand that Vista brings at least some eye candy to the table. It's
surprising, though, that http://www.fsf.org is laid out reasonably well,
but this one falls short of that. Small consolation that it's valid xhtml
1.0.
The calendar is so you can browse older posts by date. Duh :-) "BadVista.org": FSF launches campaign against Microsoft Vista
I agree with the general sentiment though. It is a blog - not a site
whether one could find meaningful, well organized information, about why
not to run Vista.
The calendar widget is a default part of Plone, which is running the BadVista site. They probably left it in there because they thought it would come in handy (as someone else said above) to find older posts by date."BadVista.org": FSF launches campaign against Microsoft Vista
I hate it when the homepage for a project is a blog or a collection of news releases. That's just stupid. The homepage should be for someone who knows next to nothing about your project, not for your developers. I don't care which bugs version 3.1.4.5 of your release fix, I want to know what your project DOES first. "BadVista.org": FSF launches campaign against Microsoft Vista
i disagree, i think the default page should show the thing that the page is mostly visited for. "BadVista.org": FSF launches campaign against Microsoft Vista
> the default page should show the thing that the page is mostly visited for."BadVista.org": FSF launches campaign against Microsoft Vista
Given the irritating page layout and the shrill voice of the content, I think this site mostly appeals to 19-year-old basement dwellers and graybeards. Not exactly Vista's target market. I'd hoped the FSF would come out with something a little more professional.Preaching to the choir
I couldn't agree more. I have been professionally involved with open source (consulting to big business, large technical implementations) for many years, and the increasingly shrill and very vocal protestations about micro$oft and anybody that dares make a living out of selling proprietary software makes that open source is simply mistrusted in the boardroom from the word go - many people actually expect a long haired, bearded hippy to walk into the boardroom to talk about opensource, not a sharp professional consultant. Preaching to the choir
> I would like to see the FSF take a step back, and devise campaigns that Preaching to the choir
promote free software in a positive way, with a strong focus on how it
helps business and consumers, how and where it is better, where it isn't,
and ultimately, what it can do for your bottom line.
proprietary software even where the competing proprietary software is
technically superior. The FSF's public position is and always has been
that proprietary software is unethical and that you should therefore not
use it. All of its public statements will reflect this view, and its
campaigns to promote free software will be focused around getting others
to agree with its view; they will not promote the technical advantages of
specific free software packages divorced from the ethical advantages.
Someone ignorant of the ethical advantages of free software would switch
back to a proprietary package whenever the proprietary one happened to
temporarily be technically better, so such a promotion would be
detrimental to the FSF's goals. Due to the promotions of others, this in
fact happened with the Qt toolkit before it became free software, and
continues to happen with Java while its conversion to free software is
incomplete.
unaware of the mission of the FSF that you would post something like this.
It is not necessarily bad that your goals are not the same as the FSF's,
but you should not expect that it will work towards your goals when they
are in opposition to its.
"Given how familiar you are with free software, I'm surprised you were so
unaware of the mission of the FSF that you would post something like this.
It is not necessarily bad that your goals are not the same as the FSF's,
but you should not expect that it will work towards your goals when they
are in opposition to its."Preaching to the choir
I am pretty familliar with where the FSF stands, and how they feel about anything that doesn't adhere to their own strict view of the world. The issue here is that 99% of the consumers and business decision makers out there don't know this, and for them, it's all open source. First of all we are discussing something as exciting as "Software Licensing" - yawn - secondly, the difference between Free Software and Open Source Software is about as clear and important to people as the different streams of belief in the Greek Orthodox Church.
When the FSF raises it's shrill voice, and proclaims everybody but their own followers as wrong and evil, they harm not only their own cause, but also through extension the whole of the open source environment. As always, when you have a very vocal radicalised minority, they only serve to polarise views and preclude any possibility of compromise. Extremeism, whatever shape it takes, is simply not a good thing.
I remember working on arranging a screening of RevolutionOS when I was working (as an open source consultant) for a large blue chip consulting firm - an awereness building session for all the consultants that had little or no exposure to open source. I watched the movie with my manager and my team - we all saw it for the first time - and about half-way through we all decided it would do more harm then good. The majority of the film is good stuff, and narrates the rise and rise of open source in a really clear and positive way. Everytime the FSF gets involved in the film though, their radicalised, polarised views simply tear down the rest. Too many cringing moments involving RMS. Not too long after, I started thinking if there really was a solid future pushing what amounts to an ideology into business IT.
I deploy and use hardware and software on the basis of architectural decisions, functionality, and technical and business merit, not on the basis of the license it ships with. Any enterprise architect that does different is simply no good. If my functional and technical requirements can be served with open source software, then so much the better. If they can't, then tough. My job, at the end of the day, is to design and build systems that work, not to push an ideology.
If the badvista website would have been a balanced and open discission on the strenghts and weaknesses of the Vista OS, great. It could have even made a bit of a difference. But it isn't and in my opinion in its current form it does more harm then good.
>When the FSF raises it's shrill voice, and proclaims everybody but their own followers as wrong and evil, Preaching to the choir
As far as I can tell, `professional' in modern manager-speak is code for Preaching to the choir
`don't rock the boat, remove everything that gives you any individuality
or personality, obey orders'. Basically `become an interchangeable
component so we can fire you more easily'.
professional'. They get all confused when I say that no, I'm not, not by
their definition: I'm an amateur, and that's a *good* thing.)
> we are discussing something as exciting as "Software Licensing" - yawnPreaching to the choir
""I know -- almost as exciting as Constitutional Law or something. I see people get worked up about issues like that, and my idiot-filter kicks in -- it's immediately clear that they can't have anything interesting to say""Preaching to the choir
'right to keep and bare arms'Preaching to the choir
Preaching to the choir
I deploy and use hardware and software on the basis of architectural decisions, functionality, and technical and business merit, not on the basis of the license it ships with. [emphasis added] Any enterprise architect that does different is simply no good. If my functional and technical requirements can be served with open source software, then so much the better. If they can't, then tough. My job, at the end of the day, is to design and build systems that work, not to push an ideology.
A license can severely restrict you in the ways you can legally use a system. Making a bad licensing decision could result in a system that is unfit for your business. As a software engineer and consultant specialised in (Open Source) licensing issues I can tell you a few stories of how projects went wrong when people ignored the licensing aspects in their designs.
> Ironically, one of the juniors on my time won't give linux the time of day, > but won't touch vista with a bargepole. every week or so he shows me >something like this site, and ask me if I really take these people seriouslyPreaching to the choir
You junior also need to take a step or three back an look seriousley at most of the Bad Mannered poorley laid out user Unfriendley ActiveX rubbish poewerd site around and they far out number the bad sites such as BadVista.org ..and incase he/she is reading this it is much easiser to take a site like that seriousley than an over active flash filled o/s specsefic (SP) crap caan site Like msn.com or some other windBloZe type site ..
If you want to look at what plone is capable of just look at it yourself.Preaching to the choir
http://plone.org/about/sites
I must agree with mdekkers. Preaching to the choir
and OSS sites are so unprofessional and ugly.
Replace this ugly, faded, toilet paper pink and uncomment
the "font-family:"
section in your css. ;)
It's all about packaging!
wear Armani. ;)
As much as I dislike Vista's proprietary EULA and restrictive defective-by-design kernel, this is little more than a smear campaign."BadVista.org": FSF launches campaign against Microsoft Vista
I agree. As bad as Microsoft is regarding software freedom, the need to single them out is counter-productive."BadVista.org": FSF launches campaign against Microsoft Vista
This is certainly not a good move. The press release states a lot about the bad features of Vista without actually referring to particular ones. What does free and open software gain by such a campaign?"BadVista.org": FSF launches campaign against Microsoft Vista
The transition to Vista will be very expensive for business, and it's going to be disruptive. If it can be slowed down, that gives more room and time for people to consider a mixture of sticking with XP and switching to alternative operating systems.
There's plenty to gain
This is a terrible move, and is likely to turn into a PR disaster for the FSF, and free software in general."BadVista.org": FSF launches campaign against Microsoft Vista
Wow, from all the negative comments here I expected something far worse. But, uh... where the heck do they say "Vista sucks, M$ is evil, join us in spitting on them!"? The press release and the parts of the site I skimmed all seemed to be on message: Vista takes away your freedoms in exchange for a string of transparent windows, and freedom is one of (maybe the) basic criteria by which we should compare systems. Sure, they're trying to hack the media attention around Vista to publicize this message, but -- it's not like this is a _new_ message for the FSF. It's, like, in their name."BadVista.org": FSF launches campaign against Microsoft Vista
"BadVista.org": FSF launches campaign against Microsoft Vista
Again, this site is not trying to preach to the masses. It is trying to help the choir coordinate. Given the audience, it makes perfect sense that their first few posts -- introducing what they plan to do -- simply assume that their readers already have some idea what parts of Vista are particularly inimical to the FSF's philosophy, and that they can just point at them and be understood (e.g., the paragraph about "Treacherous Computing" in the press release). It seems this was an overly optimistic assumption about this audience... if you are still waiting for more evidence to decide that things like DRM and TC are not quite as wonderful as their marketing campaigns claim, then perhaps the site is not for you."BadVista.org": FSF launches campaign against Microsoft Vista
"BadVista.org": FSF launches campaign against Microsoft Vista
Memory: Vista loves RAM, but more is better. Plan on 2 Gbytes to meet real-world needs.
Storage Space: With Vista taking as much as 10 Gbytes of hard drive space, big and fast hard drives will be a must.
WordPad: Ability to open .doc files has been removed.
And so on. TPM is not mentioned, DRM is also not in list. Count me "not impressed", Ok ?
Very well said Khim. I wonder, did the FSF show this site to anybody before releasing it? Their standards are normally pretty high... How did they let this happen?"BadVista.org": FSF launches campaign against Microsoft Vista
Ugh, this makes me less proud a FSF member. Free software can stand on its own merits, we don't need a smear campaign to increase its visibility. I have been using Fedora Core 6 and RHEL 5 Beta 2 the last few weeks, and it can easily compete with OS X or Windows in many areas, and surpasses both systems in other. Just promote the merits of free systems, that has worked well for twenty years."BadVista.org": FSF launches campaign against Microsoft Vista
My views on this are mixed. I would prefer to talk about the merits of Linux and free software, and this must remain the primary message. But I do sometimes talk with Windows users who are considering Vista, and it would be helpful to have some information about why they should avoid it."BadVista.org": FSF launches campaign against Microsoft Vista
I agree, there is nothing wrong with helping others with some good advise. But starting an anti-Vista site is something different IMO. It only reinforces the idea that free software supporters are unreasonable zealots. Most of us are not :^)."BadVista.org": FSF launches campaign against Microsoft Vista
I agree, but sticking just with technical merits is dangerous. There are lots of areas where proprietary software is better than free software; sometimes (as with playing DVDs or MP3s), free software cannot get there without transforming itself into proprietary software -- or changing the legal landscape.
Technical merits
"Just promote the merits of free systems, that has worked well for twenty years.""BadVista.org": FSF launches campaign against Microsoft Vista
Sometime ago I launched an online petition against PC manufacturers that recommend Vista:An online petition against Vista
http://www.pledgebank.com/boycottvista
Hmm, I don't understand your pledge. What are the 100,000 computer buyers supposed to do and what happens when they do it?An online petition against Vista
I am not a developer or anything that technical. I am just a simple consumer with a serious issue with Microsoft concerning Vista. My computer is a few years old and will need replacing soon. After researching Vista, I am outraged that XP will not be used anymore. Vista is a nightmare. Every add-on like scanners, cameras, printers and such will no longer work with Vista. I refuse to go to this latest Bill Gates grab for money. Is there a petition? I will sign it in a heartbeat. In the meantime, I wonder what Mac has to offer.An online petition against Vista
BadVsta! Bad, bad BAD!"BadVista.org": FSF launches campaign against Microsoft Vista
I am giving a talk on Jan 3 to my local Kiwanis Club. The topic is "Is Microsoft Obsolete?" I would like some reviews and suggestions to improve. I am trying to balance Freedoms, Features, and Finance as topics.
Review Requested: Linux Presentation in Jan
The presentation is in ODP (OpenOffice) and PDF formats. Please don't clutter LWN with comments, send me email (jimwelchokATgmail.com) or blog at blogspot