| |||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
"BadVista.org": FSF launches campaign against Microsoft Vista"BadVista.org": FSF launches campaign against Microsoft VistaPosted Dec 16, 2006 9:27 UTC (Sat) by njs (subscriber, #40338)Parent article: "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.
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.
(Log in to post comments)
"BadVista.org": FSF launches campaign against Microsoft Vista Posted Dec 16, 2006 11:30 UTC (Sat) by khim (subscriber, #9252) [Link] 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...
"BadVista.org": FSF launches campaign against Microsoft Vista Posted Dec 16, 2006 22:53 UTC (Sat) by njs (subscriber, #40338) [Link] 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.
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.
"BadVista.org": FSF launches campaign against Microsoft Vista Posted Dec 17, 2006 12:45 UTC (Sun) by khim (subscriber, #9252) [Link] 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
"BadVista.org": FSF launches campaign against Microsoft Vista Posted Dec 17, 2006 20:18 UTC (Sun) by bronson (subscriber, #4806) [Link] 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?
|
|
||||||||||||