[linux-elitists] Fundamentally flawed (fwd)

Bulent Murtezaoglu bm@acm.org
Wed Jul 4 10:38:47 PDT 2001

>>>>> "EL" == Eugene Leitl <Eugene.Leitl@lrz.uni-muenchen.de> writes:
[Quoting Benjamin Kite on Lars Erlandsen's piece ...]
    EL>   A suggestion: Microsoft is steadily trying to convert
    EL> people's (in particular journalists) mindset with words like
    EL> 'viral'. Clever use of words, and something you either cannot
    EL> refute, or you spend too much time refuting to get your own
    EL> message across.

Not to mention that it cannot be refuted since it is partly true!  GPL is
designed to be viral.  If they are lying, the lie is about BSD, LGPL,
and Artistic licences.  

    EL>   I suggest that all references to Microsoft (by _all_ Open
    EL> Source advocates) are prefixed with 'fundamentally flawed',
    EL> i.e. "Microsoft's fundamentally flawed security model", [...]

Quite frankly I don't have the stomach for this.  Not everything they
ship is "fundamentally flawed."  Part of the attractiveness of Open
Source (and I mean Open Source in general not just FSF-free) is the 
honesty that comes with it (fibs are hard to hide when the source is
there).  This seems to carry over to an extent to the regular
discourse among the users and the providers and is a good thing IMHO.



More information about the linux-elitists mailing list