5 ms·

Wow, that's a lot of overblown hyperbole. Free software actually suffers from variants of a number of these, at least to the same extreme that "Microsoft" does

Wow, that's a lot of overblown hyperbole. Free software actually suffers from variants of a number of these, at least to the same extreme that "Microsoft" does them in Windows 7. This is the kind of stuff that avoids critical thinking in favor of "OMG WINDOZE"

gloob 17y ago
I've never found subtlety to be the strong point of the FSF. The fact that this particular campaign suffers from hyperbole is...less than shocking.
- potatolicious 17y ago
  This is particularly questionable: "7. Threatening user security: Windows has a long history of security vulnerabilities, enabling the spread of viruses and allowing remote users to take over people's computers for use in spam-sending botnets." The way this is phrased (and knowing the FSF, quite deliberate) is to paint MS as complicit in the spread of malware. This is patently false and I would like to see the FSF called out on this - this draws extremely close to libel.
  - pyre 17y ago
    Well, in specific instances you could make a case... Like not patching a huge vulnerability for months. But this claim is way too broad. Most of the security problems plaguing Microsoft today are the results of decisions made years ago. The Microsoft ship doesn't turn on a dime, and unfortunately their large codebase isn't the only thing causing this slowness (internal politics,redtape,etc). {edit} s/cases/instances/ {/edit}
    - potatolicious 17y ago
      There's a difference between not patching vulnerabilities and "allowing" viruses to take over your computer. One is negligence, the other implies active collusion. The FSF is way out of line with that comment - but who am I kidding, this is hardly surprising. The free software movement would be a lot better off if more tempered people were in charge of the FSF.
      - branden 17y ago
        You're misreading the sentence. ""7. Threatening user security: Windows has a long history of security vulnerabilities, enabling the spread of viruses and allowing remote users to take over people's computers for use in spam-sending botnets." It states that the "long history of security vulnerabilities" enables and allows exploits, which is true. The obvious inference is that Microsoft has allowed that long history to persist, thus enabling the exploits. This is an accusation of incompetence, not malice.
deleted 17y ago
[deleted]
- gloob 17y ago
  That is as total a misunderstanding of the way the FSF uses the word "free" as it would be to ask why the Black Panthers are opposed to putting cream in your coffee.
olefoo 17y ago
> Free software actually suffers from variants of a number of these, at least to the same extreme that "Microsoft" does them in Windows 7. Could you be more specific? I don't see it.
chrischen 17y ago
Don't discount the possibility of windows people having the same lack of critical thinking. I had the same attitude towards firefox until years later when I reAlized they actually had a point. I mean, free software promoters don't have any monetary incentive to do this. So it would be wise to actually give their argument some merit instead of just labelling them as "OMG WINDOZE"
chrischen 17y ago
Linux is probably is probably less user friendly, but that's because microsoft is adamantly against ts consumer adoption. Their argument is if we switch off of proprietary, then more companies can create competing OSs. Heck Microsoft could create a new flavor of Linux that looks like windows. That's the true benefit of free.
- jodrellblank 17y ago
  I don't want Linux limited to looking like Windows, Microsoft doesn't want "looks like Windows but wont run your programs". Who would benefit from that? How much traction did Lindows get?
  - chrischen 17y ago
    Yes but if we moved off of windows then microsoft would make programs that would run on whatever we move to right? IF we didn't have windows, who would make programs that run on windows? Who would benefit from that? You're missing my point. I'm not talking about switching to linux because it's the better alternative, i'm saying that windows is impeding the advancement of free software, which has the potential to be better for everyone by making everything more competitive.
scottdw2 17y ago
I was going to say "mindless dribble", but "overblown hyperbole" will work too.

gloob 17y ago

I've never found subtlety to be the strong point of the FSF. The fact that this particular campaign suffers from hyperbole is...less than shocking.

potatolicious 17y ago
This is particularly questionable: "7. Threatening user security: Windows has a long history of security vulnerabilities, enabling the spread of viruses and allowing remote users to take over people's computers for use in spam-sending botnets." The way this is phrased (and knowing the FSF, quite deliberate) is to paint MS as complicit in the spread of malware. This is patently false and I would like to see the FSF called out on this - this draws extremely close to libel.
- pyre 17y ago
  Well, in specific instances you could make a case... Like not patching a huge vulnerability for months. But this claim is way too broad. Most of the security problems plaguing Microsoft today are the results of decisions made years ago. The Microsoft ship doesn't turn on a dime, and unfortunately their large codebase isn't the only thing causing this slowness (internal politics,redtape,etc). {edit} s/cases/instances/ {/edit}
  - potatolicious 17y ago
    There's a difference between not patching vulnerabilities and "allowing" viruses to take over your computer. One is negligence, the other implies active collusion. The FSF is way out of line with that comment - but who am I kidding, this is hardly surprising. The free software movement would be a lot better off if more tempered people were in charge of the FSF.
    - branden 17y ago
      You're misreading the sentence. ""7. Threatening user security: Windows has a long history of security vulnerabilities, enabling the spread of viruses and allowing remote users to take over people's computers for use in spam-sending botnets." It states that the "long history of security vulnerabilities" enables and allows exploits, which is true. The obvious inference is that Microsoft has allowed that long history to persist, thus enabling the exploits. This is an accusation of incompetence, not malice.

deleted 17y ago

[deleted]

gloob 17y ago
That is as total a misunderstanding of the way the FSF uses the word "free" as it would be to ask why the Black Panthers are opposed to putting cream in your coffee.

olefoo 17y ago

> Free software actually suffers from variants of a number of these, at least to the same extreme that "Microsoft" does them in Windows 7. Could you be more specific? I don't see it.

chrischen 17y ago

Don't discount the possibility of windows people having the same lack of critical thinking. I had the same attitude towards firefox until years later when I reAlized they actually had a point. I mean, free software promoters don't have any monetary incentive to do this. So it would be wise to actually give their argument some merit instead of just labelling them as "OMG WINDOZE"

chrischen 17y ago

Linux is probably is probably less user friendly, but that's because microsoft is adamantly against ts consumer adoption. Their argument is if we switch off of proprietary, then more companies can create competing OSs. Heck Microsoft could create a new flavor of Linux that looks like windows. That's the true benefit of free.

jodrellblank 17y ago
I don't want Linux limited to looking like Windows, Microsoft doesn't want "looks like Windows but wont run your programs". Who would benefit from that? How much traction did Lindows get?
- chrischen 17y ago
  Yes but if we moved off of windows then microsoft would make programs that would run on whatever we move to right? IF we didn't have windows, who would make programs that run on windows? Who would benefit from that? You're missing my point. I'm not talking about switching to linux because it's the better alternative, i'm saying that windows is impeding the advancement of free software, which has the potential to be better for everyone by making everything more competitive.

scottdw2 17y ago

I was going to say "mindless dribble", but "overblown hyperbole" will work too.