Return to BSD News archive
Path: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au!newshost.anu.edu.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!news.rmit.EDU.AU!news.unimelb.EDU.AU!munnari.OZ.AU!news.ecn.uoknor.edu!solace!nntp.uio.no!news.cais.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in1.uu.net!nntp.primenet.com!news.primenet.com!jstern From: jstern@primenet.com (Josh Stern) Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.development.system,comp.unix.bsd.386bsd.misc,comp.unix.bsd.bsdi.misc,comp.unix.bsd.netbsd.misc,comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc,comp.os.linux.advocacy Subject: Re: Historic Opportunity facing Free Unix (was Re: The Lai/Baker paper, benchmarks, and the world of free UNIX) Date: 19 Apr 1996 16:15:02 -0700 Organization: Primenet Services for the Internet Lines: 112 Sender: root@primenet.com Message-ID: <4l96pm$mrt@nnrp1.news.primenet.com> References: <4ki055$60l@Radon.Stanford.EDU> <4l5k51$3fg@dyson.iquest.net> <4l663t$1ajq@news.missouri.edu> <tporczykDq3C55.4zE@netcom.com> X-Posted-By: jstern@usr3.primenet.com Xref: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au comp.os.linux.development.system:21580 comp.unix.bsd.386bsd.misc:637 comp.unix.bsd.bsdi.misc:3257 comp.unix.bsd.netbsd.misc:3084 comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc:17505 comp.os.linux.advocacy:45927 Tony Porczyk <tporczyk@netcom.com> wrote: >rhys@vortex.cc.missouri.edu (Justin "Rhys Thuryn" McNutt) writes: >> Now given that incredible hassle [necessity to install NT from >> scratch], plus all the other given advantages of Linux (price being >> first and foremost), don't you think that some businesses, particularly >> those who want to save $$$ might consider some alternatives to NT? Objectively, I think it has to be said that in the main, smooth installations are one of MS's strengths. One can be a big fan of free (or commercial) Unix and still admire the way that MS installs just run themselves for things like NT workstation and MS Internet Explorer. >My god, you still don't get it. "It's the applications, stupid" (to >paraphrase an election slogan). Nobody installs NT because they love >that particular OS, not in the business environment. They install it >because all their apps run on it. The investment in apps and user >training on those apps is enormous. > >I would love to see UNIX on the desktop, but untill you come up with >apps that will be *immensely* better than MS Office suit, I will not >hold my breath. Largely true, but other big factors are marketing and mindshare. MS spends a huge amount of money and effort on advertising, customer relations, dealing with their distributors, and 'handling' the press. As a result, their name and products appear almost everywhere one turns in commercial computerdom. Anecdote: There is a free online news service, NandoNet (http://www.nando.net) that has a section called InfoTech which publishes daily 'news' regarding doings in the information technology sectors, including computers, telecom, electronics, etc. So far as I know, this service has no direct connection to MS, though naturally, Microsoft is frequently a topic. Anyway, one day I counted that out of 34 stories in this section, 12 (i.e. over 1/3) were specifically about Microsoft activities. Most of these stories were not anything that could be right categorized as news - they were things like MS plans such and such multi-media initiative for somewhere down the road, MS hopes to turn out some great internet products doing something or other, etc. In short, they were mainly just marketing propaganda that MS had sent to the authors of these collumns. I surmise that these stories got printed because a) MS is perceived as being big enough that their every sneeze has far reaching ramifications (actually they are drawfed in size by e.g. IBM and AT&T but one would never realize that by reading the press) b) it makes the editor's job easy if she can include lightly edited versions of the stuff sent by MS to fill space, c) MS-reps probably threaten, implicitly or explicitly, to shut off the flow of free and easy information if versions of the info doesn't get printed ( I don't wish to slander MS with this conjecture - it just seems consistent with what I know of their dealing withs their commercial partners and general company policies). In aforementioned instance, I sent an e-mail note to the editor of NandoNet complaining about that fact that the service was just re-printing marketing plans instead of news. I received no response, however the next day there were no MS-related stories in the InfoTech section. I don't know if that was coincidence, and I doubt that my note had any long term effect because the incentives I mentioned above will continue to persist. btw - I am not an MS-basher; I am simply appalled by the putrid state and direction of 'journalism' in the U.S. (and probably elsewhere). I don't find that there is anything particularly unusual about the NandoNet in this context. PC Magazine and the like are much worse, but in their case, it's not even clear that they pretend to print news. Returning to the topic: the commercial effects of this media situation are obvious. When someone buys into new technology they are very much influenced by perceptions of the strength, ubiquity, popularity, and future direction of that technology. By virtually controlling the aspects of the media that affect these perceptions, Microsoft gains a huge tactical advantage in their efforts to sell 'new' and even backdated technologies. If the business consumer cannot turn to PC Magazine, Byte, or even the Wall Street Journal or the New York Times for unbiased coverage of technology directions, it's likely that their perception of the extant realities will be quite biased as well. Bill Gates is a shrewd man - he understands these things and will do every thing he can to increase the strength of his media presence - the partnership with NBC being just one example. - Josh -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- jstern jstern@primenet.com -------------------------------------------------------------------------------