*BSD News Article 66140


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
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------