Text 12987, 103 rader
Skriven 2006-09-19 18:43:36 av /m (1:379/45)
Ärende: Microsoft's Masterpiece of FUD
======================================
From: /m <mike@barkto.com>


http://www.linuxjournal.com/node/1000097

===
I've been tracking the evolution of Microsoft FUD for nearly 10 years now, and
wrote a short history of the subject a few months back.  But even I was
impressed when I came across Microsoft's latest effort in this department: it's
truly a masterpiece of its kind.

Whereas previous FUDs have revolved around details like the relative speed,
price and legality of free software compared with Microsoft's own code, its
most recent offering takes a different tack, and purports to look at the bigger
picture.

It's a white paper from IDC, "sponsored" by Microsoft, on "The Economic Impact
of Microsoft Windows Vista".  But this is not some abstract ivory-tower
analysis: on the contrary, it is highly targeted, and aimed at a very
particular audience - the European Commission - that is proving to be
annoyingly unaccommodating when it comes to letting Microsoft have its
monopolistic way.  Not content with slapping some juicy fines on the company
for past misdemeanors, the European Commission is now starting to make
unfriendly noises about the forthcoming Windows Vista.

The white paper is a clear attempt to head off this threat by pointing out the
huge "benefits" that will accrue to Europe if the Commission just minds its own
business.  Specifically:

   The IDC research shows that the launch of Windows Vista will
   precipitate cascading economic benefits, from increased
   employment in the region and increased taxes to a stronger
   economic base for those 150,000+ local firms that will be
   selling and servicing products that run on Windows Vista. At
   least a million IT professionals and industry employees in
   the region will be working with Windows Vista in 2007.

   These direct benefits - 100,000 new jobs - will help the local
   economies grow, improve the labor force, and support the
   formation of new companies. The indirect benefits of using
   newer software will help boost productivity, increase
   competitiveness, and support local innovation.

The implication is that the European Commission would be crazy to jeopardize
these wonderful benefits by clipping the wings of this digital golden goose, or
even grounding it completely.  The white paper looks tremendously professional,
and is filled with tables, bar and pie charts; it has suitably serious
discussions of methodology, and even introduces a few measured caveats: who
could doubt its conclusions?

What makes this FUD so impressive is that this attention to detail obscures the
sleight of hand that is going on here.  The white paper may predict sales by
the "Microsoft ecosystem" of over $40 billion in six of Europe's biggest
economies, but what this figure hides is the fact that income for Microsoft and
its chums is a cost for the rest of Europe.  In other words, IDC's white paper
is effectively touting an expense of over
$40 billion as a reason why the European Commission should welcome Vista
with open arms.

As the paper itself mentions, half of this cost is down to the hardware. Some
of these purchases would have taken place anyway; the rest represent upgrades
from older hardware that cannot meet Vista's requirements.  But if Vista did
not exist (or, for example, if the European Commission were to block its sale
for whatever reason), the old systems would not suddenly stop working: they
would tick along for a few more years, gradually being replaced.  The only
justification for this hefty expenditure is to be able to run Vista: no Vista,
no need to rustle up many extra billions on hardware upgrades outside the usual
replacement cycles.

It's the same on the software side.  The case for Vista itself is hardly
strong.  As the product's ship date has slipped, so more of its new features
have been ripped out.  Now it is not entirely clear what the benefit of
upgrading is (apart from the evergreen "better security", of course).  And
without the need for hardware and software upgrades, the associated consultancy
and service costs disappear too: most of Vista's
$40 billion "benefit" is not only a cost, but an unnecessary one at
that.

As far as I can tell, the phrases "free software" and "open source" are not
mentioned once in the white paper.  The whole analysis ignores completely the
rich and expanding world of free software as a possible alternative to Vista
and its ecosystem.  Instead, Vista is presented as the only possible option for
those who wish to enjoy the benefits of "newer software", as IDC puts it.

In fact, many of the 100,000 jobs the white paper claims will be generated by
Vista could just as easily be created if companies and users ignored Vista and
turned to free software instead.  Moreover, the wider benefits of nurturing
free software - for example, in creating public resources that anyone can use -
are increasingly being recognized.  None of this is discussed in the IDC white
paper because proprietary software - the only kind considered in the report -
offers no such social and business bonus.

This, then, is Microsoft's FUD masterstroke: by focusing attention squarely on
the overall costs to society, and redefining them as "cascading economic
benefits", it has finally managed to come up with a way of looking at things
where free software is always inferior.
===


  /m

--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-5
 * Origin: Barktopia BBS Site http://HarborWebs.com:8081 (1:379/45)