In article <63435.193.62.192.15.1021027599.squirrel@secure.uksolutions.co.uk>, linux@counsell.com (Damian Counsell) wrote:
shall we deluge the Guardian with comments?
I doubt that it is worth while. In the opinion of many the editor of the computer section at the G. is "opposed" to Linux, and is a Microsoft groupie. He'll deny this of course :-) But a textual analysis of his work and commissioned articles selected over the last few years could substantiate a view that the benefit of the doubt is given to MS, all too often, and the detailing of the doubt is brought to the attention of readers with regards to Linux, and open source generally. Though to be fair there has been more exposure of open source of late, I've still found the general negativity somewhat distressing. But then I'm prejudiced in favour when balancing the benefit of the doubt. However, I still believe the balance swings further than is "fair" on the G. Negative impressions can be subtly imparted by tone and turn of phrase in writing (and does so a lot in the G IMHO) as well as overt critiscm. Some of the criticsm is justified (GUI lacks with regard to neonate users etc.) but the overall negativity is imparted, whereas one generally gets a positive impression of MS, and a downplaying of the negative technical issues for that range of s/w. Overall the politics of open source compared to the disturbing trend towards copyright/patent enforced American Empire corporates is seriously under discussed, and this for me is the prime point about open source - a socio-political and economic path fork between global US corporate control or some remaining vestiges of the values of liberal capitalist democracies (despite the well-exercised critiques drawbacks of that system!). Why the negativity? Well, personally I blame it on a bruising flame war that occurred on Cix some years back in which there was charring, the person concerned being unable to sustain the argument IMHO, with regard to linux. Others may differ with regard to who "won", they are entitled to their opinion (they are wrong of course >;). Though the tone of the faithful with regard to the roasting did leave a lot to be desired on the civility front, and that has happened all too often in advocacy "debates" with regard to computing options :-( I do fear that there is a bit too much use of (vitriol based) green ink (or the electronic equivalent) by open source acolytes :-(