Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sat 11th Mar 2006 16:59 UTC, submitted by Richard Kottmeyer
IBM IBM Germany has refuted a Groklaw report that the division has decided to migrate Windows desktops to Linux rather than upgrade them to Vista. Groklaw's story was based on statements reportedly made by an IBM sales executive in a presentation at LinuxForum 2006. This morning, Hans Rehm, of IBM Germany's Press Relations department, emailed DesktopLinux.com the following, somewhat ambiguous, statement.
Order by: Score:
Woa
by Ronald Vos on Sat 11th Mar 2006 18:07 UTC
Ronald Vos
Member since:
2005-07-06

A lot of speculation and claims in comments on OSNews and Slashdotted have just been turned upside down; people made quite a deal of this.

Reply Score: 3

RE: Woa
by chemical_scum on Sat 11th Mar 2006 21:49 UTC in reply to "Woa"
chemical_scum Member since:
2005-11-02

The original report is obviously true. All IBM is saying if you RTFA is:

"We are now in early stages of evaluating Vista. We have not made any decisions on it yet... we don't discuss our supplier contracts."

Yeah the original report obviously indicates IBM's plans.

Reply Score: 1

Groklaw
by Deviate_X on Sat 11th Mar 2006 18:21 UTC
Deviate_X
Member since:
2005-07-11

Groklaw is an appalling website; I can't imagine how anyone could take information from Groklaw verbatim without checking facts first?!

Reply Score: 0

RE: Groklaw
by chemical_scum on Sat 11th Mar 2006 22:48 UTC in reply to "Groklaw"
chemical_scum Member since:
2005-11-02

Groklaw is an appalling website; I can't imagine how anyone could take information from Groklaw verbatim without checking facts first?!

The statement by the IBM executive may be on video at:

http://www.linuxforum.dk/2006/video/LinuxForum-20060303-1230-1400-O...

I haven't had time to check it out yet.

Andreas Pleschek has not denied the statement reported in Groklaw nor does the IBM Germany Press Department statement deny that he said that.

I think Groklaw reporting is reliable as usual

Reply Score: 5

RE[2]: Groklaw
by Thom_Holwerda on Sat 11th Mar 2006 22:57 UTC in reply to "RE: Groklaw"
Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

And? This article says IBM is denying any already made decision on this issue-- and it's newer. In other words, they can be both right. But the IBM statement in this article is made on a later date, and hence, is their CURRENT official standpoint.

In other words, Groklaw's article is outdated.

Reply Score: 5

RE[3]: Groklaw
by chemical_scum on Sat 11th Mar 2006 23:29 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Groklaw"
chemical_scum Member since:
2005-11-02

This article says IBM is denying any already made decision on this issue-- and it's newer. In other words, they can be both right.

Listen Thom - Groklaw reported remarks that IBM Germany Executive Andreas Plaschek made at the end of his presentation to Linuxforum 2006. No one from IBM has denied that Andreas Plaschek made these remarks. Therefore one most conclude that the story carried by Groklaw was reliable and accurate, insomuch as they represented the views of a senior IBM Germany executive as to IBM Germany's plans for its future desktop deployments.

It may be an embarrasment to certain elements in IBM Germany that these plans were leaked. Remember Thom that corporations routinely deny their planned future actions and as you pointed out the IBM denial is a "somewhat ambiguous, statement".

Just for the record and those that don't RTFA here is Groklaw's report on Pleschek's remarks:

"At the end of the presentation, Andreas Pleschek revealed that the laptop he used for the presentation was running a pre-release of their new platform, the Open Client. It is actually a Red Hat work station with IBM's new Workplace Client, which is built in Java on top of Eclipse. Because of Eclipse, it runs on both Linux and Windows, and they have been able to reuse the C++ code in Lotus Notes for Windows to run it natively on Linux via Eclipse. Internally in IBM, for years, they have had a need to run Lotus Notes on Linux, and now they can. And they will offer it to their customers.

Workplace uses Lotus Notes for mail, calendar, etc. and Firefox as their browser. For an office suite, they use OpenOffice.org.

Andreas Pleschek also told that IBM has cancelled their contract with Microsoft as of October this year. That means that IBM will not use Windows Vista for their desktops. Beginning from July, IBM employees will begin using IBM Workplace on their new, Red Hat-based platform. Not all at once - some will keep using their present Windows versions for a while. But none will upgrade to Vista."


Edited 2006-03-11 23:37

Reply Score: 5

RE[3]: Groklaw
by chemical_scum on Sun 12th Mar 2006 00:21 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Groklaw"
chemical_scum Member since:
2005-11-02

But the IBM statement in this article is made on a later date, and hence, is their CURRENT official standpoint.

Having in my youth struggled to understand the inner meanings of statements by the British Conservative Party, the old Communist Party of the Soviet Union and the Communist Party of China, I feel that here is a need for a similar semiotic analysis of the statement of IBM Germany's Press Relations department:

"We are now in early stages of evaluating Vista. We have not made any decisions on it yet."

Interpretation: We are evaluating Vista for the purposes of supporting our client end applications on it. We have not totally ruled out some internal deployment of Vista even though some current decisions we have made may imply that this outcome is precluded.

"IBM continues to have a strong relationship with Microsoft. Our customers look to us for solutions and services on a variety of operating systems, including Windows."

Interpretation: We will sell an IBM system with Windows installed to anyone who wants to buy it, even though this may not be our preferred solution.

"As a business principle, we don't discuss our supplier contracts."

Interpretation: We do not deny that we may have cancelled or be intending not to renew contracts we have with Microsoft, pertaining to Windows and Office licences for our internal desktop deployment.

Edited 2006-03-12 00:22

Reply Score: 1

RE[4]: Groklaw
by hal2k1 on Sun 12th Mar 2006 10:39 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Groklaw"
hal2k1 Member since:
2005-11-11

>"IBM continues to have a strong relationship with Microsoft. Our customers look to us for solutions and services on a variety of operating systems, including Windows."

Interpretation: We will sell an IBM system with Windows installed to anyone who wants to buy it, even though this may not be our preferred solution.<

Exactly.

IBM Germany is going to use Linux on its desktops internally.

IBM Germany will however happily still sell and support a Windows solution (even a Windows Vista solution) to any compnay that wants Windows and have IBM to support it.

Reply Score: 2

RE: Groklaw
by hal2k1 on Mon 13th Mar 2006 08:51 UTC in reply to "Groklaw"
hal2k1 Member since:
2005-11-11

//Groklaw is an appalling website; I can't imagine how anyone could take information from Groklaw verbatim without checking facts first?!//

Groklaw is light years ahead of OSNews in regard to sticking strictly to the facts.

It is anything posted on OSNews that one needs to check the facts about. The administration of this OSNews site seems to have an absolutely false impression that being "objective" just means posting opinion from both sides of a story.

This is not the case at all. Being "objective" means sticking to verifiable facts, representing only facts as facts, not omitting any relevant facts, clearly labelling any quoted opinion as opinion, highlighting which side of the table that opinion comes from, and not representing opinion from vested interest as being neutral.

Groklaw does all that far far better than OSNews does.

Edited 2006-03-13 08:58

Reply Score: 1

Failure to communicate.
by Dark_Knight on Sat 11th Mar 2006 18:23 UTC
Dark_Knight
Member since:
2005-07-10

I get the impression that IBM company divisions are not all on the same page with what is being done at their headquarters. The announcement at LinuxForum 2006 of IBM furthering their Linux migration was by an IBM sales executive which is typical of such conferences where product releases, etc are officially announced. Though I would of preferred to see a press release to back up the announcement posted here http://www-1.ibm.com/linux/

Reply Score: 1

RE: Failure to communicate.
by kaiwai on Sun 12th Mar 2006 01:13 UTC in reply to "Failure to communicate."
kaiwai Member since:
2005-07-06

I get the impression that IBM company divisions are not all on the same page with what is being done at their headquarters.

Each division within IBM is run like a seperate business, they have different processes, make different decisions based on what their particular division and their particular market is doing at that time.

So whilst one part of IBM may be cheering Linux to the heavens, another may have a completely different story; and from what I've seen so far, IBM only see a role of Linux on the server and possibly being used as an operating system for developers.

As for the migration to Red Hat, solely migrating to Red Hat would put them in the same position as they are with Windows, once vendor crunching their balls when ever they want more cash - and no, you can't just 'pick up and move to a new distro', who ever made THAT myth should be dragged out into the street, beaten then shot.

The problem is with Linux is there is no single vision for delivering the desktop, resulting in the fragmentation you see today, then couple that with the lack of decent IHV and ISV support - we're talking about the commercial software; Linux and the desktop is further away than ever.

Oh, as a side note, why are IBM allowing Lotus Smart Suite to die a slow and painful death? why not opensource it? port it to Linux using Eclipse, as they did with Lotus Notes? it seems that IBM has all but thrown in the towel when it comes to competing with Microsoft in the desktop space, 'lets go and hide in the server market' seems to be the mantra; look how successful that has been for SUN <rolls eyes> with their massive profits they're making each quarter <rolls eyes>

Reply Score: 2

Reasonable, but still exciting
by KenJackson on Sat 11th Mar 2006 18:26 UTC
KenJackson
Member since:
2005-07-18

As a business principle, we don't discuss our supplier contracts.

Well that makes sense. It's reasonable to consider it to not be other peoples's business what happens internally.

But the story is still exciting. It has the appearance of a slip of the tongue which reveals what's being discussed, or at least wishful thinking on the inside. Just the notion that a giant like IBM might view Linux on the desktop as solid enough to forgo renewing their Windows licence is likely to start other companies thinking and talking about what's best for them.

I wish image were not a driver, but it is. Many decision makers would never consider even allowing employees to use an "alternate" desktop. But nobody ever got fired for buying IBM, as the saying goes.

Reply Score: 2

IBM ... Alternative desktop
by aGNUstic on Sat 11th Mar 2006 18:42 UTC
aGNUstic
Member since:
2005-07-28

GrokLaw is no more reliable than this site or any other for that matter. One thing I do know is that I've been using Linux since October of 2003 and it's totally desktop ready. I've had zero failures, corruptions, or data loss since then.

If people want to 'nuzzle' off the microscrap 'nozzle' then let them. I choose a better option. I hope IBM in Germany does the right thing over time.

Edited 2006-03-11 18:45

Reply Score: 2

RE: IBM ... Alternative desktop
by Thom_Holwerda on Sat 11th Mar 2006 18:53 UTC in reply to "IBM ... Alternative desktop"
Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

GrokLaw is no more reliable than this site or any other for that matter.

Groklaw has the same problems that most Apple sites have: utterly, utterly, utterly, utterly biased.

Don't compare such a biased (note how I do not say 'bad') website to a balanced place like OSNews. They're in two completely different leagues.

Reply Score: 5

v RE[2]: IBM ... Alternative desktop
by porcel on Sat 11th Mar 2006 19:39 UTC in reply to "RE: IBM ... Alternative desktop"
hal2k1 Member since:
2005-11-11

//The comment was a direct attack on the staff//

Ahhh, so I take it the OSNews staff are permitted to rant and make a direct attack in a totally unjustifiable way about another site being biased (considering that the subject site has won several awards and is reknown for sticking to the verifiable facts), yet when the home truth is posted about the OSNews staff's biases then they can't abide the perfectly valid criticism?

Is that what you are (inadvertently) telling us?

Edited 2006-03-13 05:46

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: IBM ... Alternative desktop
by hal2k1 on Sun 12th Mar 2006 10:23 UTC in reply to "RE: IBM ... Alternative desktop"
hal2k1 Member since:
2005-11-11

"Groklaw has the same problems that most Apple sites have: utterly, utterly, utterly, utterly biased.

Don't compare such a biased (note how I do not say 'bad') website to a balanced place like OSNews. They're in two completely different leagues."

I'm sorry Thom, but you have utterly the wrong take here.

For example, OSNews once published a story (I think it may even have been you who linked to it) that claimed that the Linux names for applications were less intuitive for "newbies" than the names in Windows.

People pointed out that even in the screenshot of the original author, that the Linux menus had a system of context cues that the equivalent Windows menus completely lack.

For example - to view a PDF file on my Linux installation the route through the menus is:
MenuButton->Office->Publishing->PDF viewer (KPDF).

For my Windows installation on the same machine:
Start->Programs->Adobe->Acrobat Reader.

The Linux menus are clearly far easier for any newbie to find the right application.

This was pointed out on OSNews in the comments.

There was no retraction by OSNews of the "utterly, utterly, utterly, utterly biased" original article.

Edited 2006-03-12 10:30

Reply Score: 2

Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

There was no retraction by OSNews of the "utterly, utterly, utterly, utterly biased" original article.

Of course not. That is why we publish articles by pro-Linux people too. THAT is what is called being 'un-biased'-- you shine a light on BOTH sides of an isssue-- not just one side like Groklaw is usually doing.

Reply Score: 5

tomcat Member since:
2006-01-06

The Linux menus are clearly far easier for any newbie to find the right application. I know this is probably going to come as a shock but ... just because you and a bunch of your friends disagree with an article, that has no bearing on its objectivity. Groklaw is indeed utterly biased in favor of OSS. You might be able to prove otherwise if you could provide evidence of Groklaw articles whose primary thesis is opposition to OSS. But you're not going to find that; hence, the taint of bias.

Reply Score: 1

hal2k1 Member since:
2005-11-11

//I know this is probably going to come as a shock but ... just because you and a bunch of your friends disagree with an article, that has no bearing on its objectivity. Groklaw is indeed utterly biased in favor of OSS. You might be able to prove otherwise if you could provide evidence of Groklaw articles whose primary thesis is opposition to OSS. But you're not going to find that; hence, the taint of bias.//

One avoids alleagtions of bias by sticking to facts and not omitting any relevant facts. This is largely what the Groklaw site does. Check it out by going to a site that actually dislikes Groklaw and also posts the facts - scofacts.org or (to some extent) the SCOX board on Yahoo. You will find plenty of angst over Groklaw but it is nearly all related to Groklaws comments policy ... there is no valid accusation that Groklaw does not stick to facts or that Groklaw hides facts.

For the topic which Groklaw covers, which clearly was a striaght-out scam extortion attempt by SCO to diddle every Linux installation of $699 for no reason at all, there are no facts which support SCO. No evidence of their allegations whatsoever. The judge has even said as much.

Sorry, but one does not "avoid the taint of bias" by making up stuff that supports the fraudulent SCO side of the story.

Similarly, the article about the names of applications in Linux and the ease via which a newbie could find the program they were after ... that article completely avoided the relevant facts. It avoided any mention of the menu context ... even though that context was shown in the screenshot of the original article. It also avoided any mention of the peculiar way in which Windows menus are grouped by default - grouped under the name of the software product vendor - which is hardly a clue to make it easier for newbies to find a paint application as opposed to their DVD player application.

Stick to the plain facts, and you avoid any valid criticism of bias.

Make up facts (such as "Linux names are harder", or "this detail really supports SCO") does nothing to avoid any valid criticism of bias, and in fact it just makes a lie out of your article.

Edited 2006-03-13 00:34

Reply Score: 1

RE: IBM ... Alternative desktop
by kaiwai on Sun 12th Mar 2006 01:16 UTC in reply to "IBM ... Alternative desktop"
kaiwai Member since:
2005-07-06

One thing I do know is that I've been using Linux since October of 2003 and it's totally desktop ready.

And I have been using it since 1996 - and each year people have claimed to be the 'year of the Linux desktop' - so for 10 years I've been hearing the same promises, the same 'year of the desktop' with nothing delivered.

Talk is cheap, its about time the Linux fanboys like Novell, Red Hat, IBM and the likes actually started to deliver this 'Linux on the desktop' in terms of QUALITY hardware support and QUALITY third party commercial software from the Adobes, Corels, Lotus's, Peachtree's and Quickens of the world.

Reply Score: 2

RE: IBM ... Alternative desktop
by rockwell on Sun 12th Mar 2006 03:33 UTC in reply to "IBM ... Alternative desktop"
rockwell Member since:
2005-09-13

//One thing I do know is that I've been using Linux since October of 2003 and it's totally desktop ready. I've had zero failures, corruptions, or data loss since then.//

BFD. I've been using XP Pro since 2003, and I've had a handful of failures (due to my overclocking), no corruptions, and zero data loss as well.

Reply Score: 0

RE[2]: IBM ... Alternative desktop
by hal2k1 on Sun 12th Mar 2006 10:46 UTC in reply to "RE: IBM ... Alternative desktop"
hal2k1 Member since:
2005-11-11

//I've been using XP Pro since 2003, and I've had a handful of failures (due to my overclocking), no corruptions, and zero data loss as well.//

BFD. The company I work for recently upgraded some of our workgroup staff to XP and Office 2003 but not others.

Heaps of interoperability problems and data loss and rework required to recover ever since.

Reply Score: 1

Always a Load of Rubbish
by segedunum on Sat 11th Mar 2006 18:52 UTC
segedunum
Member since:
2005-07-06

I submitted this story (although someone beat me to it) because I knew it would be refuted several days later.

Ever since the era of Windows and OS/2 Microsoft has seriously put the wind up IBM to the point where they are scared witless of going anywhere near a desktop. That explains why their desktop software is so bad and Lotus has been just about completely extinguished.

Microsoft has such a psychological hold over most of their OEMs, but especially IBM, that they become spineless wimps, scared to death of grabbing hold of their own business and their software and making their own decisions. Quite frankly, they don't have the first clue what's required from a desktop. Take this line for instance:

"IBM continues to have a strong relationship with Microsoft."

How suggestive can you get? The spineless wimps that they call managers at IBM probably had a meeting after the story broke out, and in a panic, they all said in unison "Oh my God, we can't upset Microsoft!"

Reply Score: 1

No refutal offered.
by porcel on Sat 11th Mar 2006 19:42 UTC
porcel
Member since:
2006-01-28

This story on osnews is highly misleading, even if it will likely get justified as just a reprint of someone else's title. If that's your justification, where is the editing part of your "editor" job?

Other than that, this story basically says "no comment", which is a smart thing to do on the part of IBM.

The Linux migration is going forward full steam. Otherwise, you have received a strong message disabowing everyone. IBM is just doing damage control now because the story got out sooner than it should have.

Reply Score: 3

RE: No refutal offered.
by Thom_Holwerda on Sat 11th Mar 2006 19:51 UTC in reply to "No refutal offered. "
Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

This story on osnews is highly misleading, even if it will likely get justified as just a reprint of someone else's title. If that's your justification, where is the editing part of your "editor" job?

What part of it is misleading? Other than that it does not fit your apparant pro-Linux obsession?

Other than that, this story basically says "no comment", which is a smart thing to do on the part of IBM.

Please spare us your obvious pro-Linux zealotry. The first story said: IBM will be moving all its desktops towards Linux, and NOT to Vista. However, now, an official IBM spokeperson says:

"1. There have been reports that IBM does not plan to use the next version of Windows, Microsoft Vista. Is that true?

No. We are now in early stages of evaluating Vista. We have not made any
decisions on it yet.

IBM continues to have a strong relationship with Microsoft. Our customers look to us for solutions and services on a variety of operating systems, including Windows."


That does NOT constitute as 'no comment', mister.

The Linux migration is going forward full steam. Otherwise, you have received a strong message disabowing everyone. IBM is just doing damage control now because the story got out sooner than it should have.

Ah, you have some special connection to the higher echelons of IBM, I assume?

Note: like I said, Groklaw might be a good site, but that does not make them less biased. They are pro-OSS, and if you deny that, then you are probably just an OSS zealot yourself.

Edited 2006-03-11 19:53

Reply Score: 5

pro-something vs. bias
by st1ckyRice on Sat 11th Mar 2006 20:54 UTC in reply to "RE: No refutal offered. "
st1ckyRice Member since:
2006-01-01

Hello Thom,

While I agree with you that Groklaw is Pro-OSS, the world "biased" really doesn't apply to Groklaw. A reporter can be a Democrat or Republican, and he/she is entitled to express their pro-this or pro-that view in a commentary or column without having to be "biased". It is when they are reporting a factual news item that we expect them to withdraw their personal opinions, stay neutral and just give us the hard facts.

I have been reading Groklaw off and on and while Paula Jones indeed never shies away from showing her support for the F/OSS community, I have always liked the quality of her writing and her matter-of-factness.

When someone openly supports a cause, it doesn't make them biased. It's when they dismiss everything else, stretch the truth, or only tell the half-truth, that makes them biased. And that is not what Groklaw does.

Reply Score: 4

RE: pro-something vs. bias
by Thom_Holwerda on Sat 11th Mar 2006 21:45 UTC in reply to "pro-something vs. bias"
Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

While I agree with you that Groklaw is Pro-OSS, the world "biased" really doesn't apply to Groklaw.

Dictionary:

"1) - prejudice in favor of or against one thing, person, or group compared with another, usually in a way considered to be unfair: there was evidence of bias against foreign applicants | the bias toward younger people in recruitment | [in sing.] a systematic bias in favor of the powerful.
- [in sing. ] a concentration on or interest in one particular area or subject: he worked on a variety of Greek topics, with a discernible bias toward philosophy."


So in essence, we're both right. Doesn't change my point though: just as it makes no sense to ask Aaron Siego which desktop env. he finds the best, there's also no sense in seeing Groklaw as an objective source on anything OSS vs. MS (in this case: Vista vs. Linux).

Groklaw does good work, don't get me wrong (I already said it a few times), but an unbiased newssource? No, I'm sorry.

Reply Score: 5

One way or another
by hraq on Sat 11th Mar 2006 21:21 UTC
hraq
Member since:
2005-07-06

One way or another, linucies will penetrate the corporate world leaving Microsoft no chance to survive; how could they compete with free software? Anyway, the sooner anyone get used to linux the sooner they will dominate in the future. Many Hospitals, Research Labs and Financial institutions already moved to linux and they are starting to feel its stability, check out this web site for the proof if you don't believe me: "http://www.redhat.com/en_us/USA/rhel/informationcenter/videos/custo...
I advice Microsoft to give away their OS for free and charge customers for support ONLY.

Reply Score: 0

RE: One way or another
by KenJackson on Sun 12th Mar 2006 00:39 UTC in reply to "One way or another"
KenJackson Member since:
2005-07-18

Linux isn't about domination. It's about freedom.

Reply Score: 4

Poor guy
by tomcat on Sun 12th Mar 2006 05:43 UTC
tomcat
Member since:
2006-01-06

It's gotta be frrustrating when the first question out of the competing Microsoft salesman's mouth is "If Linux is so great, how come IBM can't convert its own desktops?!?" No wonder he wants to believe in the Linux migration.

Browser: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 4.01; Windows CE; PPC; 240x320; HP iPAQ h6300)

Reply Score: 1

RE: Poor guy
by chemical_scum on Sun 12th Mar 2006 12:53 UTC in reply to "Poor guy"
chemical_scum Member since:
2005-11-02

It's gotta be frrustrating when the first question out of the competing Microsoft salesman's mouth is "If Linux is so great, how come IBM can't convert its own desktops?!?"

Easy he shows them his laptop running the IBM Open Client desktop on Linux - he has no problem ;)

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: Poor guy
by tomcat on Sun 12th Mar 2006 16:36 UTC in reply to "RE: Poor guy"
tomcat Member since:
2006-01-06

Easy he shows them his laptop running the IBM Open Client desktop on Linux - he has no problem ;)

LOL. Grrrrrrrrreat. One IBM desktop migrated to Linux. Way to go in for the big win...

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: Poor guy
by chemical_scum on Sun 12th Mar 2006 18:05 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Poor guy"
chemical_scum Member since:
2005-11-02

LOL. Grrrrrrrrreat. One IBM desktop migrated to Linux. Way to go in for the big win...

IBM already has has many thousands of desktops running Linux. The real question is how fast are they going to finish the job. All of the software tools they need to do it are now falling into place: The Eclipse Rich Client Platform, Workplace, The IBM Editors plugin, ODF support, the Hannover Notes client, internal support for Mozilla Firefox as the standard web browser etc.

I was merely pointing out that IBM Linux technical sales people should show they eat their own dogfood.

Reply Score: 2

Is this really a groklaw story?
by walterbyrd on Sun 12th Mar 2006 15:32 UTC
walterbyrd
Member since:
2005-12-31

I suppose the editors of osnews have decided to bash groklaw.

But, did groklaw, in fact, break this story? Or did groklaw simply reference the story after it was published?

Did groklaw delibertly mislead it's readers? Did groklaw concoct the story? The editor of osnews are certianly trying to imply that.

Reply Score: 2

RE: Is this really a groklaw story?
by hal2k1 on Mon 13th Mar 2006 09:32 UTC in reply to "Is this really a groklaw story?"
hal2k1 Member since:
2005-11-11

It seems on the face of it that Groklaw was entirely accurate, and concocted nothing.

Hans Rehm (a PR person no less) statement is entirely ambiguous, but it says nothing that I can see that absolutely contradicts what Groklaw posted (which after all was an indirect quote form a representative of IBM Germany). Hans Rehm says in fact the IBM are still "considering it" - which goes two ways. They are considering if they should drop Vista on the desktop - or not). In spite of what OSNews and even DesktopLinux.com claims, nothing of Groklaw's article is refuted.

The only reputations to be muddied here IMO would appear to be OSNews and I'm sorry to say DesktopLinux.com's.

As far as Groklaw and accuracy goes, and not omitting any relevant facts, on this Groklaw page of the story:

http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20060305214231974

there is this update:

UPDATE 2: Note that IBM is contradicting [ http://www.informationweek.com/news/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=181... ] elhaard's recollection of what he heard.

Edited 2006-03-13 09:41

Reply Score: 1

tomcat Member since:
2006-01-06

The only reputations to be muddied here IMO would appear to be OSNews and I'm sorry to say DesktopLinux.com's.

Huh? OSNews merely pointed out that Hans Rehm misspoke. I hardly think that that "muddied" OSNews reputation; in fact, quite the opposite.

Reply Score: 1

hal2k1 Member since:
2005-11-11

//Huh? OSNews merely pointed out that Hans Rehm misspoke. I hardly think that that "muddied" OSNews reputation; in fact, quite the opposite.//

Thom Holwerda dropped a doozy of a clanger on this thread.

He let it slip that he believes "unbiased" means something akin to 'post stories both for and against any issue, without comment one way or the other, regardles of their truth or accuracy'.

In short, OSNews editors don't have the first clue about the role of an editor.

This sort of thing will muddy the reputation of a news establishment every time.

Reply Score: 1

What's happening to osnews?
by thegrendel on Sun 12th Mar 2006 17:08 UTC
thegrendel
Member since:
2006-03-12

The bigger story is what is happening to osnews. Why is
it degenerating into an anti-Linux attack site? Could it
have something to do with MSFT being an advertiser?

Say it ain't true, Joe.

Reply Score: 1

RE: What's happening to osnews?
by Thom_Holwerda on Sun 12th Mar 2006 17:15 UTC in reply to "What's happening to osnews?"
Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

The bigger story is what is happening to osnews. Why is it degenerating into an anti-Linux attack site? Could it have something to do with MSFT being an advertiser?

*sigh* I give up. If you want to find OSNews anti-Linux, just because we do our journalistic duty of shining lights on all the different sides of Linux, then go ahead, there's no talking sense into you.

But please, then stop visiting OSNews.

Reply Score: 5