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.
Thread beginning with comment 103487
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
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 Parent Score: 5

pro-something vs. bias
by st1ckyRice on Sat 11th Mar 2006 20:54 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 Parent Score: 4

RE: pro-something vs. bias
by Thom_Holwerda on Sat 11th Mar 2006 21:45 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 Parent Score: 5