Linked by Neeraj Singh on Mon 23rd Apr 2007 19:02 UTC
Windows If you shout something loud enough and many people are saying it, does it become true? Some groups of people (include tech journalists and Linux advocates, such as Steven J. Vaughn-Nichols) have a psychological need to find Vista lacking. Mr. V-N has predicted that Vista will have all manner of problems, so his clear interest is to point out everything that is wrong with the OS. Who cares if he has to even make some stuff up?
Thread beginning with comment 233210
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Logic, anyone?
by Snifflez on Mon 23rd Apr 2007 21:22 UTC
Snifflez
Member since:
2005-11-15

OK, I've never thought that I would be defending SJVN, but the author of this article is being even more illogical than SJVN.

I followed some of the links on SJVN's recent article, and I'd like to address some of them. I'm going to ignore all of the links about how it's doing on the marketplace because I frankly care more about using an OS than about who else is using it.


One of the major points of SJVN's article is that Vista isn't very successful. You on the other hand, would like to prove that SJVN isn't being objective. And you're doing so by simply ignoring his data? What's wrong with you???

And I'm not going to address his self-referential links because I don't put any stock in his objectivity. The following rebuttal is organized by the linked-to articles. I don't care about the specific points SJVN is making... I just want to show that his data is suspect or perfectly explainable.


Wait, so you're trying to prove that SJVN isn't objective using his (alleged) lack of objectivity as one of your premisses? That's a logical fallacy.

Edited 2007-04-23 21:25

Reply Score: 4

RE: Logic, anyone?
by tomcat on Mon 23rd Apr 2007 21:30 in reply to "Logic, anyone?"
tomcat Member since:
2006-01-06

One of the major points of SJVN's article is that Vista isn't very successful. You on the other hand, would like to prove that SJVN isn't being objective. And you're doing so by simply ignoring his data? What's wrong with you???

A. It's too early to evaluate whether Vista is "successful" from a market perspective.

B. Whether or not Vista is "successful" or not is irrelevant to the question of whether Vista is a useful operating system.

Wait, so you're trying to prove that SJVN isn't objective using his (alleged) lack of objectivity as one of your premisses? That's a logical fallacy.

No, bad leap in logic. He's simply saying that he's not willing to accept SJVN's other articles as "proof" for one of SJVN's current points, based on his lack of credibility.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: Logic, anyone?
by Snifflez on Tue 24th Apr 2007 03:40 in reply to "RE: Logic, anyone?"
Snifflez Member since:
2005-11-15

A. It's too early to evaluate whether Vista is "successful" from a market perspective.


Well, since you seem to be well acquainted with PlatformAgnostic's way of thinking, maybe you could explain to me why this simple explanation for refusal to consider a substantial portion of data presented by SJVN was simply omitted. Refusal to examine a portion of evidence without any substantial justification doesn't particularly increase the examiner's own credibility.

B. Whether or not Vista is "successful" or not is irrelevant to the question of whether Vista is a useful operating system.


Whether or not Vista is "useful" or not is irrelevant to the question of whether Vista is a financially successful operating system. Microsoft had invested a lot of time and money into creating Vista. ROI != usefulness. Also, let's not forget the main point of SJVN's argument: since Vista will be a financial failure, Microsoft should just open-source it. Now, personally, I think it's a seriously flawed idea. However, I also happen to think that PlatformAgnostic's "rebuttal" is equally flawed.

No, bad leap in logic. He's simply saying that he's not willing to accept SJVN's other articles as "proof" for one of SJVN's current points, based on his lack of credibility.


Yes, the very same credibility his argument sets out to dispute. That's circular logic. You cannot cite your conclusion as one of your premisses. No amount of semantic wiggling can change that.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE: Logic, anyone?
by PlatformAgnostic on Tue 24th Apr 2007 00:37 in reply to "Logic, anyone?"
PlatformAgnostic Member since:
2006-01-02

I was attempting to dispute SJVN's sources, since I don't particularly trust his assertions and wanted to see the data behind them. I'm a student, and I wrote this article to take a break from one of my most stressful weeks ever. I'm not paid to do this, so I'm not going to spend my time chasing down every reference in SJVN's web.

I just wanted to point out that there was a bit of a ZDNet echo chamber. SJVN echoing himself is not that interesting to me. If you have a point to make about any SJVN fact I missed, please post it here so that it may be discussed. I'd like to keep the scope technical, though... I won't respond to points about marketshare or licensing practices. DRM is fair game, but only the technical aspects of it.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: Logic, anyone?
by Snifflez on Tue 24th Apr 2007 03:07 in reply to "RE: Logic, anyone?"
Snifflez Member since:
2005-11-15

I don't object to your examination of facts presented by SJVN. I am merely pointing out the fact one of your premisses and the conclusion you're trying to reach, are the same, which constitutes a logical fallacy. Your argument is fundamentally flawed. Now, this has nothing to do with whether SJVN is being objective or not (personally, I think he and objectivity weren't exactly introduced to one another). I don't have a problem with your premisses or your conclusion. It's your logic I have a bone to pick with; it's simply flawed.

Reply Parent Score: 1