Microsoft FUD Watch 154
rs232 writes "Not a week goes by when Microsoft doesn't manufacture a little fear, uncertainty and doubt about something. Yesterday's financial analyst conference was full of it ... Our approach is simple: We look at who said what and why it's FUD. Lots of companies engage in FUD, and we only single out Microsoft because we're Microsoft Watch"
FUD (Score:2, Insightful)
Oh wow what a worthless site (Score:4, Insightful)
Hi we are Microsoft Watch and we spread FUD about their FUD, please FUD our FUD by FUDDING some FUD, preferably via FUD.
FUD? (Score:5, Insightful)
Is it just me or do these guys find it impossible to speak english in a plain and simple fashion?
Actually, I think there is a proper word for this - but for the like of me I cannot remember what it is.
Re:Oh wow what a worthless site (Score:5, Insightful)
FUD has kinda of lost all meaning if you want to insist that generic PR statements are FUD. They even went into detail to explain why each statement was FUD, and that made them look even more pathetic and clueless.
/. FUD Watch (Score:5, Insightful)
Oh, Sweet Mother of God and Jumping Jesus on a Pogo Stick and Buddha in a Banyan, if there isn't something specific about Microsoft in the news on a Monday morning, some jackass has to manufacture something so there can be a day where MS is mentioned on the /. front page?
This is as bad as the guy at work that keeps talking about his ex-wife, who he divorced 15 years ago. Let it go! At least wait for Microsoft to actually do something, you know they will.
Re:Oh wow what a worthless site (Score:3, Insightful)
Moreover, I actually think what they said about phones was sensible. From TFA:
By 'full' he presumably means physical. Like say, the Blackberry (not even a MS product).
This is just such an unexceptional article, it's surprising that it was linked.
Re:FUD? (Score:3, Insightful)
RayOzzie == "more of the same" (Score:3, Insightful)
This isn't just how it inevitably is at big companies. Some are different. For example, Jonathan Schwartz got his job because he won't do things the Sun Way. No leader is perfect, and I know lots of people who don't like Schwartz. But Schwartz has backed up his promises by embracing GPL3 and hiring Ian Murdock to change the way Solaris is delivered.
You can reasonably expect Sun's performance to improve. You can reasonably expect Microsoft to continue to miss the point when trying to compete against Open Source software, and to grow worse, in fact, in the way they use PR, lobbyists, FUD, and financial bully tactics as they fail to find a way to stop alternative business models from chipping away at their lead.
Re:FUD? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:/. FUD Watch (Score:3, Insightful)
I'm not going to try and disagree with any particular one of those suggestions. I, too, sometimes find that a given topic is being over-hyped. However I think we should keep in mind that if Slashdot were to really stop reporting on all those topics, then we would basically have no content on Slashdot. Moreover, important trends would indeed pass by without Slashdot picking up on them. So, I don't think the answer is to have a "Microsoft-free" week or a "Google-free" week... but rather for Slashdot users to agree to skip stories if they are on a topic that they are currently bored with.
Yes, it's really that easy. If a certain class of story is "boring" and no one comments on it, then over time such stories will disappear. As long as people keep engaging in lively debate when a particular story comes out, then obviously there is some desire for those stories. And we all have to deal with that fact.
Re:way to go (Score:1, Insightful)
Re:FUD (Score:1, Insightful)
A sign of lazy thinking, or someone who daren't contemplate something that doesn't fit his world view, its a common sight on Slashdot.
Re:FUD? (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Good Idea (Score:1, Insightful)
Yes, FUD is bad, but if you're going to complain about FUD it should at least meet that definition.
If the definition, as you say, 'has nothing to do with Microsoft', then I don't see how on earth were they flagged as FUD by the author.
Where is the unwarranted Fear, the Uncertainty, or the Doubt?
Were these statements directed at consumers considering competing products? (per the article itself, no).
3 of 4 statements are obviously non-FUD, since they're just positive statements about themselves, their products and their market - standard PR intended to instill confidence on the audience about it being a good company to invest in.
There's not even a serious mention of the competition, much less an attempt at FUD.
The other one (the last one) is just stating an obvious fact: Microsoft still eclipses Apple in size, which is a huge competitive advantage. The article's point for FUD-ness is absurd enough considering the audience:
"Wal-Mart typically takes in as much money in the first quarter as Target makes in one year. Is that a reason to pick one store over the other?"
Well, perhaps not if you're a consumer looking for the best product.
But if you're a financial analyst looking for the best investment, then very probably yes, and that was the audience for this statement.
It's not like there is a dearth of FUD material these days on the industry, so picking on this shows a fundamental misunderstanding of what the term even means.
Re:FUD? (Score:2, Insightful)
Euhm... am I really the only one that likes my installation experiences to be SIMPLE?
That said, I'm quite experienced in installing Linux. And that is not always easy. And no, I don't enjoy doing it.
Re:/. FUD Watch (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:/. FUD Watch (Score:4, Insightful)
Actually that'd be nice. We already know MS is evil and that they shouldn't be trusted. So, instead, the watchful eyes should be on Google. Every day they get more and more personal data on everybody. I know we like them now, but should that publicly traded company change its focus...
It'd be nice to put all this energy into preventing evil from being committed as opposed to bitching about stuff that happened years ago.
Old models don't work (Score:5, Insightful)
While I agree with those that think a Microsoft FUD watch page is a bit of a waste of time, I'm still amused by the fact someone is posting it.
Let us not forget that Microsoft was the master of the FUD campaign. Consider how it used to be. A small, unknown company (Small Software Company) launches a software product that has great potential, but would result in users being semi-locked into that company. Microsoft sees the potential and announces they have their own version about ready to release, knowing full well they don't.
Average user thinks "Well, I'll just wait for the Microsoft product because I really don't know Small Software Company and whether they'll be around.", which gives Microsoft enough time to throw tons of money on a project to whip up a Version 1.0 to compete.
This model worked well for Microsoft for a number of years. But now, it isn't Small Software Company that Microsoft is chasing, it's Google and Apple, to name two. These are also well known to Mr. and Mrs. Average User.
So now, Apple or Google announces a new product, the Average User family starts using it. Microsoft announces their plan to release a competitor and the Average User thinks "a little late to the party".
The point is, people are getting more choice from companies they trust. So the FUD campaigns are not going to be as effective.
It is fun to watch, though.
Re:Oh wow what a worthless site (Score:5, Insightful)
Not surprising at all. The quality threshold slashdot editors use for any anti-Microsoft article is extremely low. I'm not surprised at all that they accepted this vacuous drivel. In fact, I would've been surpised had they rejected it. Remember, this site uses a borg icon for "Microsoft" topics and a broken window pane icon for "Windows" topics. All other topic category icons are "neutral", devoid of editorial spin. So slashdot doesn't even have any pretense of objectivity when it comes to Microsoft, they proclaim their anti-MS bias with each and every MS and Windows article by using those icons.
Re:FUD? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:/. FUD Watch (Score:3, Insightful)