Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Microsoft FUD Watch

CmdrTaco posted more than 7 years ago | from the something-to-read dept.

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"

cancel ×

154 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Fr0sty P1ss (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#20042219)

How about that? Two tall steaming mugs of frosty piss in a row!
 

Re:Fr0sty P1ss (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#20042419)

Make it three and get a turkey.

joo canne dew iit!

Not quite fair (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#20042261)

I don't think that the mere act of watching Microsoft should be considered to be "FUD". Microsoft is a corporation like any other, but they do deserve careful attention.

/. FUD Watch (5, Insightful)

WED Fan (911325) | more than 7 years ago | (#20042399)

"Not a week goes by when /. doesn't manufacture a little fear, uncertainty and doubt about Microsoft...We look at who said what and why it's FUD. Lots of /. submitters engage in FUD, and we only single out /. because we're /. Watch"

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:/. FUD Watch (3, Funny)

Opportunist (166417) | more than 7 years ago | (#20042631)

At least wait for Microsoft to actually do something, you know they will.

Do you really? I mean, could just be FUD, you know...

Re:/. FUD Watch (1)

canuck57 (662392) | more than 7 years ago | (#20042675)

Hear hear!!

Lets have a Microsoft free week. If Microsoft is bashed or put on a pedestal then kill the story.

Re:/. FUD Watch (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#20042829)

Lets have a Microsoft free week. If Microsoft is bashed or put on a pedestal then kill the story.
You know... at various times I've seen slashdot posts saying exactly the same thing, except about "Apple" or "iPhone" or "Google" or "Linux Desktop Readiness" and a bunch of other "overly hyped" or "repeatedly posted" topics.

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:/. FUD Watch (2, Insightful)

tha_mink (518151) | more than 7 years ago | (#20043689)

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.
Seriously though, this article is barely a "topic". It's a MS basher bashing MS. Which I fine I guess, but if you RTA, it's so weak and such a stretch that it's hardly worth mentioning. A guy gets up in a financial meeting, spouts a whole bunch of corporate speak, and the article_author calls it FUD. It wasn't really FUD though in my option, it was just crap. So what's the big deal, find me one corporate financial meeting where there isn't some stiff spouting about how and why they're the best company in the best financial position. Jesus.

Re:/. FUD Watch (-1, Redundant)

Ngarrang (1023425) | more than 7 years ago | (#20043035)

I would be all for banning Microsoft from slashdot for an entire month. Certainly there are other topics of geek interest (Transformers) that we could be discussing (GNOME vs. KDE) that could fill the void (Linux vs. BSD) left by Microsoft nay-sayers.

Re:/. FUD Watch (3, Insightful)

MobileTatsu-NJG (946591) | more than 7 years ago | (#20043923)

"Lets have a Microsoft free week. If Microsoft is bashed or put on a pedestal then kill the story."

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.

Re:/. FUD Watch (5, Funny)

Joe Snipe (224958) | more than 7 years ago | (#20043093)

This is as bad as the guy at work that keeps talking about his ex-wife, who he divorced 15 years ago

I didn't divorce her, she divorced ME! Apparantly you listen as well as she does; one time I had asked her to pick up our daughter at soccer practice, as I had a late meeting and I wouldn't be able to get her, and do you know where she went? Do you? She went to the hairdresser! My daughter is standing out at the soccer field in the rain and she is off gettting her hair tinted. Can you believe it?

Re:/. FUD Watch (4, Funny)

WED Fan (911325) | more than 7 years ago | (#20043313)

Joe, give it a rest, just let it go, she's gone, she got the house, the car, and she married her best girlfriend. So, you turned her gay, so what?

Re:/. FUD Watch (1)

Jaqenn (996058) | more than 7 years ago | (#20043615)

Why, Why, Why is this modded 'Informative'?

Re:/. FUD Watch (0, Offtopic)

bennomatic (691188) | more than 7 years ago | (#20044189)

This actually made me laugh out loud. Mostly stuff that's rated as "funny" is only enough to get me to type "LOL".

Fear, uncertainty and doubt... (0, Offtopic)

DiamondGeezer (872237) | more than 7 years ago | (#20042275)

Novell produces lots of FUD, but unfortunately only in its employees and customers.

Re:Fear, uncertainty and doubt... (1)

Opportunist (166417) | more than 7 years ago | (#20042563)

So does MS. The only reason why MS can also influence their non-customers and people who would love to do without MS is that you simply can't ignore them in the IT.

slashdot watch (0, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#20042289)

for all the fud spread by kdawson on his political rants.

Microsoft aren't entirely truthful? (5, Funny)

HappySmileMan (1088123) | more than 7 years ago | (#20042301)

I think I may have seen a story like that somewhere else on /.

What we need is more stories comparing Linux and Windows, preferablt by someone getting paid by either Microsoft or a Linux vendor, that's another topic that's hardly ever covered here

FUD (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#20042311)

I'm sick of hearing of this acronym. Can't you just give it a rest? It's so very 90s to be complaining about "FUD". And a very shallow analysis.

Re:FUD (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#20043321)

Just like politicians use words like 'racist' and 'sexist' to defeat arguments they know they cant win, without actually making any point or disproving them in any way, 'FUD' is a term that Slashbots like to use if they want to instantly discredit something they don't want to hear, without having to think up a real argument. Other words that fall into this category are 'fanboy', 'zealot' and 'shill', although there are many others.

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 (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#20043515)

That is unfortunately very true.

Oh wow what a worthless site (4, Insightful)

Sciros (986030) | more than 7 years ago | (#20042313)

Taking PR statements and criticizing them for being PR speak is #3 on the "10 dumbest ways to spend your time" list that I made a minute ago. Honestly, when I find a large company with a PR department that *doesn't* make exactly the same sort of statements Microsoft's does, I'm going to try really hard to make it back to this reality from the alternate one I somehow ended up in.

Hi we are Microsoft Watch and we spread FUD about their FUD, please FUD our FUD by FUDDING some FUD, preferably via FUD.

Re:Oh wow what a worthless site (0, Redundant)

Aladrin (926209) | more than 7 years ago | (#20042353)

I'm guessing #1 on that list is 'making lists mere moments before posting to Slashdot just to be able to reference the list in the post.'

Re:Oh wow what a worthless site (2, Funny)

Sciros (986030) | more than 7 years ago | (#20042375)

No that's #4. But what you just did was #2 :-) yes I wins! :thumbs up:

Re:Oh wow what a worthless site (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#20042539)

#1 is win in a discussion in the Internet. Wait, that's actually #1 for any set of rules ever.

Re:Oh wow what a worthless site (1)

Sciros (986030) | more than 7 years ago | (#20042725)

No no, #1 is engage in that same discussion and LOSE. Gotta be.

Re:Oh wow what a worthless site (4, Insightful)

MontyApollo (849862) | more than 7 years ago | (#20042395)

Yeah, I agree.

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.

Re:Oh wow what a worthless site (2, Informative)

Wylfing (144940) | more than 7 years ago | (#20042867)

FUD has kinda of lost all meaning

No "kinda" about it. Few people understand this term anymore. The term FUD originally indicated a specific marketing technique popularized by IBM in the 1970s and 1980s but now has been diluted to mean anything that is untrue or which has a disagreeable agenda. (I liken it to the use of "unique," which no longer means "one of a kind" but instead seems to mean "rare.")

Re:Oh wow what a worthless site (1)

Dr. Smoove (1099425) | more than 7 years ago | (#20044217)

Agreed. FUD would be like an ad that shows a plane crashing, with the words "Kernel panic" on the panels, and the print would say "Do you want to be here when your Kernel Panics? Sponsored by Microsoft 2007, Copyright Microsoft(TM)."

Re:Oh wow what a worthless site (1)

nacturation (646836) | more than 7 years ago | (#20042907)

They even went into detail to explain why each statement was FUD, and that made them look even more pathetic and clueless.
But it apparently got you to click through and most likely allow them to deliver banner impressions.
 

Re:Oh wow what a worthless site (2, Insightful)

Holmwood (899130) | more than 7 years ago | (#20042475)

I agree with the parent. This is FUD? That's just plain silly. It's PRspeak, and fairly dull PRspeak at that.

Moreover, I actually think what they said about phones was sensible. From TFA:

Some people want a phone where it's easy to dial. People want different sets of capabilities, and a bunch of people want a full QWERTY keyboard.


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:Oh wow what a worthless site (1)

Thwomp (773873) | more than 7 years ago | (#20042533)

Some of the comments gave me a good laugh though:

Microsoft would prefer not to have DRM but because the Entertainment industries have such control over the content and how it is distributed, they must respect their wishes. Unless Linux which steals and distributes content without the authors permission - that is the type of society you live in Chips, being a thief! Which programs are broken in Vista Chips??? You are the same person who said you don't use Windows - stop telling lies hypocrite or stop mistaking the garbage that is Linux for the best desktop OS on the market (Windows). If you are referring to third party applications that do not work, have the common sense to check the manufacturers website for updates. 2000 applications are fully certified for Windows Vista, 2.1 million devices are fully certified for Vista.

Even applications on Linux tend to break when you upgrade to a new version of the OS. There is no support in hardware and commercial software industry for Linux compared to Windows. Who wants to use a stupid OS like Linux that requires that you compile every mouse click you make on it, whether its to import pictures, write a document, browse the web, installing it is like wasting your time. All my devices are supported out of the box Vista, plug my digi cam in boom, they pop right up in Photo Gallery. Play a DVD, pop it in boom, it opens in Media Player. No need to be using illegal codecs like Linux, I can play CD without feeling guilty. Connect to a wireless network, boom, no compiling, no headache, no Linux! I want to surf the internet, not be a computer scientist - that is Linux mantra, have PHD to use a PC! Lame!

I would post more but then I'd need to move my mouse and I can't be arsed with the recompile.

Re:Oh wow what a worthless site (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#20042657)

A wonderful example of allowing yourself to be trolled, cross-website style.

And not even by a very good troll, by one that has quite a bit of age on it.

Completely agree. (1)

Vellmont (569020) | more than 7 years ago | (#20042547)

The link is just spin on spin, which I find totally worthless. There's very few definitive statements being discussed here, more like "Microsoft is great, rah rah rah!". What can be said if that other than "Microsoft isn't great, rah rah rah!"

Re:Oh wow what a worthless site (1)

suv4x4 (956391) | more than 7 years ago | (#20042567)

Taking PR statements and criticizing them for being PR speak is #3 on the "10 dumbest ways to spend your time" list that I made a minute ago.

Possibly. It just goes to show, however how people can adapt to accept absolutely everything as normal, as long as there's lots of it everywhere around us.

We're shaping the reality around us. You can't judge things based on simply how prevalent they are. Judge them based on what you'd prefer they would.

Re:Oh wow what a worthless site (1)

iminplaya (723125) | more than 7 years ago | (#20042753)

They aren't criticizing. They are advertising. It's nothing more than lame parody, probably by Microsoft itself. At the very least paid for by them. And doubleclick keeps marking up the hits. Genius!

Remember folks,

127.0.0.1 ad.doubleclick.net

Re:Oh wow what a worthless site (1)

mwvdlee (775178) | more than 7 years ago | (#20042761)

The way I understood it is that for something to be FUD, it needs to create some degree fear, a bit of uncertainty and perhaps even cast doubt about a competitor's product. This is just marketese "we are the best" talk, not "our competitor's product will kill you" FUD.

Only worthless if we had a proper press (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#20043627)

Not like what exists today, press-release recyclers.

The simple fact is that PR speak has become the one and only source of information for news outlets around the world. When was the last time you saw a journalist actually question the lines fed to him by some PR agent?

Doesn't matter wether it is about. Best examples I just see are the RIAA press releases being swallowed completly by the press and having the RIAA PR speak as facts without doing even the simplest checking.

This was proven recently by a dutch story about a baby factory being opened in africa were couples could have a local woman bear their child.

Complete and utter nonsense it turned out to be, just a test to see how gullible the press is.

It has to be noted that the press did report the story that they had been duped but not a single journalist was fired, not a single editor was forced to admit incompetence.

ALL THE PRESS FAILED A SIMPLE TEST AND NOTHING HAPPENED.

Back to business as usual, gather the press releases from the in-folder, insert grammar mistakes and spelling errors (Do I qualify) and rehash even if 10 seconds ago you were typing a story that completly contradicts this one.

Yes it is sad that we live in a world were the statements made by companies (legal persons before the law) are considered by any sensible person to ALWAYS be lies AND that we accept this.

Yet this means that we also owe it to ourselves AND to everyone else to make sure that we keep repeating this constantly.

Because there are people who really believe you can win the war on drugs/terror/whatever, who do think that drinking brand X will get you the girls, who really believe that Britney Spears is on un-employment because of piracy and who really do think MS Windows is the best OS ever and Apple just copied it all.

The basic duty of the press is to listen to what is being said and then check it and if it ain't correct say so. They don't just have to do it with politicians but with EVERYONE. If not, democracy will fail, the press, the working press is the guardian of democracy but for all that sentiment it is nothing more then people saying "you said this, and I know that ain't so".

Re:Oh wow what a worthless site (1)

bigpicture (939772) | more than 7 years ago | (#20044121)

It is the fine art of appearing to say something without really saying anything that someone can successfully sue you for. So it is not about saying my company is great, and produces great products. It is about saying their company sucks and produces lousy products, and if you buy their products or business model, instead of mine, you are taking a great risk.

You would think that by now the human race would have smartened up to the hucksters, but apparently not, it is still go with our brand and you get to heaven, and go with their brand and you go to hell. How long has this been going on?

way to go (5, Funny)

flynt (248848) | more than 7 years ago | (#20042319)

Pointing out MS FUD is like taking home the drunkest, ugliest girl in the bar. Yah, you did it, but no one is impressed.

Re:way to go (3, Funny)

Himring (646324) | more than 7 years ago | (#20042425)

Did you see her again or was it just a one nighter?

Re:way to go (1, Funny)

WED Fan (911325) | more than 7 years ago | (#20042453)

But, dude, did you have to marry her? Even after you found out she was your sister?

Re:way to go (2, Funny)

Dystopian Rebel (714995) | more than 7 years ago | (#20042483)

Pointing out MS FUD is like taking home the drunkest, ugliest girl in the bar. Yah, you did it, but no one is impressed.
But if she forces you to move out of the basement, your parents will be thrilled.

Re:way to go (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#20042487)

Ahem... that would be a #2 #6 combo. [slashdot.org] And if you think taking a girl home is about status, you're even more pathetic than I am.

-mcgrew

Re:way to go (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#20042577)

This being slashdot, what is this "girl" you refer to?

Re:way to go (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#20043207)

Pointing out FUD is important to help prepare the IT professional to address the issues when management gets taken in by them. Having clear reasons why it is FUD is critical!

fud? (0, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#20042337)

slashdot produces more fud these days than microsoft ever has.

Fixed that for ya!! (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#20042361)

"Not a day goes by when Slashdot doesn't manufacture a little fear, uncertainty and doubt about something.


There, fixed that for ya! Wouldn't want people to get the impression that Slashdot is "fair and balanced". When you are the #1 source of anti-MS FUD, ya'll gotta represent!!

Keep it real, yo!!

FUD? (4, Insightful)

apodyopsis (1048476) | more than 7 years ago | (#20042363)

I don't know abour FUD watch, but many of their press releases are so obfiscated, long winded, badly phrased and rambling I find it difficult to follow. Its like Sir Humphrey Appleby from "Yes Minister", it takes a moment to actually understand what the hell they are talking about.

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:FUD? (1)

apodyopsis (1048476) | more than 7 years ago | (#20042397)

darn! hit submit not preview. just to head off the /. pedants thats "obfuscated" and "for the life of me".

I know how picker the regulars can be so I thought I'd beat them to it and correct myself first. Ah the humiliation....

Re:FUD? (2, Funny)

Silver Sloth (770927) | more than 7 years ago | (#20042801)

I know how picker the regulars can be
Oh, the humour in irony.

Re:FUD? (4, Funny)

MontyApollo (849862) | more than 7 years ago | (#20042433)

Apparently "FUD" has become the new word for "spin"

Re:FUD? (2, Insightful)

Opportunist (166417) | more than 7 years ago | (#20042597)

Where's the difference? Both serve only one purpose: To make potential customers and investors think you have something worth stuffing money into when there is essentially nothing to see and they'd move along.

Re:FUD? (1)

Macthorpe (960048) | more than 7 years ago | (#20043361)

In general, FUD actually requires Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt, whereas saying "My product does x and x" doesn't really inspire fear in anybody, even if it's a lie.

Unless you're scared of features, in which case you have problems that even 'Microsoft-Watch' just can't cure.

Re:FUD? (1)

nacturation (646836) | more than 7 years ago | (#20043441)

Where's the difference? Both serve only one purpose: To make potential customers and investors think you have something worth stuffing money into when there is essentially nothing to see and they'd move along.
Such as "Linux is ready for the desktop" [yahoo.com] or something like that? :)
 

Re:FUD? (1)

hchaudh1 (963268) | more than 7 years ago | (#20042479)

Yayyy!!! for Humpy!

Re:FUD? (4, Funny)

kebes (861706) | more than 7 years ago | (#20042501)

Is it just me or do these guys find it impossible to speak english in a plain and simple fashion?
As part of the marketing department for a major corporation on the cutting-edge of deploying Web 2.0 applications, allow me to explain how best to interpret press releases. First, it is important to realize that the press release is not trying to merely inform you about upcoming product releases, it is trying to enlighten you about how you can best capitalize on your financial holdings by investing them in efficient products that deliver value-added productivity to your workforce. Essentially, it is a dialog between the customers and the product engineers. By encouraging this kind of customer engagement, the marketing team is able to create a synergistic expenditure of resources, where the customer needs are balanced against the fiduciary responsibilities of the product-developing company. This allows the company to recoup fixed costs while helping the customer achieve their full potential in a vital, thriving ecosystem of commercial activities.

I hope that clears things up!

Re:FUD? (4, Insightful)

st0nes (1120305) | more than 7 years ago | (#20042755)

many of their press releases are so obfiscated, long winded, badly phrased and rambling I find it difficult to follow.
I couldn't agree more. Their manuals are no better; here's an example from the C# programming manual:-

The ButtonProperty value is a string that represents the property name used by the installer to retrieve the value of the button group. This property can be referenced by custom launch conditions to make decisions concerning application installation. For example, if the ButtonProperty is set to Buttons, you create a launch condition that examines the value of the Buttons property. If the first radio button is selected, Buttons takes the value contained in the Button1Value property. Likewise, if the second radio button is selected, Buttons takes the value contained in the Button2Value property. Many of the customizable dialog boxes have similarly configurable properties, which allow you to create a rich and complex installation experience for your users.

Re:FUD? (1)

Zironic (1112127) | more than 7 years ago | (#20042977)

*makes a dechiffering attempt*

So does that mean that if I set ButtonProperty to Buttons (ButtonProperty=Buttons ?) and then later reference the value of Buttons I'm supposed to get the button the user pressed which I can use to decide what function to call?

Re:FUD? (2, Insightful)

st0nes (1120305) | more than 7 years ago | (#20043325)

I suspect that you are correct. If so, you should immediately apply to MS for a technical authoring job at an astronomical salary -- you managed to explain it more clearly in about a quarter of the words. Incidentally, we now know that when Windows installation breaks, it isn't a bug, it's a "...a rich and complex installation experience."

Re:FUD? (2, Insightful)

wvmarle (1070040) | more than 7 years ago | (#20043597)

[..], which allow you to create a rich and complex installation experience for your users.

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? (1)

Blakey Rat (99501) | more than 7 years ago | (#20043389)

Try reading anything from IBM. I used to have to deal with them, simply finding a driver on their website involved reading paragraph after paragraph of vague business-ese and following links that went everywhere *except* the driver. It was enough to drive you mad.

Re:FUD? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#20044275)

Obfudcated?

News, advertisement, or FUD? (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#20042383)

Is this news? Seriously, one big advertisement or, *ahem* fud. Next thing you know, Starbucks or Wal-Mart will have a slashdot "news" story.

Ziff Davis is teh suxx (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#20042401)

When will they learn? It's frickin 2007!!!!

They look like it's 1997. Way to go guys!

What am I talking about?

This! http://img65.imageshack.us/img65/622/screenshotuk1 .png [imageshack.us]

Re:Ziff Davis is teh suxx (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#20042921)

Oh gawd. Yet another technical wannbe, who only knows how to push buttons and hasn't got a single clue as to what those buttons do.

You know, like Homer Simpson.

Spare us the Web 2.0 crap. There are lots reasons why you don't want to use Web 2.0. And anyone who only knows how to bring up a javascript/flash/puke website without being able to fallback gracefully is utterly incompetent and ought to be fired. But mostly they'll be outsourced by an H1-B who doesn't know anything either, so that at least is nice to know.

Spare me the weak attempt at trying to present yourself as one of the technical elite. Your attempt is laughable.

Re:Ziff Davis is teh suxx (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#20043945)

Not talking any intarweb 2.0 here Homer... I'm talking about the internet standards.

http://w3.org/ [w3.org]

FUD? (1, Funny)

warmgun (669556) | more than 7 years ago | (#20042469)

Wow, I'm a noob. All this time I thought FUD stood for fucked up data. I need to study this list [wikipedia.org] !

Re:FUD? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#20043455)

GR8, 10q 4 the list and DW, AAMOF, I was 404 on FUD 2 FFS. HAND, KTHXBYE.
EOM

But this is Apple FUD... (0, Redundant)

malevolentjelly (1057140) | more than 7 years ago | (#20042571)

Yay! The only thing that can adequately combat Microsoft FUD- Apple FUD!

Can we go do something else now?

No one is just "anti-microsoft"- they're either pro-mac, or pro-linux. Anti-FUD is also FUD. It's just as stupid to read. And none of those Microsoft statements were even FUD- just marketing talk from a large corporation. Apple does this kind of crap all the time- as does Novell, or Sun.

We are pro-lotsastuff (2, Funny)

pentalive (449155) | more than 7 years ago | (#20043629)

No one is just "anti-microsoft"- they're either pro-mac, or pro-linux.
I am pro-Commodore 64 you insensitive clod. (Now You Kids GET OFF MY GRASS!!)

Microsoft have failure after failure (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#20042601)

That's the amazing thing, outside of their Windows and Office franchise they have seas of red ink. Now that Vista is doing badly and office is a yawn, even their core products look shaky.

So let them FUD, because FUD is all they'll have soon.

Re:Microsoft have failure after failure (1)

gilesjuk (604902) | more than 7 years ago | (#20042965)

The best thing is when Microsoft pay for marketing for someone else's product then hint that it is due to their products that the product was possible. Even though the product in question can run on any OS.

Claiming successes in markets they are trying to get into by partnering with people who are already in that market.

RayOzzie == "more of the same" (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#20042721)

Ray Ozzie got his job because he worked alongside Dave Cutler at Digital, and he pretty much worships the Microsoft Way. Don't expect change from Ray Ozzie. Ray Ozzie made a career out of re-implementing VAX Notes. Twice so far, and neither successfully. He is overrated, and his image is overhyped. Heck, Bill Gates has better taste and better instincts for what makes good software. Microosft will continue down a path of FUDing and bullying based on their financial and market strength.

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.

Good Idea (4, Interesting)

RAMMS+EIN (578166) | more than 7 years ago | (#20042803)

Well, since the overall reaction so far has been very negative, I'll chime in and say that I think this is a very good idea.

FUD is a Bad Thing. It causes people to take decisions based on the wrong information. Short of getting really draconic, we can't very much prevent FUD from being spread. In that light, I feel the best we can do is make sure that the truth is also out there. That way, we can at least hope that people stumble accros the truth, or we can point them at it when we find they have been misled.

All this has nothing to do with Microsoft, apart from the fact that Microsoft spreads FUD. It would be a good idea to do the same for people and organizations that aren't Microsoft.

What's also a good idea is to back up any claims you make with references. And spend some time on the visual aspects of our writings. In order to beat the FUD, we not only need to spread the truth, we also need to make it clear that it _is_ the truth. We could do worse than looking trustworthy.

Re:Good Idea (1)

mwvdlee (775178) | more than 7 years ago | (#20042873)

The reaction's been negative because this simply isn't FUD. If you're going to call every single bit of marketese "FUD", pretty soon the term will be meaningless. If you're going to be hatin' Microsoft, then atleast try to remain honest and truthful yourself.

Re:Good Idea (1)

phoenixwade (997892) | more than 7 years ago | (#20043447)

The reaction's been negative because this simply isn't FUD. If you're going to call every single bit of marketese "FUD", pretty soon the term will be meaningless. If you're going to be hatin' Microsoft, then at least try to remain honest and truthful yourself.
Ah, so sorry, the FUD moniker became a meaningless term about 50 seconds after it was coined.

For a term to have meaning, it must have a scope and we must agree on the scope for it to be useful. I believe FUD has failed in both cases. The term developed scope creep (thus it had an ever widening scope) and it developed marketing spin (thus having no set meaning, and frequently wagged the dog, as it were) from the onset of popular usage.

  I still try to use it on occasion. My preference is to either create FUD about FUD, or for it's humor value (come to think of it, that's redundant, sorry about that...).

Re:Good Idea (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#20043003)

All this has nothing to do with Microsoft, apart from the fact that Microsoft spreads FUD...

What's also a good idea is to back up any claims you make with references.


I don't usually post on /., but that was just too ironic to pass up. Have a good day.

You're right (1)

DogDude (805747) | more than 7 years ago | (#20043347)

You're right. FUD everywhere is bad.

I just turned off adblock for a second to see the ads that Slashdot trys to show me. The one main ad at the top of the page is creating Fear in me by indicating that integrating Tomcat, Axis, and other things may be too complicated for me to "get stuff done". FUD is a geek phrase. It means nothing. FUD = marketing. Yawn.

Re:Good Idea (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#20043521)

Did you even read the article?

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:Good Idea (1)

tknd (979052) | more than 7 years ago | (#20044259)

So what happens when the fud watchers spew out fud? Do they then watch their own fud and create an infinite loop?

This is a terrible idea because it's like fighting fire with fire.

Unresponsiveness and inaction on /.'s part... (5, Interesting)

djpretzel (891427) | more than 7 years ago | (#20042833)

I'm seeing more people respond negatively lately to what has gradually degenerated into a Microsoft hate-fest in terms of FUD accusations, etc. Rational *nix and Microsoft folk alike seem to acknowledge hypocrisy and finger-pointing, in this case manifesting itself in yet another utterly banal piece of journalistic blood from a stone, a Microsoft Watch "news item". Who-watches-the-watchers comments aside, are /. staff ever going to take steps to reduce this type of flotsam? I'm looking at the upper left corner of my screen right now, and right next to the /. logo is the purported mantra: "News for nerds. Stuff that matters." I consider myself a nerd of sorts, I suppose, but I fail to see how Microsoft issuing generic press releases that would compare equitably to any other company, software or otherwise, "news for me." I also have a hard time grasping how it could possibly "matter", given the frequency and quantity at which it occurs. It's certainly "stuff", no argument there... Bottom line, this seems to be a never-ending cycle that only /. staff can break. If they don't attempt to deliver on the site's motto, I don't know who's going to.

Re:Unresponsiveness and inaction on /.'s part... (0, Troll)

plague3106 (71849) | more than 7 years ago | (#20043019)

You're right, and thanks for pointing this out. The linux zealots here have taken over and you rarely hear any reasonable arguements. Its most of the reason I don't subscribe; why pay to have pointless arguements with zealots?

Re:Unresponsiveness and inaction on /.'s part... (1)

rossifer (581396) | more than 7 years ago | (#20043315)

Have you been reading this discussion at all? Everyone's been pretty consistent:
  • These PR statements are not FUD, just typical PR-speak.
  • "Microsoft Watch" column is lame.
  • Please move along.
  • Nothing to see here.
So, what were you complaining about again?

Nice Slashvertisement (1, Funny)

goldspider (445116) | more than 7 years ago | (#20042933)

Preaching to the anti-Microsoft choir; it's not just for Slashdot karma anymore!

Why can't we (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#20042985)

all just die! Our lives are just wasted living anyway.

Oh man (1)

bytesex (112972) | more than 7 years ago | (#20043061)

These people have way too much time..

Mistaken methodology (surprise!) (1)

going_the_2Rpi_way (818355) | more than 7 years ago | (#20043157)

We look at who said what and why it's FUD.

And that's your first mistake. Never heard of confirmation bias?

Dissapointing and misleading article title... (2, Funny)

iBod (534920) | more than 7 years ago | (#20043365)

I thought for a minute that MS had released a new product: "The Microsoft FUD Watch". i.e. Something you could strap to your wrist and monitor the amount of FUD present in any particular technology sector at that very instant - as well as being able to tell the time, set alarms etc.

The only thinn more disappointing... (1)

iBod (534920) | more than 7 years ago | (#20043401)

...is my spelling.

...and my typing (1)

iBod (534920) | more than 7 years ago | (#20043437)

However, the strength of the beer here more than lives up to expectations

Business is was (1)

ch-chuck (9622) | more than 7 years ago | (#20043377)

Well, business is a cold war and FUD is the propaganda and disinformation it is waged with.

Re:Business is was (1)

Derek Loev (1050412) | more than 7 years ago | (#20043809)

If that's true, who's the French?

Slashdot's mission statement? (1)

BenJeremy (181303) | more than 7 years ago | (#20043561)

"...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"

Isn't this the first item?

Microsoft sent me a survey this weekend... (1)

Ang31us (1132361) | more than 7 years ago | (#20043639)

The IE6 on my desktop at home was reporting errors when I closed it (probably some spyware gripping tightly to the dying browser), so I finally decided to install IE7 and they asked me if I would fill out a survey about my satisfaction with Microsoft products and services...gave them a piece of my mind about the "patent infringements" they won't detail and their FUD campaign against open source technology.

I'm so glad that Microsoft has abandoned enforcement of their "patents" against companies like RedHat and IBM.

In my survey response, I told them that I would not purchase a single MS product (went on to list the OS, Office, Xbox360, SQL Server, Zune, Halo 2 PC, etc) until they detailed their "patent disputes" for response or resolution...not that I will make a difference to their bottom line, but if every consumer boycotted new Microsoft products...

Re:Microsoft sent me a survey this weekend... (1)

dave420 (699308) | more than 7 years ago | (#20043953)

Did you manage to get the sand out of your vagina, or is there still some left?

Re:Microsoft sent me a survey this weekend... (1)

Ang31us (1132361) | more than 7 years ago | (#20044331)

More like a kidney stone in my urethra...no, it's still lodged in there all bloody and painful.

Old models don't work (4, Insightful)

dwarfking (95773) | more than 7 years ago | (#20043983)

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.

FUD about Microsoft. (2, Interesting)

Animats (122034) | more than 7 years ago | (#20044051)

If you want to spread fear, uncertainty and doubt about Microsoft products, point out that Dell went back to shipping Windows XP instead of Vista. Mention the problems with Vista activation. With the "tilt bit" that can kill your system. With Vista phoning home. (Do you want a system that regularly and secretly contacts Microsoft in your business?)

Wouldn't it make sense to wait and see about Vista? Wouldn't that be the safe thing to do? Do you want to take the risk of using a defective operating system in your business?

Microsoft FUD Watch? (1)

fleck_99_99 (223900) | more than 7 years ago | (#20044055)

Is that anything like the Microsoft SPOT Watch [windowsfordevices.com] ?
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>