Wow, where to begin?  The best evidence of information suppression comes from 
technical sleuth and court testimony that is old by necessity.  Almost 
everything Microsoft says about itself is a lie designed to convice people 
that they should trust all of their personal information to Microsoft's care 
and control.  This is not normal advertising, of the Coke variety which is 
designed to raise awareness and positive associations about a product.  No, 
Microsoft goes the extra mile to smear  other companies and perceived 
"competitors".  They spend billions on this alone.  The malice goes beyond 
words, though.  In the past, they have broken software from other vendors and 
lied about it in online forums.   That is information suppression and it's 
precisely the kind of thing Google gets around.  

You only have to look at their current home page for a mild examples of gross 
exaggeration and smear.  For their "Plays for Sure" music campain, they say 
"More Music, More Choices".  That's a funny thing to say about music formats 
that only play on Microsoft platforms.  It also implies negative and untrue 
things about their nearest "competitor" in DRM crippled music.  

It's one thing to say you are better than your competitors and not be able to 
deliver on your promisses but another to cause the problems in the first 
place then blame your competitor.  They did just that to DRDos, and it was 
proven in court.  See here for more:

http://www.kickassgear.com/Articles/Microsoft.htm

It happened ten years ago, but that's how long it takes to prove things in 
court.  They not only broke their competitor's software but orchestrated a PR 
campaign online to blame Digital Research for the problems they made.  It 
also proves that the "Barkto Incident" was not an abberation:

http://www.pjprimer.com/jihad.html

This happened around the roll out of Windoze 95.  They paid people to go on 
line and say bad things about OS/2 without revealing they worked for 
Microsoft.  Put the two together and you have a company that pays people to 
break software, lie about who's at fault and lie about other software in 
general.  

That should be enough to convice anyone that microsoft lies and tries to 
suppres the truth about their buggy junk..  They do so by flooding 
influential people with misinformation at critical times.  The same people do 
the same things and the effort continues, we can be sure.  

In blogs:
http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/05/02/1716251&tid=109&tid=149&tid=201

At Universities, they had M$ "Ambassadors"

They make up silly stories about how sucky Apple is:
http://slashdot.org/articles/02/10/15/0044255.shtml?tid=109

They continue to make up stories about how bad Linux is:
http://slashdot.org/features/99/04/23/1316228.shtml

We all know that free software and Linux are the new targets of Microsoft 
scorn.   We are all dreadfully familiar with the "Get the Facts" campaign, 
the SCO extortion attempt, and "think tanks" like the Alexis de Tocqueville 
Institution.  With all this effort and money going into calling free software 
unconstitutional, communist, terrorist supporting, expensive, difficult, 
buggy, do you really think they want people to find the truth with a quick 
little google search?

Google busts M$ BS directly and indirectly.  Because Google rates sites by 
merit.  Microsoft can blast the same message out in dozens of Wintel rags, 
hundreds of robot written blogs and thousands of botnet forum posts, but the 
truth about anything will float to the top of a Google search.  That's a 
direct bust.  The indirect bust is what I just engaged in.  Google has given 
me a much better memory for events than I'd have without Google.  It's easy 
to look back and discover patterns of behavior which should be projected into 
the present.  

Once again, I'm getting ahead of myself.  Today, I wanted to prove that 
Microsoft lies and suppresses correct information through Astroturf.  Am I 
loopy?  What mistakes have I made above?  Tomorrow or the next day, I'll look 
more into how Google breaks this behavior and how Microsoft hates that.


On Saturday 01 October 2005 04:12 pm, Will Hill wrote:
> The first proof is that Microsoft wants, and has, suppressed negative
> information about itself. ?That's easy because there's a long trail of
> Astroturf out there and Microsoft spends lots of money on disinformation. ?

Reply via email to