On 2/7/07, Sandip Bhattacharya <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Anupam Jain wrote: > > I really don't understand what the big deal is. If the agenda was > > sabotaged by Microsoft by just being a partrner/sponsor then let's > > hear it in concrete terms *how*. > > This was supposed to be a Linux promotion event. This was not "IT 2007" > or the like, where everybody related to software have the right to be > there and heard. So, is it fair that we expect that the event would be > about companies promoting Linux as a platform of choice? > > Whether you have Microsoft's own .Net event, or IBM's own developerworks > events, do you see parties with an alternative to offer, to get a chance > to come, show off their wares and talk about how their offering is > better than the one which is the centerpiece of the event? It never > happens. It is a convention, if you want to put it that way. This was a > Linux event - we are not interested in going to the event hearing people > talk about something belittling what we are interested in.
Exactly! Linuxers would go to the event and ignore whatever crap is doled out by the MS drones. Did their sponsorship affect our thinking at all? No! They know that and we know that. They just have money to burn and fear FOSS enough to try out everything they can, even futile things. Why bother? Why all the infighting? > > Now "Linuxers" are a breed apart. They are philosophically attached to > their platform of choice, and believe that what closed source offers is > an anti-thesis of what Linuxers stand for. Having a closed source > company whose whole business purpose is to undermine Linux [1], talk in > such a meet is preposterous. You can't underrate sentiments and > philosophy when you are talking Linux and call it out of place in a > business world - it is the fundamental base on which the Free and Open > Source movement was founded, Linux being but a part of it. > First, there are millions of Linuxers out there who do not believe in RMS's FOSS philosophy (I *do* BTW). They use Linux and Windows happily, whatever gets their work done. There is an equally large group of people who are confused and/or scared by the staunch philosophy that underlies FOSS. They use Linux because it's Free as in beer and not as in speech. They are comfortable with it and call Linux their own without attachment to any philosophy. There is a huge group of people (Who prefer the term Open Source over Free Software) who use FOSS solely for its practical utility, people who believe that Open Source is simply the best way to get work done. There are also people who differ with RMS and you and me on the definition of Freedom and the direction Linux should take. Linux based companies, Linux User Groups, and Linux Events do and should cater to all the above people, even if you and I do not think they match our philosophy. > Our anger is because we see Microsoft knowingly entering into this event > and sabotaging it from within - we are still trying to determine whether > LA cares about it or not. From LA's side of the story, they are still > trying to defend their actions instead of apologizing for the > embarrassment their decision has cost the Linux community in India. I still do not see why they should apologise, and I really hope they don't. > You can't blame the media - the media sees from the common man's > viewpoint. What else can you make out from Microsoft participating in a > Linux event and a Microsoft spokesman talking about how M$ is better > than Linux in TCO? We see things the same way that Media sees it. > > If LA believes that their actions were right and they have "effectively" > handled the situation, then this is point where the LUG and LA should > part ways permanently - their idea of what promotion of Linux is about, > and ours obviously differs. They have the right to continue doing what > they are doing. And we have the right to go our own way doing what we > feel is right. That would indeed be a sad event, but more importantly, a completely avoidable one, *if* people let their ego go a little. I liked ILUGD better when it wasn't committee-ised and decisions were not taken by individuals for the whole LUG. The freedom to fork is good but not the decision to do so on the slightest of provocation. It's not prudent to fragment the community like this. Regards, Anupam Jain _______________________________________________ ilugd mailinglist -- ilugd@lists.linux-delhi.org http://frodo.hserus.net/mailman/listinfo/ilugd Archives at: http://news.gmane.org/gmane.user-groups.linux.delhi http://www.mail-archive.com/ilugd@lists.linux-delhi.org/
