Hardware 2.0

Adrian Kingsley-Hughes

Microsoft trains Best Buy "Linux assassins"

By Adrian Kingsley-Hughes | September 9, 2009, 4:12am PDT

Summary: A whistle-blower over on Overclock.net has posted details of how Best Buy staff are trained to counter buyers’ interest in the Linux operating system.

A whistle-blower over on Overclock.net has posted details of how Best Buy staff are trained to counter buyers’ interest in the Linux operating system.

A forum member identifying themselves as GodofGrunts posted a series of screenshots from the “Linux vs Windows 7″ module of Microsoft’s ExpertZone training package.

As I worked my way through the screenshots I was disturbed by the increasing amounts of FUD that was being used under the guise of “information” to discredit Linux.

Next –>

Page 1 of 2

More from “Hardware 2.0”

Today Only! HP to provide real-time support to Snow Leopard upgraders

Apple iPod lineup revamp

Topics

Best Buy Co. Inc., Microsoft Corp., Linux, UNIX, Operating Systems, Open Source, Software, Adrian Kingsley-Hughes

Adrian Kingsley-Hughes is an internationally published technology author who has devoted over a decade to helping users get the most from technology.

Full Bio
Disclosure
Contact

Vendor HotSpot

Here to help you with your Document Management Needs

Read the DocuMentor blog now

Learn More »

Talkback Most Recent of 159 Talkback(s)

Follow via:: RSS; Email Alert

it's about netbook

( 2nd slide ) so macos isnt in the equation.

considering it is commercial material, with no
pretention of beeing unbiased, i don't see that
much FUD. But slides this small are hard to read i
perhaps missed some.

could you be more specific ?
s_souche
9th Sep 2009
- Reply to
- Flag
There is unfortunately

There is a slide boasting that Windows is safer than Linux. For how much I despise the OS, I'll admit that Linux is safer than Windows on it's own. However, Windows can be just a secure if you know what your doing.

There is also another slide about driver and software compatibility, which I don't see as FUD, there are limited software choices with *Nix compared to Windows. I can't speak for driver compatibility though.
Cylon Centurion
9th Sep 2009
- Reply to
- Flag
Limited software choices?

I haven't been limited at all. I have many choices in just about every category of software. Now if you mean limited by the fact that it doesn't run Windows software then I'm equally limited on Windows and the Linux software that I use and it doesn't run.
storm14k
9th Sep 2009
- Flag
Vast difference in magnitude

Bad comparison. You may have 'choices' in your software on Linux, but few if any offer any functionality beyond what is offered in Windows, and those that try, are at best poor clones. THat point aside, while you may be limited in not running Linux apps in Windows, there are very few of those compared to the vast software library that is available for Windows and not Linux. You CAN say the same for both platforms, but the sheer numbers of one dwarf the other. Thus, we dismiss your comment as pure fanboyism.

"The views expressed here are mine and do not reflect the official opinion of my employer or the organization through which the Internet was accessed."
gnesterenko
2nd Oct 2009
- Flag
Fighting FUD with FUD?

For how much FUD Microsoft has to face from both Mac and Linux users, I'm shocked to see them doing the same. There is always one idiot to ruin everything for everyone else. However, I will admit for how much of it they included in the slides, there are a lot of truths in there as well.

Linux has a long way to go to offer the desktop experience Windows does. It needs to quit being the "Me too" OS it is. Windows/Office offers a better, grander desktop experience, whereas Linux brings almost nothing to the table and lags behind MS and Apple. People criticize Microsoft for changing a lot of things, and doing this and that, but all I have to say is there are reasons for that, Linux has been the same thing since 1998. There is a reason why they do all the studies that they do. Change can be a good thing
Until then, Linux will always remain a niche OS limited to the few who bought it with their netbooks or the 1337's who would rather use it over Windows and Mac. It just doesn't offer much.
Cylon Centurion
9th Sep 2009
- Reply to
- Flag
Stop drinking the bong water...

it has clearly affected your brain. Linux is the same since 1998? How many brain cells did you have to kill off to come up with that? We can both agree that Linux in the server room is, and will probably always be, a better fit than Linux on the desktop. Why? Because that's what it was designed for from the kernel up. But to claim Linux hasn't changed since 1998 only proves one thing...you haven't used Linux since 1998. Run along and stick to the Windows articles where you may have something relevant to contribute. You're clearly out of your league here.
jasonp@...
9th Sep 2009
- Reply to
- Flag
I wouldn't say linux was designed for the server

Unix first lived for the workstation market,
that is the desktop. Linux was designed as a
unix clone ( so desktop ) for commodity boxes (
desktop ).

It has evolved into a server OS because unix
was more fit for it than it was for desktop,
especially because unix vendors did not invest
seriously in GUI past 1995 or so...

Linux only made important enhancement in its
desktop experience in the recent past.
s_souche
9th Sep 2009
- Flag
No such thing as "desktop market"

When Unix was first written, it was for the minicomputer, from the likes of DEC and Data General - what we would call a "server" today - although I knew of versions for the Sperry Univac 1108 and UYK-7. There weren't desktop computers, although the HP 9845 and similar weren't that many years off, they didn't yet exist. The nearest thing to a desktop computer was probably the Wang multi-station electronic calculator (the geeks delighted in telling the secretaries to keep their hands off their wangs). The Unix workstation came later.
IT_User
9th Sep 2009
- Flag
Perhaps

I over exaggerated a little, but my point was Linux offers very little, if any innovation compared with Microsoft and Apple. Personally, I think Microsoft should concentrate on this point rather than fighting FUD with FUD.

And yes, I agree that Linux is a better fit in the server room than on the desktop.
Cylon Centurion
9th Sep 2009
- Flag
Um, have you actually *USED* it?

You know, more than just it booting up, moving around the mouse then
concluding it is deficient? grab a Dell Inspiron laptop and 9/10, all the
parts will be supported out of the box with the latest kernel (as of
2.6.30.6, all the components of the Inspiron 1318 are supported
including sleep and suspend as well).

What is lacking from Linux is desktop orientated software from big name
vendors and the existing open source projects to lift their game when it
comes to making them easier to use. OpenOffice.org for all its progress
is till horrible - take a look at the preference dialogue to see what I
mean.
Macintoshtoffy
12th Sep 2009
- Flag
It fits on our desktops

We run Ubuntu desktops at our office and get by just fine. Desktop, some laptops. The servers are mostly CentOS.

And we don't really miss Windows. We have some Windows machines left. Accounting has one, there's a lonely XP workstation in the common area for webinars, most of that software is Windows only. Otherwise, everyone uses Ubuntu and everyone gets their work done.

I think that person is the next iteration of bit_byte. Then Ye, now that other dude is the resident Microsoft astroturfer. The user name changes every six months or so.
Chad_z
10th Sep 2009
- Flag
you are so right

Linux cannot match MS its impossible really
...

malware ,spyware,crapware, wga, vista and W7

your right Linux cannot achive what ms is doing
even if they wanted tooo its impossible your
right
Quebec-french
9th Sep 2009
- Reply to
- Flagged
Thats not what I meant

I guess you missed the part where I mentioned Windows can be just as secure as Linux if you know what you are doing. Knowledge is half the battle. (Hell, it is the battle.)
Cylon Centurion
9th Sep 2009
- Flag
He knew what you meant

he is just one of those that believed the FUD on Linux that it cannot be hacked, botnetted, et cetera.
GuidingLight
9th Sep 2009
- Flag
Oooh....so close...except you forgot....

...MARKET SHARE!

Linux cannot match MS its impossible really

You are sooooo right.

your right Linux cannot achive what ms is doing even if they wanted tooo its impossible your right

Right again. And it applies to one little phrase, which the Linux desktop has never known before, and probably won't know for a loooooooong time.....MARKET SHARE! Can't compare. No how, nowhere.
mgp3
9th Sep 2009
- Flag