Monday 01 July 2002

The shell game

shell game. A fraud or deception perpetrated by shifting conspicuous things to hide something else. (American Heritage Dictionary)

Burningbird points to Dave Winer’s post about Microsoft’s Palladium “technology” then sums up the Bush/Gates strategy:

While we give Bush et al high marks for “doing a good job”, our beloved president and his gang are selling this country to the highest bidder - in this case, Bill Gates and Microsoft. And as we let the Bush gang manipulate and discard the Constitution and our freedoms in order to wage “war on terrorism”, so now we’re allowing Microsoft do the same to wage war on hackers.

I searched long and hard tonight for some earlier scripting.com posts in which Dave Winer explained Microsoft’s Machiavellian strategy of manufacturing an artificial controversy in order to divert attention from a far more ambitious (and damaging) plan or policy. I wish I’d been able to find Dave’s essays; I recall thinking to myself at the time: “Yep, that’s so smart—of Microsoft to act that way and of Dave to draw our attention to it.”

And others are adopting Microsoft’s tactics. To explain how conservatives are publicly howling about the Pledge of Allegiance appellate decision—”but privately rubbing their hands with glee,” Salon’s Michelle Goldberg quotes Jamin Raskin, a professor of constitutional law at American University:

“There’s no doubt that the Republican Party is using the 9th Circuit opinion to change the subject from the ethical collapse of corporate America,” he says. “It’s classic Republican politics where the flag and God are used to replace issues of immediate concern to peoples’ lives. It’s the temporary triumph of cheap symbolic politics over dealing with the nation’s serious structural problems.”

But will installing Windows 2000 and refusing to buy Gates’ crippled computers be enough to stop the madness? And where is Steve Jobs in all of this?

Permalink

Comments

Are you kidding me, JD? Steve Jobs can't stir a single finger if it'll lose him Office for Mac.

He's going to have to come up with some kind of Palladium counter, though. If he's *smart*, he'll pass on the whole thing and pitch non-Palladiumized machines not at the consumer, but at the enterprise -- which is FAR more interested in keeping its internal workings quiet than is the average individual computer-buyer.

Let's see if he's smart.

Posted by: Dorothea Salo on 1 July 2002 at 07:24 AM

In theory OS X should be enough to take to the corporate desktop, but I wonder. There's so much heavy buy-in to the MS way of doing things.

And the Register has a series of articles on how MS is hamstringing Apple in the international market by refusing to provide right-to-left language support, e.g., for Hebrew. If MS can cripple Apple internationally, that will lose it a lot of people.

Posted by: Ginger on 1 July 2002 at 09:47 PM

This discussion is now closed. My thanks to everyone who contributed.

© Copyright 2002-2003 Jonathon Delacour