[KLUG Advocacy] Re: [KLUG Members] New York Times Endorses Linux

[Robert G. Brown]

>>>>http://www.nytimes.com/2002/09/18/opinion/18WED2.html
>>>>This is on the Editorial Page of the New York Times today.
>>>>Not a news article, or a guest opinion, but the position of
>>>>the newspaper itself on the topic.
>>>It seems a strange position for a producer of copyrighted material to take, 
>>>very much out of stride with the rest of the industry.
>>Yeah, the Times is like that.
>>>Maybe they actually get the fact that in the end reduced openness will
>>>hurt them too, and badly (IMHO).
>>I think they understand what's coming. Thier own website is a good example.
>How so?
They own a lot of the content on their website, and they give most of it away. 
They do require a (free) registration, but they reserve the right to impose
fees at a later date. They alsio use the site to sell books and other products,
and items from their own archives, as well.

The Times still views what they are doing as something of an experiment in how
to use the net to their own advantage. They have a good attitude about it, in
that they recognize a mixture of interests at stake: public service, corporate
interests, and the demands of a new medium.

>>>then why not endorse Apple,  
>>Commerical organization. The Times has a policy about this.
>Makes sense.  Seems they would have endorsed "alternatives" and been
>open-ended about it.  But maybe they have some noisy Linux advocates
>floating about.
They do, I know one of them! :)
The Times is not likely to be "open-ended" about anything. These are very 
down-to-earth, pragmatic people. Most of their time is spent assembling a 
product that's going out the door in less than 24 hours. This enforces a
practical mindset. 

>>>come out with a position on the M$ monoplity trial, etc...
>>They did!
>In the article?  
No, but they did publish editorials that took the position of the
government (at the time) during the trial, and they liked (editorially, now)
Jacksons decision.

I feel that overall, these people beleive in Capitalism in it's best sense,
they have historically preferred more or less level playing fields (even 
their own), and beleive that competition will result in the survival of the
best products, at reasonable prices. They also understand an acknowledge 
the absense of competition when they see it.

>They said the solution didn't address the problem, 
>which I suppose is a position. 
Know their style, this is a vieled reference to earlier editorials on the 
topic.

>If they had an earlier stronger one I either missed it or forgot it.
Probably missed it, unless you read the Editorial page religiously.

						Regards,
						---> RGB <---