So, if open source says it, it's not FUD?

I will admit it: I think Microsoft and other proprietary companies are often guilty of spreading FUD (Fear, Uncertainty, Doubt) about open source. Microsoft did it recently with its "number-crunching" on Firefox security and on Linux security. To me it's clear: proprietary software companies feel threatened by open source and react with FUD.

But is the inverse also true? Do open-source companies/projects/developers do the same thing about Microsoft and other proprietary companies? Of course they/we do. Some of it may well be based on good information and given for good reasons, but I'm not sure the open-source world has cornered the market on good intentions. Somehow it's considered OK to FUD one way but not the other.

A double standard? Thoughts?

[Savio.Rodrigues]

Hmm...I haven't heard much FUD from OSS vendors...it's more along the lines of "that software you're using sucks, ours is better and cheaper". Sometimes this is true, at other times, it all depends on the problem at hand.

But hey, OSS is just another part of the software market...and FUD has long been part of the software market. There is no need for OSS vendors to be morally superior. This isn't politics ;-)

[dclower]

I'd have to say that ALL software companies engage in some sort of FUD, Microsoft just seems to have perfected it's execution (plus, they are the 800 pound Gorilla). All vendors try to position their products as competitively as possible against the competition which accounts for the U and D, it's the F in FUD that Microsoft seems to do so well.

[rfuller2007]

vendor lock-in, inability to innovate, slow release cycles.....all true to some extent but unfair to generalize.