Microsoft Calls AdTI "Study" an "Unhelpful Distraction": Well, friends, we've won the Alexis de Tocqueville FUD war. It's official. In the face of a united community's repudiation of Ken Brown's "Samizdat" attack on Linus and Linux, Microsoft told the Wall St. Journal's reporter, Lee Gomes, the report wasn't helpful, leading Gomes to end his report, "Recent attacks on Linux come from dubious source", like this:

"With growing numbers of businesses turning to Linux, its pros and cons are fair game for debate. But cynically manufacturing confusion isn't debating. Even Microsoft didn't like the way this report turned out, though it indirectly helped subsidize it. A company spokesman called the study, 'an unhelpful distraction from what matters most -- providing the best technology for our customers.'"

That is the cherry on top that dooms the report to the junk bin. I doubt that it enhances a "think tank's" reputation to be called an "unhelpful" "dubious source".

{from GrokLaw}

a little background: a guy named Ken Brown wrote a book claiming that there was no way Linus could have written Linux by himself back in 1991 and has interviews with many reputable sources. The problem is that he uses quotes out of context, doesn't understand what he's talking about, and basically states things that are not true. All of the people he interviewed have rebutted his assertions in public in one form or another. it makes you wonder what this guys motivation is if even the evil empire itself is not agreeing with this.