An experiment in collective intelligence. Stupidity. Whatever.
Enderle's presence is a warning sign. I see a quote from him I get the message. The reporter is out of ideas and has decided to cut corners.
Dave Winer on Rob Enderle
That guy has always struck me as all hat and no cattle. Drives me nuts to see him quoted as an 'expert.' I'd be shocked if he's ever installed anything more than Windows on a laptop or written any code other than pseudo in an e-mail.
Michael Williams on Rob Enderle
Quote-o-matic "IT analyst". "No longer with the firm" at Giga Group; now doing business as "The Enderle Group".
Rob Enderle, the founder, has been the most highly quoted analyst since 1995 as ranked by firms like the Kensington Group and Sage Circle. In addition he has been in the top ten of most influential analysts as ranked by Technology Marketing since the beginning of that ranking and was ranked number one in 2001 in influence (#2 in 2002). This gives the Enderle Group a unique marketing and influence expertise not shared by any other firm; one focused on how to do the most with the limited marketing budgets available today.
In other words, for a few bucks from your "limited marketing budget" he'll talk up your product to any lazy journalist willing to listen to what he says and write it down without asking who he's working for.
Enderle's bio from his former employer details his extensive qualifications to serve as a technical and legal analyst:
Rob earned a degree in marketing from Orange Coast College, a B.S. in business and an M.B.A. with an emphasis on market research, both from the California State University at Long Beach, and a C.M.A. Certificate from Pace University.
Enderle's M.O. is to call himself an analyst, then hire himself out as as a PR consultant. This "flackalyst" business model only works if the reporter attributes him as "an analyst" instead of identifying his clients who are relevant to the story.
You can help the media learn to provide meaningful attributions for Enderle by sending a polite EnderleFlackLetter when you see a quote from him that doesn't identify his relevant client.
Cut and paste from the linked-to letter, or write your own. Be sure to send direct quotes from Enderle's own Web site that explain the quotes-for-hire plan, the "Microsoft Corp is a client of the Enderle Group" disclaimer that appeared on an Enderle-authored eWeek article, and a link to this site.
An example of an appropriate Enderle attribution is this, from internetnews.com:
Rob Enderle, a market consultant and founder of the Enderle Group.... His clients include both SCO and Microsoft....
Rob Enderle has built his career, in part, on being wrong about Apple.
Bryan Chaffin, in The Mac Observer
"Right now we are getting the highest number of requests from people who are trying to migrate off of Apple," he said. "People are incredibly concerned that these Apple machines are going to be isolated" in Windows networks.
One issue is the Unix roots in Mac OS X, which is based on the BSD operating system. "This Unix component is working against them," Enderle said. "It's basically Unix with an Apple front end, but from the administrators' point of view, all they see is Unix."
Enderle, on PCWorld.com
"They are a party to the lawsuit, so they can't indemnify."
Enderle, quoted on informationweek.com
"[L]ine-by-line replacement won't work because the ideas that surround the product are also protected. Were you to read the original AT&T license, which I did, you would find that it anticipated things like this and, if it is enforceable, protects against it."
SCO vs. IBM: The Other Reality (technewsworld.com)
This is utter, complete garbage. In my opinion it's the sort of interpretation that could come only from someone who didn't read the contracts, but instead parroted someone else's deliberate misinterpretation of the contracts.
Here's what you'll find if you actually read them:
Here is one of the IBMvSCO? filings on Groklaw. It's 100 Pages long but well worth the read and includes a number of quotes from the declarations of the people involved in creating/signing the original AT&T and IBM contracts. (Click on the link in the first paragraph to read the IBM filing)
"Analysts as a group -- whether industry or financial -- don't like to feel that any company can threaten their objectivity. Of late, they are particularly sensitive to this issue -- and for good reason. There is a good chance, depending on how IBM handles the SCO issue, that one of the firms could take extreme exception to this approach and change its position relative to IBM's valuation or product set."
Innovation Loses If Open Source Wins
Read between the lines about what Enderle is saying: that "analysts'" positions depend on IBM's treatment of analyst firms, rather than their position being an objective reflection of IBMs worth. In other words, analysts are either lying now, and if IBM doesn't behave they will start being honest, or they are being honest now, and will start lying if IBM doesn't behave. In any event, how could you trust an analyst's report, if it doesn't depend objectively on IBM's financial prospects.
(Source: Yahoo SCOX message board)
-- AllanKim - 03 Sep 2003
Gotta love this one. I have this to say: If you can't stand the heat, you shouldn't be competing on Iron Chef.
The Linux Zealots generally hide behind phony names on the Internet -- often, in fact, names of male body parts. The Zealots are rude and crude, and the sentence "two beers short of a six-pack" defines them well.
I've watched these people fabricate stories about my own job history and events that I've written about -- as they were happening. These Zealots have been the primary reason that I've come to believe SCO will likely win its lawsuit -- because if the Zealots are lying about facts I know to be true, they must be lying about facts I don't know about.
This group owes its roots to similar groups that existed around OS/2 and the Apple platforms. The Zealots are generally seen as being part of the cause when the related platform fails or goes into decline. The Linux Zealots are similar to religious zealots and political extremists.
I have a hard time seeing the Zealots as any different from terrorists because of the nature of their threats. I expect one of them -- or perhaps a group of them -- will go too far at some point and do significant damage to the open-source movement, the ongoing litigation with SCO or their employers.
I strongly believe that if September 11th showed us anything, it was that zealots of any movement represent a huge risk to that movement because they do not consider the repercussions of their actions.
-- AllanKim - 20 Oct 2003
Here's Rob's latest waste of bandwidth, from Linux Community vs. SCO Battle, SCO Should Win:
SCO did, however, have to develop a unique strategy with regard to Linux due to the unique nature of the Linux license and community. This uniqueness allowed IBM to position the Linux community against SCO and distance itself somewhat from the less-agreeable parts of the war and, hopefully, conceal the connection between the IBM decision maker and the resulting problem. These moves were incredibly well-orchestrated and apparently included donated equipment for sites like Groklaw.
The bit about Groklaw links to a Forbes.com article that mentions past donations to iBiblio by IBM and Red Hat. Unlike Enderle, Forbes.com had some degree of respect for the truth and made a point of debunking any direct connection between IBM, Red Hat, and Groklaw's content. Methinks some faceless editor at eWeek needs a refresher course in media law, notably the part about false light.
-- AllanKim - 05 Mar 2004
Enderle's Profanity-laced Anti-Open-Source Rant at SCOForum
Quoting a news item by Pamela Jones:
The reason I know some folks don't understand about free software and what it is and isn't is because I just read Rob Enderle's speech at SCOForum, which SCO has put up on its web site, unbelievably enough. I wonder if they cleared it with their lawyers. I won't give a url, and I'll tell you why. The language was so filthy, it is not fit for Groklaw and I'd never suggest anyone read it, for that reason.
Enderle finally makes clear that he doesn't grasp the (licensing-based) definition of open source in the first place, i.e., the most crucial fundamental background fact underlying his topic. Also, the speech is unabashedly prejudiced, vituperative, and emotional. This is an analyst?
-- RickMoen - 10 Aug 2004
It's interesting to note that in attempting to slam OSX, he shows how little he understands system administration: "... from the administrators' point of view, all they see is Unix." He clearly doesn't understand that to most sysadmins this is A Good Thing.
-- DrewKime - 14 Aug 2003
OSX like Unix from an admin's POV? That's a laugh ... many of the familiar Unix config files, init scripts, etc. are just placeholders included for their ornamental value. I don't know who this Enderle is but I hate him already
-- AllanKim - 18 Aug 2003
Thinks monoculture is a good thing from a security point of view. Definitely short a few 'roos in the top paddock. Does repond to email but won't let you publish his responses - and for good reason.
-- WhatMeWorry - 13 Oct 2003
This from a recent eWeek commentary on Longhorn
Editor's note: Microsoft Corp. is a client of the Enderle Group, the consulting firm headed by Rob Enderle.
IMO this says as much about the publication as it does about the author. At least eWeek's editors saw fit to disclose such matters, unlike certain other publications.
-- KarstenSelf - 14 Aug 2003
From the official transcript of the SCOForum 2004 speech:
There are people who get up every day, work a 9 to 5 and go home to their families trading their lives for varying degrees of cash. In my view, though clearly not theirs, they are selling their lives very cheaply.
Wrong, Rob. Those who fashion specious opinions on behalf of paying clients, thereby placing the whole of their past, present and future credibility in question, are the ones selling their lives and honor very cheaply.
And I'm always amused by the out-of-touch people who still use the quaint expression "9 to 5" to represent the average person's working day. Few employers ask so little of their employees in this day and age, at least in the U.S.A. Reminds me of former New York Times managing editor Gerald Boyd who said, in the wake of the Jayson Blair scandal, that journalists are out of touch because they are overpaid.
-- AllanKim - 12 Aug 2004
-- KarstenSelf - 14 Aug 2003
-- comment found in the source for gnu-tar
Copyright © 2001-2007 by the contributing authors.
All material on TWikIWeThey is the property of the contributing authors. This content may be freely distributed, copied, or modified, with attribution, and this notice.
Works are provided AS IS with NO WARRANTY and NO LIABILITY for consequences of use.
Ideas, requests, problems regarding TWikIWeThey? Send feedback.