Halloween VII

mjh writes "ESR has reviewed the latest Microsoft leaked Linux strategy document. A very interesting read. Summary: OSS is winning some battles, but Microsoft is poised to bring out bigger and nastier guns." To the extent that people read it and gain some insight into what Microsoft is actually thinking about Linux and Open Source Software, it's useful. To the extent that anyone draws a conclusion from this document like "we've got Microsoft on the run", that's just idiotic.

Comments

I hope Judge Kollar-Kotelly reads it!

[terraformer]

Maybe she will understand how badly she screwed up!

Re:I hope Judge Kollar-Kotelly reads it!

[neverkevin]

she didn't screw up, she knew exactly what she was doing.

Looking for proof.

[tshak]

Although this seems legit at-a-glance, I can't find any proof that this is truely an internal MS document. Time for me to start querying the insiders :-).

Re:Looking for proof.

[Anonymous Coward]

But it clearly states that it should be forwarded only to those who would gain value from it. Doesn't the internet as a whole gain value from having it posted?

Re:Looking for proof.

[stefanlasiewski]

There's really no proof that the first set of Halloween Documents were truely an internal MS document either.

It's unlikely that we will ever see proof. The documents always come from 'a confidential source'.

If the confidential source is exposed, some poor MS employees will be fired, sued, and probably dumped into Puget Sound with a lead weight around their ankles.

Re:Looking for proof.

[gasrios]

Try

http://opensource.org/halloween/halloween3.php

specially the part that reads

"Microsoft HQ conceded that much [authorship of the document] to Wired, the Wall Street Journal, and the New York Times three days ago".

Lost somewhere in the middle.

Re:Looking for proof.

[zonker]

WTF? Does Microsoft huddle around every Halloween with some loser intern who has loose lips? It is getting kind of silly that these things keep 'slipping' out of their offices each Halloween...

P.S. Am I the first person on Slashdot that understands the difference between looser and loser and their, there and they're? Methinks I am. :)

Yeah, MS is thinking about OS...

[MagicFab]

... but mostly incorporating ideas and concepts into their OS. Maybe sometimes OS projects should also pay attention to succesful companies (from marketing, not technical point of view).

Remember a lie repeated 1000 times can become truth ;)

The executive summary

[Adam Rightmann]

Don't criticize Open Source software, it can backfire.

The Germans, French and Japanese are tending towards Open Source Software.

We can share some of our source code and make inroads on Open Source software.

All in all, a rather vapid document, but at least ESR restrained himself on the asides. Funny how losing 99% of your paper wealth can make one more humble.

Anyone think this may not be a "Leak"

[Chris_Stankowitz]

Whats the chances of this "Leak" being intentional? M$ isn't to be underestimated, especially not with pockets as deep as theirs.

Why negative attacks don't work for MSoft

[deanc]

The essence of the document was that MS's attacks on the viral nature of the GPL weren't working and that they'd do better to extol the virtues of their own product.

Notice that, for the most part, the exact opposite strategy works for Linux advocates.

This is because Microsoft, as the dominant player, has to justify it's own existence again and again, whereas Linux as the (initial) underdg, had nothing to lose by tearing down its rival. After all, as a multi-billion $$$ company, everyone knows that Microsoft can financially dominate the PR world to badmouth its competitors.

Does this spell the end of "Linux is Bad/The GPL is unAmerican" propaganda from Microsoft? That coul dbe a disaster, because then we wouldn't have anything to flame about on slashdot anymore! :)

Re:Why negative attacks don't work for MSoft

[tshak]

I dissagree. I think negative attacks don't work well on either side, and that each competitor needs to focus on making their products the best, instead of cutting the other product down.

Are you kidding?

[selectspec]

While this might be a document produced by one of the thousands of MS minions, by no means is this the MS linux strategy document. Anyone who thinks so is incredible foolish.

The MS linux strategy document is probably 1000 pages and is divided into three huge camps:

1. enterprize server market (.net)
2. deparment server market (win2k server)
3. desktop OS

They are probably closlely looking into the latest desktop linux distros from red hat and ximian and shitting their pants.

They are still trying to figure out how to roll out .net.

They are maintaining share in the department server market, but are aware that the eventual TOC issue is going to hand them their lunch soon.

A company with 40 billion in cash and a 20 billion/year business doesn't write 2 page strategy documents.

Re:Are you kidding?

[IamTheRealMike]

A company with 40 billion in cash and a 20 billion/year business doesn't write 2 page strategy documents.

Do you want to bet? It wouldn't surprise me if they have a LOT of people working on knowing everything there is to know about Linux, it's only smart considering that it's the only real competition.

This document is nothing special, in fact it's so boring I'd be surprised if it was faked. Maybe it was leaked intentionaly, maybe not. I dunno. What I do know is that it's quite likely they do multi-national surveys on Linux awareness/favourability quite regularly. In fact, one thing that puzzles me is that the tone of the document is one of "we haven't done this before", and this line:

"The study fielded between late-July and September 2001"

makes me think huh?? Who the hell waits a year before presenting a 2 page document like this? It can't possibly have taken a year to analyse a survey like that.

Anyway, don't have any doubt that they know all about Linux. They have some people monitoring the wine-devel lists as it is, and apparently a large number of their senior tech guys are well briefed about it. I know one of the Passport heads is familiar with WineX :) I expect they have people who's job actually involves reading slashdot. Funny in a way, but why wouldn't they? Easiest place to get news on open source happenings.

/me waves - hi there Microsoft person! Hope you're having fun :)

Re:Are you kidding?

[IamTheRealMike]

Now, the majority of you will go you "you could've fixed this and that by editing this and changing that and rewriting these 30 lines of code yatta yatta yatta" but who gives a fuck. It's a computer. It's supposed to make my life A: Easier or B: More Fun.

Nah, I'm not going to say that. I don't really know what I'd say, all that stuff you mentioned (except for debian) has always worked fine for me and my friends. I had to go download the official nVidia drivers to get good performance, but you have to do the same on Windows (except from CD instead of the net). I'd guess sometimes Win2K installs go awry too - or do you really think Windows is perfection itself?

Until the day when Linux supports any and every piece of hardware the day it's released, the installations can be done my grandma, and all software hits store shelves in both Windows and Linux version on the same day, Linux will never be a contender for the desktop market.

Wrong. Linux already is a contender for the desktop market. Most people don't buy hardware on the day it's released, and for most apps there are either Linux equivalents, the maker is considering porting it or it's close to working under Wine. Note: I said *most*, not all. Most apps is good enough for most people.

Anyway, the next battle isn't for people like you, it's for the business desktop, where stuff like the cumulative cost and TCO of Windows (2k or XP) is a big issue. Maybe in a few years we'll have all those issues nailed, and then you'll find that Linux makes your computer easier and more fun too.

Re:Are you kidding?

[Outland Traveller]

I can't speak for Ximian, but I was rather underimpressed with Red Hat 8--and I've never really even tried Linux before.

This is really incredulous to me.. I remember showing Redhat Linux to some friends, who had never known anything but windows and macintosh systems.

They were blown away. They were totally incredulous that such a distribution of OS, development tools, and large array of real applications was 100% Free and largely developed and maintained by worldwide communities of independent programmers.

If you are not completely astounded by this fact, then you have some serious entitlement issues to work out.

The fact that linux is better at some things than the MS operating systems and worse at others is insignificant in comparison.

Re:Are you kidding?

[DunbarTheInept]

It's not a troll. Don't think because I have a varying opinion on something that I'm just some asshole looking to start some shit.

(I think you meant "differing opinion". A "varying opinion" would be one that keeps changing.

"troll" is one of those words that has changed meaning through the massive overpowering force of the ignorance of the majority. When first coined as an online term, it meant what you imply - it referred to people stating controversial things EVEN THOUGH they don't necessarily believe them - they just state them because they are assholes who think starting arguments is a form of entertainment. Nowadays, however, it has come to mean ANY controversial argument-inducing post, even the heartfelt honest ones. Where am I going with this? Well, I'm just pointing out that just because he called you a troll doesn't necessarily mean he though you were insincere. There are a lot of people who don't use the term that way anymore.

Linux needs a more professional evangelist

[tshak]

Well, it was all pretty sane up to that point; it's nice to know our opponents are still smoking crack -ESR

I'm sorry, but if I was an IT manager of a corporation and if I was reading this commentary I would assume no credibility to ESR after this comment. Grow Up.

Re:Linux needs a more professional evangelist

[cduffy]

"Smoking crack" isn't a random insult along the lines of "your momma", but rather an element of established jargon (indeed, I'm more than a bit suprised that it's not in the Jargon File). It may be a bit more of an in-crowd-targeted piece of commentary than need be, but by no means is it childish. "Grow up" thus probably isn't the appropriate response -- at least not targeted at ESR.

Perhaps I've been lucky thus far, but most of the upper-management types I've known thus far either were once hackerly types themselves (particularly in the case of tech companies) or rely heavily on their (current or former) hackerly types to provide advice on related issues. Hence, I see this not as so serious an issue as you paint it to be.

FUD is bad for them, and bad for OSS too!

[gosand]

From the memo:

Messages that criticize OSS, Linux, & the GPL are NOT effective. Messaging that discusses possible Linux patent violations, pings the OSS development process for lacking accountability, attempts to call out the 'viral' aspect of the GPL, and the like are only marginally effective in driving unfavorable opinions around OSS, Linux, and the GPL, and in some cases backfire. On the other hand 'positive' OSS, Linux, and GPL messages are very effective - both across geographies and audiences.

(reviewer's comment):
{I've suspected for a while that the anti-Linux, anti-GPL FUD campaign was actually rebounding on Microsoft. This seems to confirm it.}

I think this speaks also to the fact that WE should not be anti-Microsoft, but be pro-OSS. Being positive does a lot more than being negative. I find that this is a challenge for me personally, but I am working on it.

Re:FUD is bad for them, and bad for OSS too!

[Anonvmous Coward]

"I think this speaks also to the fact that WE should not be anti-Microsoft, but be pro-OSS."

I've been saying that all along, only in a different context. Slashdot's behaviour of reporting flamebait MS stories isn't doing much good for the community's credibility. It feels like a "it's cool to hate Microsoft!" club.

Frankly, any story about MS these days causes lots of people to roll their eyes. Then, it's balanced with a "Hey look, another guy got Linux up and running!" story. It paints the picture that MS = Bad because Linux = good. Unfortunately, that won't do a whole lot to convince MS users to switch to Linux. It's a religious debate. Inject some professionalism and objectivity into Slashdot, and people will make their decisions more intelligently.

Let me put it another way: MS's updates to the SP3 EULA are an annoyance. They are not a reason to switch to Linux. However, Linux being free and not caring about how many copies I have is a reason to switch to Linux when I get my next computer. The difference is subtle, but it's there.

Choose your battles. Fight everything and you'll gain nothing.

Not strategy, just an attitude survey

[Animats]

This is more the result of a survey than a strategy document. This reads like something a low-level manager tasked to subcontract out a survey would write. Unlike the original Halloween memo, which was a higher-level document, this is just an internal report.

The high rate of acceptance of Linux in Japan is significant. Be thinking about the implications of that.

What happens if you submit a good kernel patch in Japanese?

Re:Why bother thinking?

[Anonymous Coward]

"That's what I like about slashdot: I don't have to think for myself. The editors tell me exactly what I'm supposed to get from the article with their editorial comments they append to every submission..."

Yeah, its outrageous! You dont' get that in the papers..uh, i mean tv...books...radio?

Free software, like sex, is better without ESR

[SexyKellyOsbourne]

According to the article, here are some interesting statistics:

64% say they like Linux because it's "Not Microsoft" -- some obvious discontent!

30% of French, 27% of German, and 23% of Brazilian respondents believe that a Linux solution offers a lower TCO than proprietary software -- obviously, they know about administration costs.

Linux favorability among the Linux familiar was 95% -- looks like it has some diehard fans :)

93% of Swedes, 84% of the French, and 75% of Germans and said that messages that rely on an abstract discussion of intellectual property rights are effective -- obviously the product of socialism, but it nevertheless shows that open source philosophy may have a chance.

We are emotional and not rational??!!!

[gosand]

I was surprised the reviewer didn't comment on this section:

Closing, those who are familiar with OSS and Linux are favorably predisposed towards them. Linking this work with other on-point research, we can assume that in the majority of cases this reported 'favorability' is more emotional than it is rational. Given this context, we should not expect rational arguments focused on undermining support for OSS, Linux and the GPL to perform well. In the short term, then, Microsoft should avoid criticizing OSS and Linux directly, continue to develop and aim to eventually win the TCO argument, and focus on delivering positive Shared Source messages that contain transparent, audience specific proof points.

Excuse me? Because people in Microsoft's survey were supportive of OSS, that means that they were predisposed to like it, and therefore is based on emotion and not rationality?! This doesn't make any sense. What is this trying to say, that people who like OSS are simply using it to make a statement, and not becaue they legitimately prefer it? That is a pretty arrogant assessment of the FACTS if you ask me. I use OSS because I find it to be a better product, for several different practical reasons. And since when is it a rule that you can't be rational AND emotional about something?

Definition of Developer

[warmcat]

ESR says in his preface:

Developer: A non-manager. In this survey, a disjoint category from "IT Pro'. Therefore, it probably means anybody with a technical clue.

In fact by 'Developer' Microsoft means: 'person who writes software'. Its really interesting (in a good way) that ESR makes no mental distinction between a user and someone who can contribute, whereas for MS they are totally different categories.

Re:Definition of Developer

[PissedOffGuy]

thus ESR is wrong. it is indeed interesting how ESR is totally out of touch from the real world.

Re:Definition of Developer

[rlowe69]

Its really interesting (in a good way) that ESR makes no mental distinction between a user and someone who can contribute, whereas for MS they are totally different categories.

ESR is confusing the issue and I agree with you, probably mistaken. "Anbody with a technical clue" could have a many many levels. Half of the pimply-faced college students that comment on slashdot have a technical clue (ie. maybe use free software in some capacity), but that doesn't mean they hack OSS or even care about code at all.

Microsoft is obviously looking at the 'people who write software's opinion, as they are the ones directly affected by SharedSource. The other people with a clue are only indirectly affected by work done by the code writers.

Aren't APPS the real issue?

[httpamphibio.us]

Watch any documentary about the infancy of the computer world and you'll hear the phrase "killer app" about a billion times. The real goal should be to get to the point where the line between it and Windows is transparent. The fact that Linux is free and more stable obviously isn't a selling point for most computer users, but get to the point where the desktops are just as intuitive, where all the apps people want to use are available in their Linux form and can interact with Windows apps: the basics: Office, AIM, Solitare :), and more importantly the more advanced stuff like Adobe's software, Macromedia, High end audio and sequencing software like eMagic Logic, and Cycling 74's Max/MSP...

Most people that buy a Windows computer with Windows preinstalled aren't going to switch, or at least most will be absolutely intimidated by the idea, so you have to get them when they purchase the computer. Get Linux boxes into stores and available through the channels people buy through online, if somebody is looking at two identical computers that have the same stats, can run the "same" programs, and one of them costs $300 less because it doesn't have to bother with MS, then you have a winner.

The real issue isn't what MS does to combat open source, the only people who understand the arguments about OSS are people already involved. The average computer user just wants something to run Office and get on the web...

Re:Aren't APPS the real issue?

[schlach]

The real goal should be to get to the point where the line between it and Windows is transparent.

You know, I can't figure this out at all. Here we have the Linux community who, in large part, is not being compensated for their contributions. Therefore they are free to make whatever sort of contribution they want. And you know what sort of alternative to Microsoft platform they come up with? Something that attempts to look and feel identical to its Microsoft counterpart!

Why? Why, why, why? We have the freedom to explore completely different paradigms in computing and user-interaction, and we insist on just writing open-source applications that clone their MS-equivalents. So the best that anyone can do, on any platform of their choice, is the Microsoft vision.

"But we have to clone MS so that we can get Mom and Dad, and Pointy-Haired Boss, to switch to Linux!"

-- Why?

"Well, duh, so that we can kill Microsoft!"

-- Why?

"Because Microsoft is Evil, like the Nazis!"

-- You lose.

Why are we competing with MS on MS's own ground? When did Linux shift from being an alternative to being a clone? When did we stop being a bunch of people that wanted an OS that did what we wanted it to, and start being a bunch of people whose only driving goal is to kick MS off the desktop? What do we have to gain from that? I understand that RedHat has a financial interest in making software that looks and feels like Redmond's - they want enterprises to switch, so that they can sell systems, and enterprises will switch if it's not hard. Simple. But why does everyone else, that doesn't have a financial incentive, jump on that wagon? Why do people invest their limited time and energy, not to writing better software, but writing same software? Why do people in the Slashdot community constantly talk about how much better the world will be when there's no difference between Linux and Windows?

The best software on *nix does it differently. Look at Apache. Anyone who wants it can figure out how to edit an httpd.conf file. It's not terribly hard. Why would anyone want to give it an IIS-like interface?

I like linux because all the security tools are written for it, they're free, and I have the source to them. It's a hacker's playground. These tools don't have GUIs, let alone ones that look like they came from MS. Doesn't bother me. I'm going to use Linux so that I can use these tools, and when I write tools, I'm going to build them from the ones that are already successful at what they do.

As an aside, anyone notice how much better the command-line paradigm deals with chaining/piping programs together? When something terminates at the GUI, it's really hard to make use of it without rewriting it. Maybe if everyone on Windows started using COM and .NET whenever they wrote anything, it wouldn't be as difficult to make a program collaborate. But a lot of people don't bother, often because it doesn't occur to them that someone would want to chain their program together; or because they don't want other people using their program in a non-approved way. Do we want to clone that paradigm? That apps should be feature-laden, bloated, and only useful in one specific way? As opposed to the typical Unix "do one thing really well (and make it a link in a chain)" paradigm? I dunno...

Those are my questions. If you have answers, I'm all ears.

Re:Aren't APPS the real issue?

[mjh]

But you missed my entire point! Why is that our goal?? Why should that be the goal of anyone who does not have a direct financial incentive to get people to switch (ie, people who work for RedHat)? What happened to our goal of just having a system that does what we want it to do, because Windows doesn't? Why limit our goals to just killing Microsoft?

The point isn't to kill Microsoft. It's to maintain the practical ability to not become beholden to Microsoft. And that depends on being able to freely communicate through open protocols/document formats/etc. Microsoft's goal is antithetical to openness. They want to proprietize everything so that everything you do generates a payment to them. That's their motiviation. It's a fine motivation, as long as it isn't effectively implemented.

The problem is that Microsoft's goal, combined with their market share, make it increasingly more difficult to use any other computing software that isn't produced out of Redmond. Some folks have responded by wanting to kill Microsoft, dead. But the reality is that if Microsoft were effectively curtailed that most of those folks would back down from the "kill 'em dead" stance.

Getting some mom's & pop's on board is an indirect goal. The primary goal is to be able to maintain independance from beholdenness to anyone (including Microsoft). Having mom's & pop's as a 2ndary goal, is supportive of the primary goal because if there are enough people using an alternative to Microsoft, Microsoft can't arbitrarily change things without breaking compatibility with a huge population of people who'll be outraged.

Mom's & pop's provide the check and balance to an overly agressive Microsoft. This allows me to continue to expect that open network protocols will continue to work. And effectively enable me to continue using Linux.

How do we get mom's & pop's onboard? Giving them something that has a low financial cost, but a high educational cost isn't going to work. You have to give them something that is low cost in terms of ease of use as well as easy on the pocket book. Thus the desire to mimic the MS environment.

In summary: Easy to use leads to mom & pop onboard leads to prevention of MS monopoly breaking everything non-MS. This enables freedom to continue to effectively use Linux. Which is the goal.

Does that help?

Wake-up Call for OSS

[mark_space2001]

> In fact, their [Microsoft's] figures indicate that we [OSS] are winning. It looks like all we have to do is stay the course.

This is wrong. The leaked document does show that OSS is winning. The same document also shows that Microsoft knows that OSS is winning, and now Microsoft will changes it's strategy, possibly to something far more effective than it has used before.

The author of the article, who I quoted above, is wrong. Now is not the time for OSS to rest on it's laurels. Now that MS has realized it's blunders, you can bet they will be doing something about it. MS ain't stoopid, and they've got lots of money to power any initive they can dream up.

OSS projects should redouble their efforts. The community needs stable, useful technology now more than ever to battle MS with.

Re:Wake-up Call for OSS

[Anonymous Coward]

"Microsoft will changes it's strategy, possibly to something far more effective than it has used before."

Like what? Outsmarting linux with bigger start buttons Like this? Even the newsreaders at Foxnews realize that MS didn't really innovate anything yet.

Linux needs not change its course. It is going in the right direction with a lot of momentum. Just keep the power on and keep your eyes open ready to respond when there is an actual response needed, not just when MS writes a document about Linux. There is a name for that, it's called flinching. Just keep your eyes on the ball and move the ball towards the goal.

Ghandi Stage Three Attained

[__aajelt3877]

First, they ignore you.
Then they laugh at you.
Then they fight you.
Then you win.
--Ghandi

This quote has been mentioned many times in the context of M$ strategy, but this document indicates to me THEY think things are in the middle of stage 3. was a policy document, not some shiny PR.

Hmm..

[Loki_1929]

"To the extent that people read it and gain some insight into what Microsoft is actually thinking about Linux and Open Source Software, it's useful. To the extent that anyone draws a conclusion from this document like "we've got Microsoft on the run", that's just idiotic."

Thanks for clearing that up for us. I suppose we can now just do away with the comments section of /.; doesn't seem to be needed anymore.

(From m-w.com)
Editor: 1 : someone who edits especially as an occupation

Edit: 1 a : to prepare (as literary material) for publication or public presentation

I suppose it just bothers me when those we expect to be acting at least semi-impartially while in a professional capacity (an editor for instance) decide to arbitrarily prescribe what shall be orthodox in matters of opinion. Editors often add extra information or links (when publishing online) before publishing in addition to the usual typo/spelling-corrections and such, but I suppose I'm just not too thrilled seeing opinions cut down as "idiotic" within the posting of news. To the best of my knowledge, editors are allowed to post in the comments section, and I certainly wouldn't complain about seeing the above statement there, where I believe it belongs.

Just my opinion, I could be wrong.

After my last month with RH8 M$ has no worries

[t0qer]

I run all my webservers on linux/php/mysql, but occassionally I get an itch to be different on my desktop, last time it was when XP released SP1 and I was so frustrated at M$ trying to keep me from pirating their software I thought i'd try and say "Fuck em!"

So I downloaded the new redhat Iso's when they came out, burned them, and wiped my system for redhat. To summarize that last month, let me just say I think having my balls cinched in a vice may be more pleasurable than trying to be productive with linux as a desktop.

Now my system is not some weak POS. It's a p4 with ultra 160, so it's very nice. The first thing I had to do was install the drivers for my nvidia card, oops that don't work, docs don't say anything, read the nvnews forums, oh ok gotta

rpmbuild --rebuild NVIDIA*.src.rpm

Ok it works.

Then it was onto my CDBurner. Again, not crappy hardware, brand spankin new Plextor dvd/cdr. ide-scsi emulator? WTF is that? Ok, I read some more, I know what it is, ok great, it's working.

Repeat process for my bt878 card and firewire.

So at this point, I pretty much had my hardware working as best it could under linux. I started setting out to get some applications going under linux. I needed some audio editing, video editing I started poking around and found some stuff that looks sweet.

tar xfzv reallysweetproggy.tar.gz ./configure
**Exit error 2**
you need to install some library.so

So i'd dig around, find the library, then find out that library wanted this library and ect and so on. Some of the stuff i'd click on the page to download it and the page would be gone, making the software I wanted to try useless.

I thought it would be cool to burn some homemmade karaoke VCD's. Previously I had used a screencapture to avi program in windows coupled with powerpoint, or a karaoke plugin with winamp and AVS.

Well, open offices impress sucked dog balls compared to powerpoint, and when it came time to burn a VCD again, the howto was linked to dependancies that returned a 404 instead of what I needed.

So with the help of a friend I gave up on linux on the desktop. Yeah it runs nice, but not nowhere near as good as how windows runs. I can tell a big difference in how UT2003 runs under XP compared to linux, and sorry but the penguin is slow here too.

I hope linux gets over these problems on the desktop, it would be cool if it actually were an freely availiable OS for download, but linux just isn't that right now.

And if you don't believe I use linux, click the link on my sig. All PHP/postnuke/MySQL goodness runnin on linux, not my desktop. For now that's how it has to be.

Re:After my last month with RH8 M$ has no worries

[jgerman]

I love posts like this, they're easy to respond to. I've never had a problem with linux as a desktop. And I am incredibly more productive with linux as oppsosed to Windows.

Not that my one testimonial of a good experience is worth anymore than your bad one, but the point is for every bad experience, at least one good experience can be produced. I'd be willing to bet that for every bad experience more than one good one can be produced, otherwise the number of linux users would be shrinking rather than growing.

I'm an idiot

[pubjames]

To the extent that anyone draws a conclusion from this document like "we've got Microsoft on the run", that's just idiotic.

Why, exactly? If genuine (and I expect it probably is, since I can't see any benefit to Microsoft of leaking this), this document highlights what many of us already thought - Microsoft is having a tough time coming up with an effective response to Linux and OSS.

The strategies it suggests (making more noise about Shared Source, trying to win the TCO argument) aren't really hard hitting, but then, what else can MS do? People suggest that it will start using patents and IP law to get heavy with OSS projects, but I doubt it - it's too important for them to improve their image and stop being peceived as the bad guy, because that is why many people are considering OSS and Linux in the first place.

It suggests we're got Microsoft on the run to me, it basically says they recognise Linux/OSS as a strong competitor, and most of their weapons are blunt.

TCO battle between Linux and Windows

[Mr_Silver]

In the short term, then, Microsoft should avoid criticizing OSS and Linux directly, continue to develop and aim to eventually win the TCO argument

(snip)

{So they're going to try to beat us up on total cost of ownership! Well, it was all pretty sane up to that point; it's nice to know our opponents are still smoking crack about some key issues.

Whilst Windows will never be cheaper than Linux it could be argued that it can have a lower TCO if you make the assumption that a persons time is worth something.

In other words, if I have to set something up and it takes 4 mouse-clicks under Windows and 2 hours under Linux (extreme I know, but bear with me), then they could claim (rightly so) that their OS has saved my organisation money by making me more productive. Its the whole "Windows is easier!" mantra.

Of course, OSS will catch up, but they want it to always play catch up and then this is another point MS can use in their favour.

I could be totally wrong, but I'm pretty sure that they have a perfectly sensible reason for stating that they could beat TCO. Considering ESR wasn't actually in that review, he has no idea what was discussed or the finer points around it and therefore would be a tad premature to dismiss it as them "smoking crack".

It's not an entirely professional suggestion to make either. Makes him sound like a spotty faced 15 year old.

Re:Unlikely!

[thoolihan]

Or Upgrade any other distribution to the same, but more recent... http://gentoo.org/doc/faq.html#doc_chap3 See the part about emerge --update world "Unprotected Breakfast, the sweetest taboo of them all" -HJS

Snared Source

[Airline_Sickness_Bag]

One important thing about the memo is that we need to do a better job explaining the difference between shared source, and open source, and how it really is "snared source" in terms of the potential legal entanglements.

-asb

Re:Is this some sort of a MS tradition?

[gol64738]

i don't know about that, Bruce. i follow MS PR closely, and this document seems to fall exactly in the right place.
except for the twisted logic, everything in the document appears true (what marketing tactics fail, etc).

winning the TCO argument is not just something mentioned in this document, it's what MS is really trying to do right now.
the TCO argument is a win/win for MS if they can pull it off.

Re:cost

[tomhudson]

When you shell out $100 for a distro, you're getting 3 to 4 gigs of applications., as well as upgrades for the OS.

Try that with Micro$hit, where, after upgrading the OS, you have to shell out $$$$ for software upgrades 'cause your current apps break

Re:I can hear the preview now...

[sharkey]

scary piano music in the background...

You mean Toccata and Fugue in D Minor? 1.8 MB

TCO isn't "in the bag" yet

[Sloppy]

The alleged-MS document says:

In the short term, then, Microsoft should .. continue to develop and aim to eventually win the TCO argument..

And ESR says:

So they're going to try to beat us up on total cost of ownership! Well, it was all pretty sane up to that point; it's nice to know our opponents are still smoking crack about some key issues.

I think TCO is still a major unresolved issue in the Microsoft-vs-OSS-vs-EveryoneElse debate. Computers, at least in business, are still very expensive to run and require experts. The cost of these people absolutely dwarfs the retail price of MS Windows. Microsoft's products are still pretty hard to use and take a lot of expertise, but everyone else's (including the popular Linux distributions) are still pretty bad too, except maybe Apple's.

If Microsoft makes a serious effort to make Windows easy to use, they could theoretically win the TCO fight, or at least beat the penguins. As far as I can tell (at least from what I've seen of XP) they haven't really tried yet. But don't get complacent.

If you want to ensure beating Microsoft on TCO, then quit being smug about the Microsoft's pricetag and EULA. Instead, look at your OSS projects from this point of view: Will deploying this software help a business to justify firing some of their IT staff? It's cool that someone can troubleshoot a user's machine by ssh-ing into it instead of having to go to their office, but the fact that they have to be around to do it at all, means their employer didn't really save money.

Re:Unlikely!

[jdavidb]

Hate to tell you, but it was actually Solomon, in the Bible. The book of Proverbs says something to that effect multiple times, in fact.

Lincoln has gotten credit for reusing or slightly rewording Biblical sayings before, including "A house divided cannot stand."

Re:Unlikely!

[ShavenYak]

Are you even try to upgrade Mandrake 8.2 to 9 without loosing all users configuration. Or Upgrade any other distribution to the same, but more recent, distribution whom was updated every four to six mouth ? no ! I try more than one. And every time, I have to reconfigure all the user preference.

That's funny, I upgraded from Mandrake 8.2 to 9.0 (for free, I might add; I typically buy boxed sets at every other release, which is obviously not a legal option with Windows). I didn't loose (let go of, release) any configuration, nor did I lose (fail to keep possession of) any configuration.

Also I should point out that if you update every "four to six mouth", you might have problems keeping track of time. The rest of us count months, not mouths. Or is it just that your N key is umop apisdn?

Dont get it wrong, they ARE on the run..

[nurb432]

But TOWARDS us, swords drawn.. not running away in fear as we would hope..

Be afraid, very afraid of a coporation that has no restraints on its actions.

Unfortunate, but OSS has to have advocates.

[RyanFenton]

It would be great if open source operating systems could exist, Windows (and possibly others later) could exist, and each of them attracting those who find the respective operating system most helpful to them.

But that's not entirely possible. Because of the great freedom afforded by the internet for thousands of programmers to create anything, and distribute them, combined with the free architechture of open source operating systems - the applications on these formerly hobbyist-only OS' have been infringing on the markets most prized by propietary software vendors. It can't be helped - people are interested in such applications, so they develop them to use in their favorite open source environment.

In response, companies like Microsoft have been working on legal, finantial, and legislative grounds to hinder or halt many forms software and idea development. After all, they can't just explain to their stockholders that they just can't convince these potential customers to pay for their proprietary software, and that there's nothing special to that they can do to stop that.

So, now open source software needs advocates. Advocates in the legal world, in the finantial world, and in the legislative world if any expectation of free development is to be expected.

These voices don't have to work the same way proprietary software advocates do - they just have to get others to understand why they need the freedom to believe the way they do... because the simple freedom to develop is almost all that is needed for open source software to exist. This is most unlike proprietary software, that needs a certain dollar value, and constant increase over time on top of that for stockholders.

It's unfortunate that advocates are needed, but they are - stories like this show the mindset that forces this need.

Ryan Fenton

Re:biz dev definition

[BeeShoo]

Be serious. Biz dev and sales are only different to people who work in biz dev and sales.

Why negative attacks DO work for OSS

[freeBill]

I dislike negative attacks as much as the next guy and I hope we see less of them and more positive Linux-building comments, but I do believe there is a case to be made that they work better for Open Source advocates.

Almost anyone who has ever used MS products has had at least one nightmarish experience with their products. Many newbies assume these experiences are their fault (especially when they were told such by a lying error message deliberately written to blame it on them). Many people just blame computers when this happens to them. Others carry it as a secret guilt.

When such a person hears an anti-MS rant, it can be a revelation giving them the "right" to question their own assumptions about Microsoft. (Remember: They have been told this is a great company which makes good products.)

If you include a positive Linux message at the end of your rant, you may even make an OSS sale.

Re:Why negative attacks DO work for OSS

[More Trouble]

Almost anyone who has ever used MS products has had at least one nightmarish experience with their products.

So, who's making Switch Ads from MS to Linux? Instead of Apple's wimpy "MS is hard" pitch, you could really go for the jugular: like "I just got tired of the viruses, everyone in my address book emailing me asking me why I sent the wierd message."

:w

defend against Free why its gone

[SubtleNuance]

but one strong possibility is that the term has simply fallen out of use both at Microsoft and in their survey population

or, MS didnt want to include the Free Software meme in its Survey (thereby replicating it).

They would like to see Free Software only be Open Source - because they have (some) answers to Open Source.. but none for Free Software.

Re:Unlikely!

[rseuhs]

So that 80$ allows me to put Windows on every machine on my network, right?

And it also includes Office, right?

Cornered animal

[Anonymous Coward]

I see MS as like a large dangerous animal that now perceives that it is in danger of getting cornered by something mysterious that it can not quite comprehend in terms that it understands.... and will soon behave accordingly.