Slashdot Mirror
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.
Maybe she will understand how badly she screwed up!
Who are you? The new #2 Who is #1? You are #617565. I am not a number, I am a free man! Muhahaha.
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 :-).
There is no longer anything that can be done with computers that is nontrivial and clearly legal. -- Paul Phillips
Halloween VII, posted by Michael, eh? Where's the theme music?
Cheers
-b
If I wanted a sig I would have filled in that stupid box.
Has there really been 7 of these things already?
Ñ'
... 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
Notepad specialist & FAT administrator, group training available
Reportedly The Leaked Stragey Document only runs on an ATI RADEON 9700, and is pretty slugish even on the most high-end 3Mhz PC's. Oh wait - that's the leaked Doom 3 Alpha, never mind.
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.
A. Rightmann
Whats the chances of this "Leak" being intentional? M$ isn't to be underestimated, especially not with pockets as deep as theirs.
Due to the sensitive nature of this information, please forward with discretion only to those people who can clearly gain value from it...
...
Ah, gain value? They mean *head-shaking* or *laughing* geeks? Oh, well
Life sucks.
We've got Microsoft on the... oh, sorry, never mind.
the major advances in civilization are processes which all but wreck the societies in which they occur - A.N. White
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!
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.
.net.
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
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.
Someone you trust is one of us.
Tom.
Oh arse
While respondents cited OSS's 'low Total Cost of Ownership (TCO)' as one of the best reasons to support OSS, an 'alternative to Microsoft' did not lag far behind. A plurality (40%) of all respondents felt that a low TCO was the best reason to support OSS. One-third of all respondents cited 'an alternative to Microsoft' as one of the best reasons to support OSS.
I think that yearning among home and business users for, quite simply, "an alternative to Microsoft," is one of the strongest cards we have to play. Unfortunately, Linux is only really an alternative in the server markte at the moment. In the desktop market it's still not quite there. And that's where we need to put our efforts.
Woopty Doo Basil, what does it all mean?!
scary piano music in the background...
Deep voice: Just whn you thought it was safe to turn off your computer..
Someone in a Bill Gates mask jumps out from behind the desk and starts chasing the user while brandishing a giant paperclip.
Paperclip: You look like you're being hunted by a madman in a Bill Gates mask. Do you need any help?
JET Program: see Japan, meet intere
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.
There is no longer anything that can be done with computers that is nontrivial and clearly legal. -- Paul Phillips
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.
My beliefs do not require that you agree with them.
What? No Finns? How terribly unpatriotic of them!
Roving Web-Teleoperated Robot
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?
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.
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?
My beliefs do not require that you agree with them.
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.
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...
sig.
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.
"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."
/.; doesn't seem to be needed anymore.
Thanks for clearing that up for us. I suppose we can now just do away with the comments section of
(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.
-- "Government is the great fiction through which everybody endeavors to live at the expense of everybody else."
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!"
./configure
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
**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.
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.
Eric Raymond, clearly impressed with his own wit, writes, "BDM Business Development Manager: fancy term for IT salespeople and IT sales managers."
Biz dev and sales are quite different. Think strategy (biz dev) vs tactics (sales). Business development, well, develops new business. New markets, possibly new products, new partnerships. Sales executes, possibly getting into new markets but not on the level of biz dev.
(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.
Avantslash - View Slashdot cleanly on your mobile phone.
Office account for 60%+ of MS' profit and they are so far up the diminishing return curve that this is where the attack should be. There is a Office 11 beta review today that pretty much says that the user benefits of upgrading is small and more geared at developers and requires total MS on the backend. This is excellent as they are playing right into Open Source's strength: The backend. Foil this and Office 11 will have little to offer over OpenOffice et al.
Help fight continental drift.
-asb
Try that with Micro$hit, where, after upgrading the OS, you have to shell out $$$$ for software upgrades 'cause your current apps break
Now we've got Microsoft on the run!
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.
As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
as a consultant i am ACTIVELY moving my customers (small businesses and home users) over to GNU/Linux.
how do i do it?
i give every customer a free 1/2 hour of consulting to bring them up to speed on the state of the computer industry. all of my customers love getting the free 1/2 hour. after the talk they feel empowered to make informed decisions about the computing technology upon which they rely.
what do i tell them?
just the same stuff most folks on slashdot already know. some details about Microsoft's focus on customer lock-in. details about long-term computing reliability via the GPL (since most folks have experienced a forced Microsoft upgrade cycle, this is music to their ears). i note that large reputable corporations are switching to GNU/Linux (IBM's seal of approval carries a lot of weight). also, i use simple analogies like Microsoft products being automobiles with the hoods welded shut.
after that 1/2 hour talk my customers usually want to make the switch immediately.
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?
Hey kids, there's only 5 days left 'til Yak Shaving Day!
Ed Muth admitted that "No. These documents do not represent an official Microsoft position or road map. They are technical analyses written by a staff engineer that represent the thoughts of one individual at one point in time. They were intended to encourage an informed internal discussion of issues by marketing and engineering middle managers." Of course they tried to make it sound as though it didn't really mean anything.
/ /w ww.microsoft.com/ntserver/highlights/editorletter. asp
They have since pulled the press release from their site but Microsoft did admit it was authentic document. I've read it myself from the horse's mouth on Microsoft's site.
Here is the Wayback Machine's archive:
http://web.archive.org/web/19990117031504/http:
Is this proof enough?
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.
---- Booth was a patriot ----
denisbergeron wrote:
> Since W3.1, you can upgrade to the next/ more
> recent version without a problem. (except of
> course the problem caused by the bsod) !
Obviously, you didn't try to upgrade to Windows 95 when it first came out. Took me eleven months of reformats and reinstalls, corrupted registry, and a near useless (and getting worse) computer before I gave up. I reformatted, reinstalled Windows 3.1, swore eternal hatred towards the Microsoft I once loved, and started looking for alternatives. Why did this take eleven months? Because I loved the concept and GUI of Windows 95 and really wanted it to work. I had been looking forward to it coming out, and had even preordered it.
In the late 90's, I experimented with various Linux distributions, built my own Linux server, etc. I eventually settled on Suse. Installation was fairly easy even then (a breeze compared to Windows 95), and I handled the lack of distribution "upgrades" by upgrading my hard drive at the same time. I'd install the new version on the new hard drive, then just copy my files and stuff over. Upgrades were fun, gave me more room, and I'd spend an hour or more carefully selecting what packages I wanted. I still have fond feelings for Linux, and I currently own the Linux based Zaurus PDA.
In the fall of 2000, thanks to the coming of OS X and some prodding by Godzilla (courtesy of the extremely pro-Apple movie "Godzilla 2000"), I took a look at Apple's Macs for the first time since a chance encounter in a college book store back in 1985. This time I appreciated what I saw, and fell in love. I bought an iMac, and when OS X first released, I installed it without any headaches.
Exactly seven years after my Windows 95 nightmare began, Apple released OS X Jaguar. Again I brought an OS of great promise home to install it. This time, though, the results were very different: everything I'd hoped for for the past seven years came true.
On December 14, 1996, Mothra resurrected a charred Apple sapling ("Mosura" 1996).
On December 14, 2001, Mothra returned to see its fruit ("Gojira, Mosura, Kingu Ghidora: Daikaiju Soukougeki").
OS X Jaguar: truly the Apple of Mothra's Aqua eye.
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
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.
Eternal vigilance only works if you look in every direction.
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.
And it also includes Office, right?