Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft to Buy Rational and/or Borland?
oblivious writes "I got this in e-mail this evening: According to a Reuters report that crossed the wires late today, the speculation is that Microsoft will make bids to buy both Rational and Borland. Shares of both Rational and Borland are up on the news, and so far both IBM and Microsoft have no comment on this report." We recently ran a story about IBMs planned purchase of Rational. Chris didn't make clear in here - it's not that Microsoft might buy both, but that Borland might be a likely target, if a bid to buy Rational out from under IBM fails, which it is likely too. Rational and IBM have signed the substantive portion of the agreement already, so any sort of counter bid would have some fun legal consequences for all involved.
Nothing would be worse than M$ buying borland. It would be the end of JBuilder--a fantastic java IDE. Not to mention delphi and KYLIX! This would be B*A*D.
---gralem
There is no way this ends up good, if MS makes the sale. But here's a question. At what point does MS own too much of the computing world? With MS buying Borland and Rational, does this signify the end developments for other OS's? If not this, then how much more does MS need to buy before they do own practically everything.
I have no friends. Will you be my friend?
successful? How? Borland C++ Builder, Delphi, and Kylix GONE. I don't call that successful. I call that anti-competitive.
There is no reasonable defense against an idiot with an agenda
:wq
MS buys Borland: Bye bye kylix
MS buys Rational: Sue any open source that provides anything similar to rational products, or uses anything rational may have patented
- We are the slashdot. Resistance is futile. Prepare to be moderated -
This is pure speculation on my part. But considering MS's stance on Linux, and supporting non-MS operating systems, would they kill cross-platform support?
I don't know how many customers Rational has that are using the Windows version of their SW (eg: ClearCase & ClearQuest), versus the Linux & Unix versions. Is there enough income coming in to encourage MS to support other platforms?
And as far as Borland is concerned, I would expect the Kylix to get knifed quickly since it's prob not a significant source of revenue.
I could see how IBM buying Rational would be good for Linux & the community. But MS buying Rational seems like a way for MS to kill off a bunch of viable products on non-MS platforms.
Thoughts?
Wasn't there just a slashdot article saying that Microsoft lost money in every department except for Windows and Office? http://www.self-aggrandizement.com/archives/monopo ly_much.html
this mentions it too
so I dont think that MS buying them will make them profitable.
Why is Rational considering a sale to another corporation, anyway? Do they just need a boost, or are they a sinking ship?
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Pick your prophecy people: If you claim in one post that Microsoft is doomed, then you must forever disagree with any claims that they are a monopoly.
Slashdot is not monolithic!
Sigh.
Retarded, irritating and whiney -- sure. You've proved that by combining a false dichotomy with a big flaming strawman. Cheers.
Not with the current administration in office.
This is the pattern that Microsoft and Intel both have repeatedly run through:
- find a company
whose software helps you develop software, or web pages, or what have you
- buy that company
- make future relaeases that only work on
Windows
as the software rot makes the old versions fail, users of that software are herded towards Windows.- "History shows again and again how nature points out the folly of men" -- Blue Oyster Cult, 'Godzilla'
Microsoft's old strategy of killing competitors by buying them doesn't work with open source. Sorry, Bill.
Since Anders Hejlsberg, the Danish creator of Turbo Pascal was pinched by Borland by Microsoft to be the chief architect of C# and the Common Language Infrastructure used by .NET, perhaps Microsoft will decide to go the whole hog and get the rest of the company too? Borland had (has?) some of the best developers in the field and may be worth buying just for them.
Microsoft today acquired the Free Software Foundation, acquiring the GPL and the last vestiges of competition.
I was about to say that it wouldn't do Microsoft any good because they still wouldn't really be able to use any GPL code, then I realized something...
quite a bit of GPL code has an "or any future version of the GPL" clause. If Microsoft DID aquire FSF it could simply release a new version of the GPL and effectively remove all protection on all of that software.
-
- - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
The real loss will not be C++Builder. The true loss will be Kylix.
While C++Builder is a reasonable approach to C++ development, you need to consider the quality of what it generates. In my experience, the executables that C++Builder generates are very large and very slow to execute. Being a fan of Delphi, I expected fairly small and fast executables when I purchased C++Builder, but there is a definite difference between the runtimes and the resulting executable code.
If you compare the floating point code generated between Delphi and C++Builder, there is an immense difference. The Pascal code generates much faster executables -- and that ought not to be! However, this is the case for Borland's C++ product line and it has been this way for over 10 years.
Practically every other C++ compiler out there generates tighter code than Borland's, especially in the area of floating point math. I am no fan of M$, and never have been, but I must say that their binary code is tighter, by quite a margin, than Borland's. If they acquire Borland and kill off C++Builder, they will be killing off a great GUI front end with a miserable code generator. Yes, I know Borland's is more ANSI compliant...so what? If the binary is slow, and you care about run times, ANSI compatibility is not your primary concern.
Where we will lose as developers will be in the loss of Kylix. It might not be perfect, and it might not be the most efficient code creation engine, but if it creates projects that can be ported to Linux, M$ will want to kill that off quick! And I can't say that I blame them (even if I disagree with the idea).
Be excellent to each other. And... PARTY ON, DUDES!
A) Different people can have different oppinions.
B) Either one could be wrong. How the hell does that mean people can't still assert the other one?
C) They could BOTH be right. It's completely possible for Microsoft to be an EvilMonopoly and on the verge of collapse in one or more markets. Assuming they ARE and EvilMonopoly, anything short of total bankruptcy could still require government intervention to set things right.
-
- - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
While browsing for info in regards to the legality of a proposed buyout of Borland, I ran across this site from Microsoft Monopoly, at Stanford, Its has a fairly well laid out description of all of Microsoft's past woe's and tangles with the law.