Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft's Reaction to OSS Adoption
inode_buddha writes "Eric S. Raymond has the eighth "Halloween" memo available here. It looks like Microsoft is really beginning to notice the national and corporate movement towards FS/OSS, and is reacting accordingly."
In a recent ZDNet article, ZDNet write/predicts that Linux will this year or perhaps next overtake Apple's OS to become the second most common desktop OS. Microsoft simply seems to be reponding to this increasing pressure, which as the ZDNet article point out, is coming as more government's switch over to Linux.
Lawrence Lessig is my personal hero.
...or would everyone have preferred a version without ESR's comments and opinion, so that we could form our own?
Feel that power? That's mah MOUSING FINGER
If I were in a leadership spot at MS...I'd release a slightly different memo to various depts, just to narrow down where the leaks are coming from and eventually just release different ones to people in that department, finding out who is doing it
That is, assuming that these links aren't on purpose =)
We need to more effectively respond to press reports regarding Governments and other major institutions considering OSS alternatives to our products.
Yeah, this is just what I want to do: Make a decision on IT issues and then issue a press release on it. All this will get me is Microsoft knocking on my door asking me for some of my time so that they can attempt to sell me on a product. Look, if I made my decision already to go with OS X, Linux, or whatever, I don't want somebody second guessing my decisions and trying to get me to change my mind.
Visit Jonesblog and say hello.
I don't get it.
Is Microsoft actually dumb enough to write memo after memo about something they now have admitted is their biggest threat and allow all of these memos to leak so the opposition can read them?
I was never sure about the first Halloween memo. The more that are "discovered" the more I wonder if these are truly from M$ (they must be released by our old friend, Mr. Source, or Reliable to those that know him well).
More and more it reminds me of P.D.Q. Bach -- the least of all the Bachs. There's no evidence he existed except from Peter Shickele, who keeps finding more and more works composed by this supposed composer.
While it is a little scary to have the proverbial 10,000th pounded gorilla coming after you, I think we should be happy that we're starting to make the fat cats at Micro$oft nervous.
In the past, Linux has been mostly ignored by Evil Bill and company. It made sense. Like *BSD these days, we had such a small install base that we didn't really pose much of a threat. But in the past year or two, Linux has really started to explode. It's popping up on servers, PDAs, hell, even cash registers. Suddenly, we're a force to be reckoned with.
What we need to do now is strike while the iron's hot and go for the kill. We've got them running scared, and I think one final push is all it will take to bury Windows forever, another tombstone on the side of the fabled Information Superhighway. I plan to do my part by open sourcing all of my non-sensitive projects and donating a token amount to the FSF each year. I encourage others to do more.
Karma: Good (despite my invention of the Karma: sig)
the memo outlines perfectly healthy organizational function. it's exactly what MS should be doing. if those folks actually function that way, they've moved up a few notches in my esteem.
My question is, if Linux overtakes MacOS on the desktop, can Microsoft continue to justify to it's shareholders the reasons behind not making Office for Linux?
They can't say there isn't a market if they make Office for a *less* popular OS.
(It's not that I actually want nor need Office for Linux.. but it's something I'm curious about)
You eventually give up and use it. Think about things you have resisted in your life but you eventually started to use it and LIkE IT! Common examples are the metric system adoption, usb devices, iso 8601, and so on. The better system may be hated and resisted at first, but it usually succeeds and linux is the next one.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
I don't see how his inline comments add anything to the memo that we wouldn't have gotten from it if he hasn't simply quoted it sans-editorial. In fact, his comments look less like clarification and commentary than simple whining. He should read "Eric Raymond's tips for effective open source advocacy" some time. ;-)
I also am surprised that he acts almost insulted by the memo. What did he expect, Microsoft would support OSS? The phrase "free software" gets the same reaction from Microsoft as the phrase "free cars" would get from Ford. Don't fault the rattlesnake for biting.
Not really. There are a number of MS employee reading this web site every day, with instructions to post pro-MS messages or mod up pro-MS messages. And if I was in their position, I'd do the same thing. This is much more efficient "marketing" than, say, MS ads on Newforge...
Reminder: find a new sig
If MS wants to "win" this "war", all they have to do is port their apps to Linux. MS Office, Exchange, Outlook, .NET, etc.
If they do that, they win. People like their apps, or at the very least they're used to them. If they port, one of two things will happen:
1. Everyone will migrate to Linux, but run MS apps (unlikely, but MS just becomes an app farm instead of an OS farm. Big change, but MS gets to live on.)
2. People say, "Hey, I can run MS apps on Linux, and it's cheaper! But wait, they're probably more tightly integrated into their own OS. And they have better support. Hmm, it's probably worth it just to buy the whole package. Less work, too."
I mean, MS still will always have the Joe Schmowe desktop users as long as they control OEMs and maintain their humongous inertia. (Remember, inertia is what keeps alive the x86 monster.) So their worry is for big institutions defecting. If the institution has a very high priority on saving money (e.g., a government), they're going to go to Linux or similar anyway, so MS should just try to keep what slice of the pie it can by porting its popular apps, and actually making some use of its inertia. But if the institution wants a whole pre-packaged, integrated license deal, they're going to go MS all the way because no one else comes close to the app/OS integration they do. (This is similar to what Sun does, selling their hardware and Solaris all at once. And they don't have MS Office!) Heck, MS apps and OS are so integrated, even MS can't pick them apart! They don't know their dll/exe dependencies any better than we do!
Further, MS will get good publicity because they can no longer be so easily derided as anti-competitive. Who cares if the source isn't open? The media and Joe User can't pick up on subtleties like that, and when OSS zealots start crying foul, Joe User will just think they have a stick up their ass, ruining their public image. Joe User doesn't care about source. Joe User will never read a line of source or compile a single app in his life. Joe User gets his software in a BOX. At COMPUSA!
If MS ports its apps to Linux, MS wins, plain and simple. If they just get over this "Not Invented Here" stupidity, they are unstoppable. If they don't, they'll die the death of a thousand pinpricks.
(Hey, I just thought of something! Maybe MS should roll their own Linux distro, too!)
they've left it too late. Since they did not make Office available for Linux others have moved in and filled the gap already.
Why on earth would I install MS Office on Linux when I've already replaced it, even on my Windows partition?
Keep up, or drop out. MS dropped the ball on this one because they thought no one could catch up, let alone put *them* in the catch up position.
They were wrong.
KFG
Actually, yes. MSFT has an amazing history of shilling and astroturfing:
I'm sure there's more, that's just all I can scrounge up in a few minutes. I seem to remember another MSFT-funded think-tank ("Indepence Institute"?) white paper, and there was an interesting "Brill's Content" article on how MSFT tracks reporters and what they write about MSFT. Actually, isn't the above enough? 10 items from 9 different sources about all varieties of shilling and astroturfing in forums from small to nation-wide. Yes, I think it's prudent to believe that MSFT employees watch Slashdot and mod-up pro-MSFT articles, or even submit them.
I'd go so far as to say that the average person should be suspicious of any pro-MSFT article or viewpoint posted in a public forum. If you, the reader, are pro-MSFT, I'm sorry: if you lie down with pigs, you can't expect to wake up in the morning smelling like roses.
Quit playing Monopoly with Bill. Switch to one of many non-Microsoft products today.
People have overlooked one major trend and that's the rise of web native ASP's. Our company is one of hundreds out there creating vertical industry specific applications. Things like accounting, supply chain management, crm and sales force automation. Everything is available through a browser. You're not aware of it because the great majority of companies like ours may be well known in their industries but not on any national radar screen. What happens in five years time when companies realize that the only thing they use Windows for is email and MS Office? Suddenly Linux with evolution and Open Office becomes a viable alternative. If the business applications are all accessed through the browser the games over for Windows. People that's the main reason Microsoft bought Great Plains. They want all these vertical providers working on a Microsoft framework. Man Holmes
I think that Halloween VII is an even better example. In this document, Microsoft says the best way to attack OSS is by stressing the TCO of Microsoft vs. Linux. That document is dated 4 November.
One month later (3 December), IDC puts out a study giving Win2K a better TCO than Linux.
Coincidence?
The
Please note: XML is NOT the holy grail.
/etc/hosts file by hand if it's in an XML style, it's much easier in the current style. Moreover writing a GUI for editing non-XML config files is no big difficulty. Configuration files should be editable by hand (easily) and possibly by a GUI.
It *can* be an excellent solution for many problems but it always depends on what and how you do it.
Misunderstanding (1): XML is human readable
Yes, it is. (unless it is not compressed with a proprietary protocol which is not so unlikely). But only because you can read it this does not mean you can actually *understand* it. The so called scheme, that makes you understand an XML document can be proprietary and not open. There is no reason to believe that Microsoft XML-Documents will have public available schemes.
Misunderstanding (2): XML is suitable for everything (e.g. configuration files).
Simply wrong. It's no fun at all to e.g. edit the
To me XML has it's pros but also it's cons.
Microsoft wants us to believe that they converted from "Saulus to Paulus" by using a standardized language that is human readable. But we will all soon recognize that they will still use their proprietary formats to lock everyone out.
Sure they can hold back mass migration to linux but what does it bother us? If we keep this pace up in development of Linux Microsoft will be lagging behind real soon. The snowball is rolling and i dont think Microsoft has the capability to stop it anymore. Lets leave Microsoft behind and let them fight a ghost. Without something to hit they are lost. They have shown us again and again with their gorilla practices that they cant compete on engineering or quality with anyone.
Let them fight nothing but air and windmills!
HTTP/1.1 400
As long as the 'jihad' spirit doesn't distract Linux developers, I can't really see what's wrong with it.
I see the 'jihad' spirit as a double edged sword. On one hand it is a strong motivating factor and promotes unity throught the community. On the other it opens the OSS movement up to accusations of extremism and can make it difficult to be objective. I see a danger that the OSS movement becomes overwhelmed with anti-M$ sentiment, and any movement that is purely reactionary is destined to collapse shortly after the thing it is reacting against.
I would argue that Microsoft is not "just another corporation going about its business" due to Microsoft's sheer wealth and power. Microsoft has the ability to buy out or atomise just about any organisation or competitor they feel the need to destroy.
Agreed, perhaps I over-compensated for my own jihad-induced reactionism :)
When server administrators and companies see just why Linux is getting better than Microsoft products, then they will switch.
I sincerely hope this is the case, and there are some signs that it is. Unfortunatly these decisions are not always made on technical merit alone, superior technology does not always win the day. There used to be a saying in IT: 'no one ever gets fired for choosing IBM'. A similar culture now exists in reference to M$. Coupled with the fact that many of the techies, here in the UK at least, know nothing of (and are scared of) *nix I think we have no room for complaicence.
We're going to have to do a lot to improve the UI and smooth running of Linux, and to increase compatibility with Windows software.
Agreed, although I already find the Windows UI almost unusable after 3 years of KDE.
I too think that OSS will win the day, but I don't think it will take decades. Linux has come from a nonentity to a virus-like threat to the Microsoft paradigm in the space of just one decade. In another decade Linux could quite easily have taken over the server market and a lot of the corporate market. It'd probably be making good inroads into the realm of the home user as well.
You may well be right, but now that M$ is taking OSS seriously I suspect that things are going to get more difficult. If palladium takes off, if M$ backed anti-copyright legislation causes collateral damage to OSS, if M$ continues to be allowed to aggresivly 'lock-in' its users, then we may find it much more difficult to gain ground. As I say, this is also a battle of ideologies. The ideology of the OSS movement contradicts much of modern corporate consumerism.
Your ideas are fascinating and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter.
Thank you, unfortunatley I spend far too much time coding to produce one. If this changes I'll let you know :)
At least thats my guess. It's a common acronym used at other companies. It's a sales department, not a law department.
post their words without the "translations" and they'll hang themselves
No, post the copyrighted words of Microsoft without criticism or comment and the Feds hang YOU!
Will I retire or break 10K?