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.
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.
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)
I'm not fond of 10,000 pound gorillas either, but RMS makes a good point with the quote from Ghandi. When M$ was ignoring Linux, it wasn't a threat. Now they're fighting. They're trying everything they can to take out Linux.
But look at what's happening. They've tried outright FUD. They've tried new licensing (which was stupid and backfired). And now they're trying FUD again.
It really is like the Borg. M$ has been used to just assimilating (buying out) or destroying any competition (either by pricing their products lower until the competition is bankrupt, by leveraging their monopoly to force people to use M$ standards, or by twisting arms in backroom deals). Now they don't know what to do -- instead of facing a big threat with one name, where a well aimed shot, or a massive attack could destroy any threat, they're fighting something all pervasive, like a virus.
And the funny thing is they don't know what to od! It's got them so scared they're beginning to do stupid things and having knee-jerk reactions.
I don't think Windows will end up burried forever, but I think if Linux distros unified and started pushing easy to use desktop systems with OpenOffice.org on them, I think we'd soon find that most companies are not focusing on JUST Word compatability anymore, but on Word and OOo.
Linux is in a good position, and it gets better and better. M$ is fighting Linux -- but that's because it's a real threat and could even (conceivably, but unlikely) bankrupt the company. That's good, because M$ has no idea how to fight a movement. They just don't understand the structure -- by their very nature of being a cold-hearted predatory company, there is no way they ever can understand OSS.
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
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