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."

69 of 526 comments (clear)

  1. ZDNet is saying the same thing by pgpckt · · Score: 5, Interesting

    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.
    1. Re:ZDNet is saying the same thing by mosch · · Score: 4, Interesting
      What's to stop a corporation from running non-linux applications on citrix, thus cutting their workstation licensing and support costs dramatically?

      After all, most business applications work beautifully over citrix.

    2. Re:ZDNet is saying the same thing by Reality+Master+101 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      What's missing? What am I missing?

      The ability for my wife to walk into Best Buy and purchase "Hoyle Card Games". Or "Reader Rabbit Preschool".

      Or buy a digital camera and use the included picture organizing software that my in-laws bought.

      Of course, Quicken is unavailable. GnuCash is not a particularly "friendly" substitute for most people either. And until I can pay my bills over the Internet, it wouldn't be a substitute for me either.

      I really could go on and on, but the point is that Linux is not mainstream and you can't get mainstream software.

      --
      Sometimes it's best to just let stupid people be stupid.
    3. Re:ZDNet is saying the same thing by jonnythan · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The fact that this solution is complex, and there is no gurantee that all present and future applications will actually work on citrix?

    4. Re:ZDNet is saying the same thing by c13v3rm0nk3y · · Score: 5, Insightful
      After all, most business applications work beautifully over citrix.

      I guess mileage may vary. We abandoned Citrix/winframe years ago and never looked back. As a means of sharing or forwarding apps across an international VPN, it totally sucked^h^h^h^h^h^hrefused to work properly for this corp.

      I could use stronger words to describe how much I dislike all Citrix products, but I've used the word "sucks" too much recently. My New Years resolution was to stop saying

      1. sucks
      2. it's all good
      3. believe it
      this year. So far, so good.
      --
      -- clvrmnky
    5. Re:ZDNet is saying the same thing by Foochar · · Score: 3, Informative

      Be sure to read your EULAs real close before you do this. Microsoft has worded their EULAs so that you still have to license a copy of the app for every machine you have that connects to citrix. You also have to have a Microsoft Terminal Services CAL for every machine that connects to the Citrix server, because the citrix server is running on top of Microsoft Terminal Services. The cost for a TS CAL is about 1/4 of an XP license...

      --
      "You can't fight in here! This is the war room" --Dr. Stra
    6. Re:ZDNet is saying the same thing by Kiaser+Zohsay · · Score: 4, Informative

      thus cutting their workstation licensing and support costs dramatically?

      A company I was once with looked at Microsoft's Windows NT 4.0 Terminal Server Edition with a similar idea. Among other things, they could standardize on some NT4-specific apps without having to roll out NT4 to the whole organization. But they soon found out that the fine print of the licensing agreement said that since apps running in the terminal server were on NT4, then the user was using NT4, and if the client machine was not running NT4, you get to pay for an NT4 license. The company wound up saying "if we're gonna pay for NT4 on all our desktops, then we're gonna by God run NT4 on all our desktops". An additional downside was that whenever they want to upgrade from NT4 to NT5 (2000), they got to pay for upgrades across the board again. There were some other benfits, like WAN access and centralized administration, but licensing was definately not one of them.

      Now Citrix is the company that came up with the idea of making Windows NT "multi-user" over the network. They licensed the NT3.51 source from Microsoft and fixed a lot of the "single-user-isms" and made a product out of it. Then, with NT4, Microsoft said "we won't let you make money from our OS anymore, but we will license the fixes from you so we can make money from it" and Terminal Server was born. Citrix was still making client apps for additional platforms like *NIX and handhelds and such for a while, but I'm not sure what they're up to these days.

      Of course, everyone here knows that the MIT X Consortium was running graphical apps on multiuser machines over the network back in the late 1980's.

      --
      I am not your blowing wind, I am the lightning.
    7. Re:ZDNet is saying the same thing by rainer_d · · Score: 3, Informative
      It's not gonna happen (sadly enough) until there a free, open and viable competitor to Exchange. Maybe three years down the road, but who knows what MS has cooked up for then.

      Looked at SamsungContact ?. It's HP's OpenMail, further developed.

      • Corp can keep Outlook on the Windoze-Client
      • Geeks can use the Linux-Client
      • migration from exchange possible

      --
      Windows 2000 - from the guys who brought us edlin
  2. Is it just me... by awx · · Score: 3, Interesting

    ...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
    1. Re:Is it just me... by Spy+Hunter · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Yes. Some of his comments are just childish. "We'll start by learning how to type the word "become" correctly. We promise." I mean, come on. Everyone makes mistakes.

      --
      main(c,r){for(r=32;r;) printf(++c>31?c=!r--,"\n":c<r?" ":~c&r?" `":" #");}
    2. Re:Is it just me... by chumpieboy · · Score: 3, Insightful
      From below the H8 document:

      For a good indication of the sterling quality of human being we are dealing with here

      Was that necessary either?

    3. Re:Is it just me... by br0ck · · Score: 5, Informative
      We've discussed this one before. He's not just doing it to be cute, he's trying to avoid--perhaps ineffectively since this is a modified copy not a derivitive work--copyright violation. From the FAQ.

      Would you please make un-annotated versions available?
      No. As it is, my defense against a copyright-violation suit by Microsoft would have to make rather creative use of the exemptions in copyright case law relating to journalism, satire and commentary. I fear that making un-annotated copies available would place me at significant legal risk.
    4. Re:Is it just me... by Zeinfeld · · Score: 3, Insightful
      We've discussed this one before. He's not just doing it to be cute, he's trying to avoid--perhaps ineffectively since this is a modified copy not a derivitive work--copyright violation.

      This makes no sense at all. The annotation is not going to stop Microsoft filing a suit, it might provide a defense but it certainly isn't going get the case thrown out.

      Microsoft is not going to file a case like that for damages, if they did file the case it would be to shut the squirt up. The fact they have choosen not to do this indicates that either they don't care or they realise that that type of tactic is likely to give more to feed ESR's ego.

      What it comes down to is that the comments are just another way that ESR uses the documents to feed his ego.

      --
      Looking for an Information Security student project suggestion?
      Try http://dotcrimeManifesto.com/
    5. Re:Is it just me... by mce · · Score: 3, Insightful

      That may be a valid reason, but if he cannot come up with better annotations that what he used this time, I move that the underlying memo was not worth the trouble.

      Sometimes I get the impression that ESR has painted himself into a corner with these Halloween documents. The first two were absolutely worthwhile, but as time goes on he seems to feel obliged to produce follow-ups at almost regular intervals (advance notice for the trolls: please don't take that literally), whether or not he's got something substantial to comment about. All in all, I think he is doing both himself and a lot of others a considerable disservice with that. When promoting Linux at work, for instance, I do not want to be confronted with "Look at how childish these Linux zealots are. How can we ever entrust our valuable data to software produced by such people." argumuents. Yes such arguments are silly. Yes, they can be debunked. But every minute doing the latter is a minute not spent on promoting Linux.

    6. Re:Is it just me... by Doc+Hopper · · Score: 5, Informative

      His main claim to popularity comes from writing "The Cathedral and the Bazaar". The problem is that the seminal understandings that sprang from that lightweight volume are now considered common knowledge. ESR was the first to codify into easily-understood form the innate truths about free software development that people had long since suspected.

      He's come out with some more good ones (in particular, I like "Homesteading the Noosphere), but he hasn't written any work with more impact than than "Cathedral". He was also the first to publish the original "Halloween Document", which showed that Microsoft was, at last, taking the GNU/Linux threat seriously.

      These days, almost everybody in the free-software/OSS development world understands the difference between the Bazaar and Cathedral development methods. They often consciously choose one or the other, or to develop according to Cathedral methodology, and transition to Bazaar after initial successful release. People understand the success of the development of GNU/Linux now, and despite what some will try to say, most really didn't until 1996 and the CaTB publication.

      Lately, he's mostly a critic. Fetchmail is very slow on the development side these days, and his efforts to create a new build system for the Linux kernel were not accepted (killer effort, though, and well thought out, just too politically charged and too sweeping of a change for most people's tastes). However, he's still an exceptionally influential self-appointed Linux advocate. His opinions are read by millions of readers in and out of the free software community.

      For the bio on the stuff he's done that has had a massive impact on the free/oss software scene, check out his bio: http://tuxedo.org/~esr/resume.html

      Regardless, he has many publications in print and does a lot of speaking conventions. Like Bruce Perens, who is also influential in the community, he chose the role of public advocate for GNU/Linux for himself, and has been very successful in that role.

  3. Mindshare by nege · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Looks to me like this has a lot to do with perception. PArt of MS' deal is that they have lots of mindshare. If the people realize that they HAVE options in terms of office and OS, then they certainly will at least explore those options. MS needs to keep people thinking that MS is the only way to get something done, so this memo is no surprise IMHO. Interesting though anyway.

  4. Well by Jonny+Ringo · · Score: 3, Funny

    That's what they get for living like assholes. Bill Gates has 7 kitchens and around 70 bathrooms! Shit, If I was a billionare I wouldn't even have 1 bathroom. I'd just be like "clean me up, come on 1,000 bucks to the first person to wipe my ass.

    1. Re:Well by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

      but instead you'll keep working at McDonalds saving up your money to buy that perfect aluminum spoiler for your '87 civic.

    2. Re:Well by sharkey · · Score: 3, Funny

      I'd just be like "clean me up, come on 1,000 bucks to the first person to wipe my ass.

      MS Depends: "You look like you just shit your pants. Would you like some help arraigning for a Smithers to clean you up?"

      --

      --
      "Outlook not so good." That magic 8-ball knows everything! I'll ask about Exchange Server next.
  5. Mirror here by grub · · Score: 5, Funny


    January 2, 2003
    From: William Gates III
    To: All Employees

    The sky is falling!

    Thank you,

    - Bill

    --
    Trolling is a art,
  6. Irritating by Reality+Master+101 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The memo is mildly interesting, but ESR is growing more shrill and childish with each passing year. GOOD LORD a company is exploring how to compete with other products?? ALERT THE PRESS.

    Sheesh, maybe Microsoft is good for some things, and OSS is good for other things. And to talk like Microsoft is going to "lose" with $40 billion dollars in the bank is ludicrous at best.

    Fah, ESR is not as annoying as RMS (that is, of course, impossible), but he seems to be heading down the path.

    --
    Sometimes it's best to just let stupid people be stupid.
    1. Re:Irritating by Omnifarious · · Score: 3, Insightful

      If they don't change something, they will lose, no matter how much money they have in the bank.

    2. Re:Irritating by bgfay · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I agree that ESR sounds here like an idiot. I remember that, some time ago, during a windows refund day he dressed up as Obi Wan. What's up with that? He seems to want both to be _the_ spokesperson for Linux and a geeky idiot at the same time. The two things don't match.

      For many years, when I wasn't running Linux, I hated Microsoft, Bill Gates and the lot of them. Then I got Linux running and realized that it's much more fun for me. So now I don't boot Windows very often. All my emnity toward MS was just a waste of time, it was childish, and it did no one any good. Does MS make software that I like to use? No, not often. Are they evil? Well, probably not.

      Back to ESR. "The Cathedral and the Bazaar" whether you agree with it or not was a good piece of writing. It was well crafted and I enjoy reading it. The commentary along with this memo is ridiculously bad writing. Embarassing stuff. Were I a developer of Linux, I would be pissed that this guy was speaking for me. As a mere user, I'm embarrassed that he thinks this is helpful.

      Raymond ought to pull this version down, put up the memo and leave his commentary at the end or on an optional page. His argument would be made for him and he'd look the part of an intelligent man.

      --
      Yeah, I'm as old as my UID would suggest.
    3. Re:Irritating by DickBreath · · Score: 4, Insightful
      GOOD LORD a company is exploring how to compete with other products?? ALERT THE PRESS.

      Microsoft is doing more than exploring how to compete. Microsoft does not compete. They destroy competition. They only explore how to destroy a competitor. Read one of the earlier documents Haloween III where ESR says...

      Yes, and it's routine and appropriate for vendors to discuss the measures they'll take against the competition. What is not quite so routine is to see the discussion imply a cold-blooded acceptance of methods including FUD tactics and dirty tricks such as ``de-commoditizing'' open standards into monopolistic lock-in devices.


      Did you follow the day-by-day testimony of the Microsoft antitrust trial? (I did.) Did you see the e-mail and other documents introduced as evidence? Discussion of how to cut off Netscape's air supply. Etc. This company does not compete. It is not merely enough for them to succeed. Everyone else MUST fail! This is a company where no low is too low. Have you somehow missed all of the things Microsoft has done? This is a company that will steal other's code (Stac Electronics). They will lie before a federal judge and show doctored videotapes as evidence. The list is long.

      A company that studies competing products in order to compete has in mind to better their own products where they might be weak against competition in order to compete more effectively. Nowhere in the Haloween documents do you see any notion of competition. Its all about how to destroy competitors, prevent their entry into the market, make sure that major accounts don't get a chance to give open source a fair hearing.


      And to talk like Microsoft is going to "lose" with $40 billion dollars in the bank is ludicrous at best.

      Microsoft as a whole is not going anywhere anytime soon, and is not going away ever.
      BR But who would have thought back in 1981 that IBM would loose control of the personal computer industry in so short a time? IBM, the big, entrenched monopolist, who controlled the industry with an iron grip, just as Microsoft does today. Things change. If Microsoft is so secure, then why do they seem to so urgently need to respond to open source in the Haloween memos? If they are so truly interested in competition, they why don't they continue to better their products and leave open source alone?
      --

      I'll see your senator, and I'll raise you two judges.
    4. Re:Irritating by InnovATIONS · · Score: 3, Insightful
      If you have ever worked in a corporate sales environment none of these memos seems particularly unusual or alarming. This is standard competitive practice in sales and marketing. They tend to use dramatic language and analogies because that is the business that they are in.

      In the commentaries not only does he show him self to be shrill but also not understanding of the environment of corporate competitive marketing and public relations.

      The memo just says that they have to act calmly, coherently, and proactively when major announcements of OSS products occur. So? You expect them to act like a bunch of uncoordinated volunteers because that would be fairer?

    5. Re:Irritating by Reality+Master+101 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Discussion of how to cut off Netscape's air supply.

      The other replier said this as well, but sheesh how naive are you? This is the language of marketing people.

      I'm not going to particularly defend Microsoft in all aspects, but...

      It is not merely enough for them to succeed. Everyone else MUST fail!

      Big freaking deal. Guess what? I want my competitors to fail also!! OH MY GOD I am such a horrible person for wanting my products to be bought over my competitor's! Maybe I should just try and not get too many customers. I don't want to be mean to my competitors.

      And what makes this all the more laughable is when you look at many Linux advocates. They are more blood thirsty than any Microsoft exec. It's not enough for Linux to succeed, they need Microsoft's charter to be revoked.

      --
      Sometimes it's best to just let stupid people be stupid.
  7. Microsoft by reyalsnogard · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I find this 'fear' quite enlightening. It's about time MS felt *some* form of competition. They were getting a little too miserly and stifling innovation. (i.e. HOW long has Mozilla had tabbed browsing and ad-suppression? *When* might IE?)

    It's also nice that quite a few companies, such as Lindows.com, are taking a bite out of MS's Law Creation/Politician Acquisition fund by suing them over patent abuse and/or common-name copyrighting.

    Hopefully the "little people" in the market will have more of an effect on MS than the DoJ.

    1. Re:Microsoft by cbv · · Score: 3, Insightful
      HOW long has Mozilla had tabbed browsing and ad-suppression? *When* might IE?

      It doesn't matter, because whenever IE WILL have tabbed browsing, Microsoft will announce it as their newly discovered revolutionary way of browsing the web - just like they did when Windows came out, regardless that Apply and DRi had "windows" for years before that...

  8. Eight Halloween Memos? by TheWanderingHermit · · Score: 5, Interesting

    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.

    1. Re:Eight Halloween Memos? by Otter · · Score: 5, Insightful
      Linux is a major competitor on the server front, perhaps _the_ competitor. It might emerge as a serious competitor on the desktop. Microsoft takes it into account when strategizing.

      That's it. These aren't the plans to Death Star, and no Bothans have died so Eric Raymond could ridicule a misspelled word. Except maybe for the first one or two, they're utterly routine corporate memos.

      The fact that much of Raymond's fan base has never had a job causes them to read a memo from a sales head saying, "Go out there and fight!" and freak out. "M$ is plotting to destroy Lunix!!! To the X-wings!" There's nothing the "opposition" is going to get out of these things.

    2. Re:Eight Halloween Memos? by JudasBlue · · Score: 5, Insightful

      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?

      In short, yes, they are. Never worked at the enterprise level, have you?

      Exactly how else are you going to communicate with divisions that have over 5,000 people in them in order to set policy and implement proceedures than send out memos and other documentary evidence? Direct communication doesn't work over around 30 people in an office, that is why there are entirely different managment techniques for very small buisness situations and mid sized business scenarios.

      As for "allowing them to leak", when you have hundreds of people in on a memo, some of whom might have their own motives for wanting to see one idea/department/division spun a certain way, it is exceedingly difficult to keep that information from going public. Just ask the government, which is constantly leaking information, sometimes intentionally, but just as frequently unintentionally.

      Microsoft used to be a sure path to making millions quickly for an employee, but the stock options aren't worth what they used to be. It is not surprising to me at least that the level of employee loyalty might drop. Further, this might actually be a case of employee loyalty. If you really were devoted to your company, but were convinced it was going the wrong direction, this might be a way to help force the situation.

      I am not saying that I know that these memos are real, but thinking that Microsoft just wouldn't let this happen isn't realistic. All you need is a couple of people at the right level and it is exceedingly hard to stop this kind of thing. It can be done, but requires tight compartmentalization, which is very hard to do with large scale policies that you are implementing across entire enterprise groups.

      --

      7. What we cannot speak about we must pass over in silence.

    3. Re:Eight Halloween Memos? by TheWanderingHermit · · Score: 3, Interesting

      No -- I haven't worked at enterprise level. I used to be a teacher and now I'm happily running my own small business (and bound and determined that no matter how well it does, that the number of employees always stays small enough that I know them all).

      Thanks for a point of view that I don't have.

  9. looks like great news for Linux by tps12 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    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)
    1. Re:looks like great news for Linux by TheWanderingHermit · · Score: 5, Interesting

      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.

    2. Re:looks like great news for Linux by EnVisiCrypt · · Score: 3, Informative

      "RMS makes a good point with the quote from Ghandi"

      It should be noted that ESR, not RMS annotated this particular document.

      --


      *everything* is Orwellian to cats.
  10. Office for Linux? by prockcore · · Score: 5, Interesting

    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)

    1. Re:Office for Linux? by BWJones · · Score: 5, Insightful

      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?

      So, this is an interesting and obvious question that has been kicked around for some time. As a M$ shareholder I have made this argument before that if Microsoft would cease attempting to make everything fit within the Windows paradigm and start writing quality software that meets consumer demand, they would be a much more powerful and wealthier company. Hey, all one has to do is look at the profitability of the Macintosh Business unit at Microsoft which is doing quite nicely thank you, making software for a completely different platform than Windows. In fact, I find the Office X for OS X to be a superior product to the Windows version of Office given the tie-ins to OS X functionality and rendering.

      --
      Visit Jonesblog and say hello.
    2. Re:Office for Linux? by DickBreath · · Score: 5, Interesting

      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.


      They can justify it.

      They make Office for Mac as an extortion tool to force Apple into compliance with Microsoft's wishes. Hey, Apple, you better make Internet Exploder the default browser or we'll discontinue Office for the Mac. Sound crazy? The preceeding came out in the antitrust trial.

      No such extortion logic applies to Open Source. Hey, Open Source, you better do XXXX or we'll discontinue (or won't initially develop) Microsoft Office for Linux! I wonder what the open source community's reaction would be if MS threatened not to bring Office to Linux? How badly would we take it? Just how much could Microsoft force us to do using this tactic?

      --

      I'll see your senator, and I'll raise you two judges.
    3. Re:Office for Linux? by swillden · · Score: 3, Insightful

      It may take a few more steps to work on Debian, but it would still run just fine.

      And, of course, Debian (and other unsupported distro) developers would use the tried-and-true trick of making an "installer package", which runs the MS install software and then automatically performs whatever tweaks are necessary to make it go. The result would be:

      apt-get install msoffice-installer

      The installer would prompt you to insert the MS CD and in a few minutes you'd have a working Office X11 install.

      I predict that such a package would hit the Debian unstable repositories about two days after MS released Office X11.

      MS can pick one distro and support only that one; it won't slow the rest of the x86 Linux world much at all.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    4. Re:Office for Linux? by swillden · · Score: 3, Insightful

      the product will be pirated on a massive scale (or copied in an infringing manner) from the very instant it is available.

      And this is different from the Windows version how?

      I built a machine for my brother-in-law for Christmas and installed OpenOffice.org on it, rather than an infringing copy of Office (yes, I have a copy of Office XP, purchased for $2 by my brother in Macedonia; no, I don't use it). I pointed out that OpenOffice.org does everything he needs, can read and write MS Office files and should work just fine. He called his brother and got a copy of MS Office to install. Why? Not because he found OpenOffice.org to be inadequate -- he didn't even try it -- but because pirating MS Office was so trivially easy and such a normal thing to do that he thought the idea of even trying to use something legal was just silly.

      The fact is, home users almost invariably steal their software, and business users generally pay for it. There's no reason to suppose that the underlying operating system platform would have any effect on this state of affairs.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    5. Re:Office for Linux? by IamTheRealMike · · Score: 3, Insightful
      . Hey, all one has to do is look at the profitability of the Macintosh Business unit at Microsoft which is doing quite nicely thank you, making software for a completely different platform than Windows. In fact, I find the Office X for OS X to be a superior product to the Windows version of Office given the tie-ins to OS X functionality and rendering.

      Well, there are two separate issues here.

      The first is that Microsoft most likely would not rewrite Office for Linux, ever. It simply costs too much. Office X by the way has not been very profitable, in fact, it may not even have been profitable at all, I seem to remember Microsoft bitching at Apple telling them to sell more copies of a competing OS just so they could make back what they spent on it.

      It's also kind of a moot point, as Office already runs OK on Linux via Wine. If Microsoft wanted to "make" Office for Linux, all they'd need to do is ship binaries compiled with WineLib. A weeks work for one or two people, at most. Of course they'd probabably want to improve Wine if they were going to do that, which is fortunately now LGPLd.

      In short, I think it'll be a cold day in hell before Microsoft release Office for Linux, but even if they don't, it doesn't matter, because you can just buy the Windows version and use that. Office X is certainly good, but it shows what Joel Spolski has been saying for some time, namely that rewrites rarely pay off. This all assumes MS can keep their lead on Office suites of course. OpenOffice isn't as good as MS Office yet, not by a long way (he says as OO segfaults on him yet again [sigh]), but Office hasn't really changed a great deal lately. It's not inconceivable that OO could catch up.

  11. Anyone still care? by Otter · · Score: 5, Insightful
    A cut and paste of my LinuxToday post -- too busy arguing H1-B policy here to come up with something new...for entertainment purposes, I will throw in a link to ESR heroically facing down al-Qaeda.

    Who cares any more? Clearly, free software has now risen to the point where competing software makers take it into account in their planning. Eric Raymond periodically gets his hands on some entirely routine memo from Microsoft and spins it into some apocalyptic confrontation between Good and Evil. He needs to lay off the Lord of the Rings, I think.

    Actually, the memo is funny in its concern. Basically, it deals with the fact that when some government considers switching a few servers to Linux, or some legislator proposes an open-source-only policy, Slashdot and the rest of the Linux media turn it into "INDIA SWITCHING TO LINUX!" AND "NORWAY SWITCHING TO LINUX!" It's not nearly as much deliberate spin as it is complete journalistic incompetence and the inability to read linked articles, but it's an effective enough fUD technique that Microsoft feels compelled to respond to it. ;-)

  12. The document is so boring, it is probably real... by dagg · · Score: 5, Funny
    The commentary on the document is pretty hard-hitting:
    {We'll start by learning how to type the word "become" correctly. We promise.}

    That in reference to a misspelling in the memo. That's some pretty juicy stuff they found there.

    --
    Sex - Find It
  13. Big Deal... by pdaoust · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Miscrosoft is just behaving like any other company would when threatened by competition, be it OSS or other...

  14. Sounds like Microsoft is... by DA_MAN_DA_MYTH · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ... running a normal business. Microsoft is a business that is looking to make money. Goverments and Corporations moving to Linux and Star Office means less money for them. They are trying circumvent that. Can you blame them?

    This is an unusual Halloween memorandum in that it's not particularly redolent of evil.

    Was this newsworthy? Microsoft definitely does not have a monopoly on servers. Also they are beginning to lose their grasp of a monopoly on the desktop. They realize this, why doesn't everyone else.

    --
    "It takes many nails to build a crib, but one screw to fill it."
  15. Looks like a fairly routine memo to me . . . by fetta · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I don't really see anything that sinister here. It looks like a typical memo defining a procedure for responding with "one voice" to a business challenge that Microsoft faces. Frankly, I'd be surprised if they weren't having these kind of discussions.

    Some of the comments seem unecessarily shrill to me. Example:

    Name the key contacts within the gov't
    {Translation: Who can we suborn?}


    Providing a list of people to contact does not imply suborning (from m-w.com "to induce secretly to do an unlawful thing") to me. How is it unlawful to contact a customer who might be going to a competitor and trying to convince them to reconsider?

    Don't get me wrong - I'm excited to see governments looking at Linux and Open Source as an alternative. I just don't think it serves anybody's best interest to take a pretty routine memo and try to turn it into the Pentagon Papers.

    --
    ** The opinions expressed here are my own, and do not reflect those of my employers - past, present, or future**
  16. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  17. Re:The document is so boring, it is probably real. by SuiteSisterMary · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Not to mention that their security 'sucks dead maggots through a straw.' Having run out of actual things to call Microsoft upon, it's nice to see the bulwarks of OSS are reduced to such as this.

    Maybe one of these days I'll try out some dead-equine-flagellation myself; it seems to be awful fun. Happens so much around here, I MUST be missing out on something....

    --
    Vintage computer games and RPG books available. Email me if you're interested.
  18. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  19. In Other News... by zentec · · Score: 5, Funny


    Eric S. Raymond was arrested today by the FBI for being in posession of confidential documents from Microsoft corporation. Microsoft has charged that posession is tantimount to industrial espionage and violates the DMCA.

    "I find the whole matter deeply disturbing and troubling that this confidential document ended up in the hands of this individual. Obviously, intellectual and ownership rights have no meaning to the 'Linux' crowd and it just goes to show you their true mettle", said Microsoft spokesperson Nyles Forebush in an exclusive interview to Slashdot's Cowboy Neil.

    Mr. Raymond is being held without bail at the federal penetentiary in Milan, Michigan.

  20. Eric needs to tone down the message a bit... by coupland · · Score: 5, Interesting

    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.

  21. Re:This should be modded "scary" by Archie+Steel · · Score: 4, Interesting

    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
  22. of course they can justify it to the share holders by kapital · · Score: 3, Insightful

    from a pure valuation standpoint, the returns that MS share holders recieve come from the monopoly tag team in both upstream and downstream markets (the OS and the application). to weaken that link would dramatically change the dynamics of the free cash flow forcasts going forward.

    that is to say nothing of the signalling effect that it would have in the market. begining to sell office for linux be taken as a very pessimistic signal about MS management's view of their relative strenth.

    the stock would take a beating and the lawsuits would fly. at this point i'm pretty sure it would do nothing if not make a train wreck of the equity value.

  23. Who cares about your wife? by Pac · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Her boss will find it much better that she can't use company time to play "Hoyle Card Games", organise her pictures and manage her finances.

    On the other hand, not having to pay for the next Windows and the next Office on your wife's workstation may really call her boss attention.

    Nobody is talking about personal machines. Those will follow in some years, with the growing demand by corporate users to have exactly the same tools at home.

  24. the memo conspiracy... by thrillbert · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Yes, it is true, Microsoft actually did write these memos.

    They were written by a group of individuals in the DTPOSF department (Distract Those Pesky Open Source Flunkies) and leaked to Slashdot for the purpose of slowing down progress.

    By getting all of us to stop what we're doing, comment on how stupid they are and how much they phear us, they have accomplished exactly what they were organized to do - distract us.

    So quit your gawking and get back to coding, we have an empire to destroy...

    ---
    Dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with Windows(tm).

  25. Mickysoft and Scienos? by kobotronic · · Score: 3, Funny

    Funny, how internal microsoft strategy letters, with their abbreviations and paramilitary jargon and posturing, resemble internal Scientology memos.

    http://www.xenu.net/

  26. Re:M$ doesn't "compete" by Waffle+Iron · · Score: 3, Funny
    Microsoft has NEVER used the lawsuit as a weapon.

    If I was above the law, I wouldn't use wee puny weapons like lawsuits either.

  27. The problem here is that. . . by kfg · · Score: 3, Interesting

    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

  28. "Oh! Oh! Br'er Bear! Don't!"... by tlambert · · Score: 3, Insightful

    "Oh! Oh! Br'er Bear! Don't! Don't throw me in that briar patch!"

    Gee, it's convenient for a company facing a court decision on anti-trust grounds, and a decision on whether or not to be independently pursued at a state level, to have this big, scary, Linux monster under their bed. Isn't it?

    -- Terry

  29. Are you kidding me? by altaic · · Score: 3, Insightful

    This is the eighth leaked letter concerning reactions to OSS! If MS is not using these letters to carefully manuever the public, they have all got to be totally stupid. For us to believe that they aren't would make us even more so.

    Here is the introduction:
    -----
    Everybody remember the Gandhi quote?

    First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win.

    Gentlemen and ladies, this newest leaked memo from Microsoft confirms that we are advancing through GandhiCon Three. As usual, highlights are in red and comments are in {green, also bracketed for the color-blind}. Also as usual, the memo is otherwise unedited and exactly as I received it, with one exception: in the text version I was sent, the last bullet item was inexplicably positioned after the sender sig "Orlando".


    Some analysis follows the memo.

    -----

    Gandhi's words *are* wise, but the problem it that we (the OSS community) are the ones who are laughing. We're so secure in the fact that OSS can't be touched in the traditional method that we're just sitting back and taking every inch of their retreat as a victory. But it's a tactical retreat! Clearly MS is doing something tricky with palladium, and the gods know what else. I'd be not so quick to dismiss the "inexplicably positioned" bullet item, nor would I say the "then we win" step is so near.

    I don't mean to sound paranoid or anything, but it's bloody foolish to be overconfident.

  30. now, people think... by Valar · · Score: 5, Insightful

    have any of these things really been creditible after the first one? ESR is once again leading everyone around in circles. ESR wants to be king of a new world order, but his problem is that there is no new world order. So he is trying to create a us versus them world, so we will all rally behind him.

  31. Re:This should be modded "scary" by phsolide · · Score: 5, Interesting
    Dude, do you honestly think MS tells its people to sit around on slashdot all day and argue?

    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.
  32. The point is the obscured origin of the material by phsolide · · Score: 3, Insightful
    Are you claiming the Linux community never does anything like this?

    What do you mean? Am I claiming that Linus Torvalds (or whoever you imagine to direct "the linux community", the Linux analog of Bill Gates or Steve Ballmer) directs his employees to participate in public forums to post derogatory comments about MSFT products at his expense? No, I'm not claiming that.

    You missed the point of my observation that a corporate entity (MSFT) conducts organized campaigns of misleading the public by hiding the origin of the "public opinion poll" or "grass roots campaign" or "think tank whitepaper".

    Sure, the linux community does all of the things that MSFT does - but on an individual-by-individual basis. I've posted pro-linux articles in public forums. I've written anti-MSFT whitepapers. But I've done it by myself, on my own time, I wasn't paid for it, I haven't claimed to be someone else, I didn't copy any PR firm's talking points, and I haven't claimed any kind of authority based on lack of bias, as the Gartner and Alexis de Toqueville whitepapers claim.

    That's the real point of my laundry list of shilling and astroturfing. MSFT, directed by upper management, puts out all kind of pro-MSFT material, whose origins are deliberately obscured. By pretending to come from Joe Sixpack or from think tanks, MSFT progaganda gains a mantle of legitimacy that it wouldn't possess if it openly acknowledged its origins.

    --
    Quit playing Monopoly with Bill. Switch to one of many non-Microsoft products today.
  33. Linux moves like a glacier - slow and unstoppable. by Kjella · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Facts:
    Linux keeps getting better.
    Windows keeps getting better. (Technically, not counting the EULAs)

    Is the gap closing? I don't think so. There's still way more software and systems being created for Windows.

    But Linux is doing something else, for users that don't need any exotic software. Do you need a server? Do you need a simple browsing/e-mail/basic office pack desktop? You got it. Maybe next year I can add a couple more things to that list. Maybe a few more are good enough now already and I don't know about it or agree.

    In Windows, you choose between different software with different cost. In Linux, most of the tools people use are free, and there isn't many commercial counterparts. That means that those that *do* use Linux use it because it *already* does what the users want it to do, for free.

    That's what spooks Microsoft. It's not that people switch. It's that they don't really have anything to offer to get them back should they decide Linux is "good enough" as it is. Any business would. And should.

    Kjella

    --
    Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
  34. One major trend that's been overlooked by Man_Holmes · · Score: 4, Interesting

    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

    1. Re:One major trend that's been overlooked by vegetablespork · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Good point, but how many of these apps spec out particular browsers running under Windows (or worse, MSIE only) as the only "supported" configuration>

      --

      Call (206) 338-5780 COLLECT for information about a genuine BA, BS, MA, MS, MBA, or Ph.D.

  35. The New World Order by Idou · · Score: 3

    "ESR wants to be king of a new world order, but his problem is that there is no new world order."

    I would say that there is definitely a new world order, but it doesn't need a king.

    --
    Sdelat' Ameriku velikoy Snova!
  36. Who cares what Microsoft thinks any longer? by miffo.swe · · Score: 3, Interesting

    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
  37. Nothin' but a � thing by yerricde · · Score: 3, Interesting

    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?