Sendo vs. Microsoft: The Truth Comes Out

igotmybfg writes "The Register has a story which includes many details about the phone maker's Texas suit against the software giant. It seems that Microsoft had much more to gain from letting its partner fail than helping it to succeed: in the event of a bankruptcy, Microsoft acquired all of Sendo's intellectual property related to the z100 Stinger SmartPhone, and was then free to do whatever it wanted, which in this case turned out to be going behind Sendo's back and making a deal with Orange SPA." Read our original article about this to get more background information.

Comments

NEWS FLASH!!!

[unterderbrucke]

Microsoft a company of back-stabbing money-grubbers.
Film at 11.

HOW STUPID CAN SENDO's executives be?

[thona]

I mean, if I would have THIS clause in the contract, it is NORMAL to assume that MS would play hardball to then gain all the rights. This is to be expected. Unless they crossed some lines then (which to proove will be the problem of Sendo), Sendo got what they deserved - for neglecting the reality of harsh businesses practices.

Re:HOW STUPID CAN SENDO's executives be?

[Alan Partridge]

"Sendo got what they deserved - for neglecting the reality of harsh businesses practices."

Not at all, business relationships - like all relationships - must have a basis of trust to succeed. Sendo obviously made the mistake of thinking that Microsoft was run by humans.

Re:HOW STUPID CAN SENDO's executives be?

[Anonymous Coward]

I guess this is a more-or-less standard part of any (exclusive) contract: if one partner fails, the other gets the freedom to make new deals with new partners.

Stupid? No, hardly. The alternative would be that M$ could not sell *any* phones if and when Sendo fails.

Of course, Sendo should have insisted on a "M$ will not run us into the ground" clause. But really, trust *is* a major part of business.

Re:HOW STUPID CAN SENDO's executives be?

[jez_f]

Even if they do get fined it will only be for pocket money in M$ terms.
Seeing how soon the SPV came out after sendo switched to symbian I would think that there was some dodgy dealing going on. I mean not spending a couple of dollars to help M$ against it's biggest competitor (nokia), when they are happy to loose billions on the Xbox. Just dosn't sound right.
It would be nice if the US government could introduce a 'three strikes and you're out policy' for anticompetitive behaviour. Not that this would happen with the current administration.

Re:HOW STUPID CAN SENDO's executives be?

[rseuhs]

Well, business is about trust.

Think about it: Imagine you would make a deal signed with only a handshake with the local mobster-boss and another with Bill Gates.

Which deal would you trust more?

Re:HOW STUPID CAN SENDO's executives be?

[richie2000]

The local mobster-boss, of course. The Mafia actually has a sense of honour and ethics, it's just not perfectly aligned with everyone else's. Bill Gates does not have that sense, at all.

OTOH, his sense of smell more than compensate for this deficiency - he can smell a dollar bill from a distance of 12 miles, even if the bill is downwind, underwater and he has a severe cold. This has been confirmed in secret tests in the Microsoft labs in Redmond.

Re:HOW STUPID CAN SENDO's executives be?

[WindBourne]

I agree with you. I have been trying to figure out why so many companies sue MS for breach of contract? MS has shown that they know how to write contracts and/or how to buy courts. Either way, any company that deals with MS will get burnt if they are making any real money or they hold a key to the future. I personally think that Corel,Apple,Sun,Sybase,IBM,etc. have gotten what they deserve for doing deals with MS. I have also wondered why stock owners of public companies do not sue the company as soon as they get into a contract with MS? It shows that the company is risking too much.

Re:HOW STUPID CAN SENDO's executives be?

[grrliegeek]

I guess this is a more-or-less standard part of any (exclusive) contract: if one partner fails, the other gets the freedom to make new deals with new partners. This is not the crux of the issue. It's not about M$ being able to negotiate with other handset makers if the deal with Sendo didn't come through. It's that they gained rights to Sendo's intellectual property and the right to use that with other handset makers if the deal went bad.

Under the SDMA, in the event of a Sendo bankruptcy, Microsoft would obtain an irrevocable, royalty free license to use Sendo's Z100 intellectual property

With M$ being convicted of monopoly abuse, this is the equivalent of naming the Don of an organized crime syndicate as the beneficiary of a life insurance policy, and hoping that the Mob won't off you. IANAL nor am I a biz negotiaions guru. However, I'm sure there could have been something Sendo could have negotiated into the contract that would have given M$ financial incentive to help keep them afloat? It seems obvious that even then, knowing what was known about M$, trusting them in a business deal to be fair or non-fatal to a business partner is asking to be taken advantage of. And I'm not sure why the lawyers at Sendo allowed them to make such a self-defeating deal in the first place. But that doesn't negate the potential validity of Sendo's case. Doing business with M$ is shaky at best, given their known behavior. From a business perspective, Sendo signing a contract that was in M$'s interests and not their own was foolish enough. Signing a contract that incented M$ to help them fail was insane. However, it seems that even with a sweet deal for them, M$ was breaching the contract. "Code complete" was promised to Sendo to be delivered by June of 2001, it was never delivered. (At this point, they still haven't been able to deliver a stable embedded OS for handsets). Also:

Microsoft refuses to pay Sendo some capital that was scheduled under the earlier agreement, Sendo alleges, and by spring the relationship has deteriorated to the level of legal threats.

And, M$ appears to have lied:

However on the surface, all appeared to be cordial, and at a board meeting in May last year Brown pledged that Microsoft was "not working with anyone else as an 'initial go to market partner'". This we now know to be false.

So, there is some (allegedly) wrongdoing on M$'s part that goes beyond the contract, however foolish that was.

Re:HOW STUPID CAN SENDO's executives be?

[Anonvmous Coward]

"I mean, if I would have THIS clause in the contract, it is NORMAL to assume that MS would play hardball to then gain all the rights."

I'd really like to see this case on Judge Judy.

Re:HOW STUPID CAN SENDO's executives be?

[nutznboltz]

It is run by humans and that's the problem--it's simply not run by saints. No big business is; they all get big by doing this sort of thing.

Re:HOW STUPID CAN SENDO's executives be?

[Chris Johnson]

This actually warrants an 'insightful'. Organized crime bosses have to have subtlety- that Machiavellian thing going on- they have to do the smart thing to hold on to power, which will often mean establishing that their word is good.

Microsoft has shown no interest whatsoever in having subtlety, or being trustworthy. In fact, they have filed amicus briefs supporting Nike in Nike's legal attempt to establish that corporations have the same rights to lie outright in public statements that a human being would have, so Microsoft is officially in favor of having their word be worthless.

Any living Mafia don would tell you this was very foolish. If you expect EVER to deal with others who have power, you have to have them treating you as a person or entity with a position and coherent issues and concerns, rather than have them treat you as an essentially unpredictable object or inconvenient fact. When they no longer have reason to consider your stated wishes, you're in trouble even if you have power, because you've lost the ability to direct others through persuasion. All you have is brute force- and the 'uptime' of brute force is not 100%, ever.

Re:HOW STUPID CAN SENDO's executives be?

[richie2000]

Exactly. Mafia bosses can (most of the time anyway, there are bound to be psychopaths there too, but they usually don't dance around a stage screaming "Developers!") be relied upon to adhere to the Mafia's set of standards, ethics and rules. They have been taught since childhood to respect their elders, care for their family and provide for their 'extended family'. They are, in their own cultural context, very predictable. This makes them tempting to do business with.

On the other hand, Microsoft VPs are a pack of hungry, rabid dogs on meth that would not only bite the hand that feeds them but continue up the arm until they choke.

Herein lies also a fundamental difference between IBM twenty years ago and Microsoft today; even though many like to draw this parallell (mostly to take comfort in the fact that a near 100% market penetration can be overturned in very little time) they are in fact not alike. IBM also had this set of standards, an internal culture that predicated their every move. This was also what prevented them from keeping their grip on the PC industry. Microsoft has no such barriers. They will not refrain from anything to further their own agenda. The hope lies in the fragmentation of these rabid dogs - they have no loyalty to each other and this may distract them from uniting against common enemies outside the pack, especially sneaky, difficult-to-grasp-and-counter enemies - hint, hint, nudge, nudge, tux, tux.

Re:HOW STUPID CAN SENDO's executives be?

[TheLink]

1) In the underworld, if way too many people hate you, you die.

2) You always have to make sure you can trust the people around you.

3) The people around you have to trust and respect you.

4) You mess up 3) see 1).

Re:HOW STUPID CAN SENDO's executives be?

[richie2000]

1) In Microsoft, if way too many VPs hate you, you die.

2) You always have to make sure you can squash the VPs around you.

3) The VPs around you have to fear you.

4) You mess up 3) see 1).

Re:HOW STUPID CAN SENDO's executives be?

[Chris Johnson]

But that's not the point- the point is, if lots of people hate you BUT you have a coherent position and your word is good, you can thrive through negotiating.

If your word is shit and you're incoherent and treacherous, you're meat- not necessarily because people hate you, but because they have no reason to listen to what you have to say.

If they cannot count on getting a coherent position out of you, they are forced to treat you as an unpredictable object or inconvenient fact, rather than negotiating with you. They have no reason to do anything but kill you. This is the position Microsoft's put itself in. (the U.S. government might also pay better attention to this lesson)

It doesn't matter how many enemies you have, if you can negotiate with them and they'll take your word. They can HATE you and still let you live if you convince them it's in their best interest, and if they can believe what you say. As soon as your enemies have no reason to negotiate with you- such as if you still have power but your word is shit and they give up even bothering to ask you what you're trying to do, because you lie and break your word- that's when you're in real trouble.

Again, being hated is not the problem. It's being openly treacherous that's the problem, because it undercuts anybody's reason to even inquire what your position is, and that guts your ability to negotiate for what you want.

Re:HOW STUPID CAN SENDO's executives be?

[TheLink]

Actually my point was: in the underworld it's hard to rely on people doing the law abiding thing and not gunning you down for being a treacherous slimeball.

In the business world, you can't gun down a corporation easily. Even though a corporation may be hated. Individuals that make up that corporation are unlikely to accumulate enough enemies to make staying alive difficult.

I'm unaware of any underworld equivalents to "limited liability" or "Co Ltd" ;).

This looks quite serious

[madprof]

If these allegations are true it could have very serious consequences for Microsoft. That's pretty obvious. But one possibility is that companies will simply refuse to get into similar deals with them in future.
As the article notes, it is not as if MS have been able to produce the goods even now for the Orange phone. A handset that dials your friends' names as opposed to their numbers, anyone?

Re:This looks quite serious

[suman28]

This isn't news when we talk about Microsoft. But Sendo executives or lawyers were crazy to have signed such a contract with someone like Microsoft. I guess they will be more careful if there is a next time.

Re:This looks quite serious

[0x0d0a]

But one possibility is that companies will simply refuse to get into similar deals with them in future.

Um...yeah, right.

Nobody wants to deal with Microsoft. Microsoft partners have a lousy history of getting the short end of the stick. You know what, though? They don't have a choice. You can't ignore the most influential computer company, with multiple crucial monopolies, simply because they're risky to deal with.

Re:This looks quite serious

[madprof]

OK. Biggest computer company.
Who have no phone market share. Show me they have a winning strategy in that marketplace and I'll believe you have a point in this instance.
You may be right about desktop apps but this is just not the same.
Similarly games companies, if looking to tie themselves to a console maker, would do better to tie themselves to Sony than MS.

Re:This looks quite serious

[GreyPoopon]

But Sendo executives or lawyers were crazy to have signed such a contract with someone like Microsoft.

I'm not sure why you feel this way. While it's true that many of us here on Slashdot are aware of the seedier side of Microsoft's business practices, it's also just as obvious that the majority of the US is not aware. The fact that business continue to form relationships (at their own peril) and that consumers continue to purchase Microsoft's products indicates this. The problem just hasn't escalated to a high enough level to financially impact Microsoft yet. You can see this situation as another log on the fire, and maybe more people will be able to see the flames now; it all depends on how the civil case pans out.

Re:This looks quite serious

[GreyPoopon]

I'd say that chances are overwhelmingly against Microsoft being found guilty; no, not because they will "buy their way out."

I disagree. The only thing Microsoft has in their favor is the fact that they still haven't been able to provide an OS that meets carrier approval. They are accused of breach of contract, which appears to be true because they did not provide the software as promised, and they did not make a capital payment as promised. The fact that they still don't have a viable OS will serve partly as an indicator that failure to provide the software as promised was not fully intentional.

My guess is that unless Microsoft makes a contribution to somebody's retirement fund, breach of contract will be upheld, and you'll have a following battle over IP because Microsoft will no longer be entitled to the information they possess and are now using in conjunction with another company.

Wow

[psyconaut]

I'm astounded. I truly can't believe a household name such as Microsoft would be involved in underhand business practises.

Seriously, the law makers in the US should probably look into Microsoft being a monopoly....don't they have these things called antitrust laws too?

And Bill Gates looks like such a nice guy. How can he be evil when he wants to save children in third world countries from AIDS?

Re:Wow

[jc42]

How can [Bill Gates] be evil when he wants to save children in third world countries from AIDS?

Well, according to several recent reports on his contributions to various efforts, he wants to save them from the threat of linux even more he wants to save them from AIDS.

--

Sendo needs better lawyers...

[HiyaPower]

When you walk into the lion's den, you need more than a g-string on. To have put themselves in a position where M$ could grab Sendo's intellectual property by not giving them anything is stupid.

That said, dealing in bad faith is something that is tortous. I hope Sendo recovers the stars the moon and the sky from these bastards.

Re:Sendo needs better lawyers...

[yeti (dn)]

That's crap, though. If you read the article, they're basically suing MS because MS won't give them more money.

Of course they will be bankrupt when MS won't give them more money (and it surely won't). But MS will also grab their know-how/IP/... as reward for making them bankrupt, and that's the point.

Re:Sendo needs better lawyers...

[SerpentMage]

No the argument that Sendo is raising is very legit. Their argument is that they and Microsoft entered into a deal where the aim was to sell product. While they had backdoor clauses, MS, it would appear dealt in bad faith.

Bad Faith is not something to underestimate. Whenever you enter into a contract you have to actually pretend to support the contract. Because otherwise you will be in contempt and be VERY liable. In fact this could get very messy for MS if it is proven that they acted in bad faith.

This could be the case that kills MS. Think about it. This company had a once in a life time offer. They were ready, but the company they wanted to deal with was not. Result, you kill that company. You are liable because potentially the other party could have become very large and very rich.

I guess finally history is catching up to MS.

Re:Sendo needs better lawyers...

[plugger]

That's what I thought on first reading the article, but maybe this extract is significant:
...summer comes, and the code isn't ready. It isn't ready in the autumn, either, and this starts to play hell with Sendo's budgets. December rolls round, and according to Sendo, bugfixes that carriers have requested are being refused by Microsoft. Sendo is in a cash crisis, and a call to VCs is spurned. So Sendo asks Microsoft for a further cash injection, which is declined:
"Microsoft refused with the full knowledge that this refusal would push Sendo to insolvency", claims Sendo in the filing.

So, it looks like MS failed to deliver the software on time, which caused a cash-flow problem for Sendo. According to the story, MS also refused to make a scheduled payment to Sendo, thus causing them further financial difficulties.

A friend of mine has an Orange/MS phone. Judging by the problems he has experienced (counter-intuitive address book, problems connecting via GPRS), I think MS have had genuine problems getting the software right. I mean, this phone shipped about a year after MS failed to deliver working code to Sendo, and it still isn't finished.

I doubt this is a conspiracy by MS to steal Sendo's IP, but it still looks as if they bear some responsibility for the situation. If they signed a contract and can't honour it, they should be held accountable for any damage that causes.

Re:Sendo needs better lawyers...

[squiggleslash]

That's crap, though. If you read the article, they're basically suing MS because MS won't give them more money.

Not in the article I read. In the article I read, Microsoft deliberately delayed the OS they had promised to Sendo with the specific aim of driving Sendo into bankruptsy, and using the time in between to gain critical information about Sendo's technologies that could then be passed on to competitors.

If you're summarising that as "suing MS because MS won't give them more money", then you have a wierd way of looking at the world. Presumably the Cold War can be boiled down to Stalin not giving Truman more money too, or something.

Re:Sendo needs better lawyers...

[Subcarrier]

So, it looks like MS failed to deliver the software on time, which caused a cash-flow problem for Sendo.

The contract should have had progressively increasing sanctions against slipping delivery deadlines. The Sendo execs must be kicking themselves.

Re:Sendo needs better lawyers...

[rseuhs]

That's like suing your parents after they pay for the first five years of college and then refuse to pay for year six.

Well - no.

Microsoft promised to have Stinger ready in summer 2001. Without Stinger, Sendo couldn't make any money. Over a year later Microsoft still hasn't got the product ready and is refusing to fix some of the bugs Sendo found. You get the picture?

So yes, Sendo was stupid. Everybody is stupid who thinks Microsoft can put out a working product in schedule.

Re:Sendo needs better lawyers...

[mOdQuArK!]

The contract should have had progressively increasing sanctions against slipping delivery deadlines.

When you're in an unequal partnership with a company the size of Microsoft, you have very little or no leverage to insist on clauses like that.

Re:Sendo needs better lawyers...

[phorm]

Over a year later Microsoft still hasn't got the product ready and is refusing to fix some of the bugs Sendo found. You get the picture?

This, from the company that made windows, and you're surprised? "We'll fix it when we get to it" seems to often be MS's plan, unless the problem becomes public enough to cause them a certain embarrassment if they don't.

Too bad this is going more public with the dying gasps of Sendo. Often it seems the only way to get to MS is to throw a lot of potential bad publicity their way (a little bad publicity does nothing, they've got lots of that already).

Re:Sendo needs better lawyers...

[squiggleslash]

The constant support, or at least tolerance, of dishonesty, treachery, and fraudulant behaviour by the pseudo-libertarian right makes me glad that the LP stands no chance whatsoever of winning any elections in the near future.

Dishonest business practices and the destruction of trust will kill capitalism. It doesn't need a Marxist-style revolution. It just needs what both Roosevelts nipped in the bud to succeed.

Re:Sendo needs better lawyers...

[Locutus]

This is what Microsoft does all the time. The "partner" is rendered so weak by Microsoft that a fraction of what the technology is offered as a settlement and usually taken. FEW cases against Microsoft actually go to trial.

Here's how it work:
1) Microsoft promises to feature YOUR product so you sign an agreement
2) Microsoft stalls while it's engineers figure out what/how you are doing what you're doing and how they can Window-ize it. By Window-izing, I mean make it proprietary so it'll only run on a Windows based OS.
3) YOUR company starts getting fed up with all the Microsoft engineers running your engineers in circles and delaying the product.
4) YOUR company starts running low on capital and now is getting REALLY tired of Microsoft. Legal threats start here.
5) YOUR company files legal action against Microsoft for all the things they did illegally. The list is long. From stealing secrets, sharing them, stealing employees, delayed product, etc
6) YOUR company shrinks to 1/4th it's previous size and sales all but have dried up as Microsoft announces it's version of YOUR product to be released in the next quarter or two.
7) YOU and your one remaining lawyer decide to take the 1 million dollars Microsoft offers to settle the case.
8) YOU give your lawyer 3/4 of the settlement amount and you pay YOUR remaining closing costs to shut the lights out on your multi-billion dollar business which Microsoft now owns for a fraction of what it would have cost them if YOUR product hit the market.

This is what it means to be a Microsoft partner and those that have been down this road are not vocal about it. You don't put up signs when your business has been raped by Microsoft.... IMHO.

LoB

sounds like the mafia...

[garcia]

Only summer comes, and the code isn't ready. It isn't ready in the autumn, either, and this starts to play hell with Sendo's budgets. December rolls round, and according to Sendo, bugfixes that carriers have requested are being refused by Microsoft. Sendo is in a cash crisis, and a call to VCs is spurned. So Sendo asks Microsoft for a further cash injection, which is declined:

"Microsoft refused with the full knowledge that this refusal would push Sendo to insolvency", claims Sendo in the filing.

This sounds an awful like the Mafia. Take over a business. Milk the shit out of it. Keep saying you will take care of it. Burn the damn place down when it fails (as if you cared in the first place).

Re:sounds like the mafia...

[jafac]

This whole thing smells vaguely like Microsoft's partnership with DISH Network as well, for their DishPlayer.

DISH partnered with Microsoft to get the software for DishPlayer - MS bought out some other company for the software (it's supposedly some form of BSD) - and their integrated WebTV client.

On the surface, it looks like a win for both companies. DISH gets a PVR, and a client for Web Access, and Microsoft gets MSN seats.

But the problem was, the PVR software was horribly buggy. I mean, it was really really bad. And bugs weren't fixed for something like two years. When attempts went out, things got worse. A class-action suit was actually in the pipeline. RMA rates were something like 50%, and DISH was claiming that they had 200,000 PVRs in the market. Talk about pain. They were obviously struggling on the phone-support side, they could keep enough warm bodies to man the phones, but the bodies were at best, a half-degree or so above room temperature. All this in the backdrop of DISH's proposed merger with DirecTV.

Instead of caving, DISH said Fuck You to Microsoft, sued them, and designed their own replacement to the DishPlayer - which, while buggy, was at least usable more than 20% of the time - which DishPlayer was not for many customers.
(I do not know how the lawsuit turned out, but DISH also eventually provided a bugfix for DishPlayer, so the units are a lot more stable now).

In the end - DISH looks like a bad guy to customers, who started a massive grassrots campaign to bitch to the FTC to prohibit the merger (many others simply fled DISH and went to DirecTV's DirecTiVo instead). And the end product was that Charley's little bid for Satellite World Domination dies on the vine. Now DirecTV (which Microsoft also has a stake in) is a nice crispy takeover target for Murdoch.

Re:sounds like the mafia...

[Syre]

Whether deliberate or not (and signing an agreement like Sendo's, where your partner has an incentive to make you fail seems really ill-advised), outsourcing makes you vulnerable to these sort of problems.

If you do your own development, there's certainly a possibility that your project will fail, but then at least its your own fault and not something that someone did to you on purpose or because they just didn't care enough (or weren't incented enough) to make it work.

As a development manager (CTO, what have you), I've had to use this argument with various CEOs and boards who were all hot on the potential cost-savings of outsourcing vs. building your own team. It's very simply stated:

"Do you want to bet the entire business on these guys, forever?"

Thought of that way, people often (but not always) come to their senses.

This is not true of products that are generic, and can be replaced easily (and quickly) with something from another manufacturer if need be. But if it's the one thing you're relying on and will continue to rely on, watch out.

yeah baby

[Anonymous Coward]

Watching the free market in action is like watching a lion rip apart a gazelle on animal planet.

woohoo!

Re:yeah baby

[rseuhs]

Wrong. This isn't survival of the fittest.

Microsoft was too incompetent to ship their part of the product in time. Sendo is paying for Microsoft's incompetence.

Re:yeah baby

[rseuhs]

You think Microsoft purposely delayed the product to their only partner, purposely destroyed their already damaged reputation and purposely destroyed their future in the wireless market?

In the wireless market, Microsoft is as dead as Sendo. Stinger still is not working as promised and we will see how long Orange will ship a half-ready product.

No. Microsoft did not plan it that way. It's just the typical asshole's "if I can't have it, nobody shall have it" attitude caused by incompetence and overconfidence. Microsoft are not evil geniuses, they are incompetent bullies.

Re:yeah baby

[SuperKendall]

You think Microsoft purposely delayed the product to their only partner, purposely destroyed their already damaged reputation and purposely destroyed their future in the wireless market?

What makes you think otherwise, given that's how they work? If you think about it long term (which Microsoft is), is it so bad to delay success a few years when you can have so much more of the profit? They certianly have the capital on hand to play possum for a few years.

Microsoft has been declared "dead" in too many things that they eventually returned to have the upper hand in.

Re:yeah baby

[HiThere]

No. Microsoft is a group of very competent bullies.

I may not think much of MS tech, but I realize that they can sell people an OS that is full of bugs and security holes, and sell it over and over again with little more than cosmetic changes. That's skill, of a sort. I may not admire it, but I do recognize it.

And have you tried to read the licenses that come with MS software? Has any other company been able to sell software that gives them the right to steal all your data, and at their option either wipe your disk clean, or modify the data on your disk as they choose? IANAL, but that's what the license looked like to me. They aren't even required to let you know that they've done it. Doesn't that make you feel secure?

Now, truthfully, I have no evidence that they have ever exercised these clauses. But would I expect to if they had? You aren't allowed to publish evaluations or comparisons of MS software without their approval. (Well, perhaps these aren't in all licenses. I can't check, and don't really want to. I heard tell, however, that some vitally necessary security patches come with these new and improved licensing clauses attached... so even only agreeing if the license is not totally horrible won't necessarily protect you in the future.)

These are not the actions of incompetent bullies. These bullies are quite competent, and clever at what they do. It's quite alright to despise someone and still recognize them as clever. Cleverness is orthogonal to ethical and to moral.

Re:yeah baby

[Locutus]

The fact that they've been doing this since the 1980's leads me to believe they did it on purpose. There is no way they'll complete a deal which does not let them own the technology very quickly. Especially if they see it as a key technology/sector.

This is how Microsoft does business in new markets. They've been "damaging" their reputation for almost 20 years and look what it's got them. Just a mere $30 billion in cash and a 9x% marketshare for desktop OS's and desktop applications. The big wireless guys are smart and have stayed the heck away from anything tied to Microsoft. Remember, they've done this since the 1980's and they are good at it.
IMHO.

LoB

Re:yeah baby

[rseuhs]

I may not think much of MS tech, but I realize that they can sell people an OS that is full of bugs and security holes, and sell it over and over again with little more than cosmetic changes. That's skill, of a sort. I may not admire it, but I do recognize it.

Wrong, Microsoft didn't sell it at all.

Asian hardware manufacturers made cheap PC-parts and PC-makers made cheap PCs which sold well. Hardware manufacturers innovated and created much more powerful features. And the Windows/PC combination *IS* usually much better than a Sun or Apple solution or whatever other proprietary hardware solution there is around - despite of DOS and Windows' deficencies.

Remember that before the mid-90's no serious alternative to DOS/Windows existed for the PC and Linux only recently became suitable for the desktop. Despite being over a decade late, Linux grabbed nearly half of the x86-server market in the last 5 years. That share would have otherwise gone to Windows and not because Windows is so great on servers, but because people would prefer the cheap open hardware platform with or without Windows.

Of course market inertia and customer lock-in keeps Windows going on the desktop. But market inertia and customer lock-in can hardly be qualified as cleverness, it's not really hard to make your product incompatible to everything else.

But market inertia and customer lock-in just slow down the transition from proprietary to open, it won't stop it. Just like the Unix-vendors couldn't stop the transition from proprietary to open hardware, Microsoft will be unable to stop the transition from proprietary to open software. Hell, just look at the latest Helloween documents and how fast Bill Gates is selling his MSFT-shares (he already sold over half of his initial holdings and is selling more each month). Microsoft is scared and should be. They know the party will be over eventually - they still can make obscene amounts of money for quite a few years, but sooner or later it will end.

Bill Gates was very, very clever when he secured the DOS-contract from IBM (clever and lucky, his mother helped him a lot), but that's over 20 years ago. After that, Microsoft was just backwards compatible and reimplemented (or bought the companies right away) what others have created, whoa. You don't need to be clever for that, just very rich - and they were rich because the DOS-contract made the money rolling in.

All the success of Microsoft is based on that contract in 1981, without that contract they would be a rather small software company for Apple.

Re:yeah baby

[rseuhs]

What makes you think otherwise, given that's how they work? If you think about it long term (which Microsoft is), is it so bad to delay success a few years when you can have so much more of the profit? They certianly have the capital on hand to play possum for a few years.

How should they ever be able to "have so much more profit"? *IF* they want to make another wireless-OS, they have to completely redesign it aniway and pretend Stinger never existed, destroying Sendo on the way hardly helps them. It would have been much better for MS to get to market one year earlier.

Microsoft has been declared "dead" in too many things that they eventually returned to have the upper hand in.

Microsoft has also been declared as the victor in too many things that they eventually turned out to fail miserably.

Remember how Microsoft wanted to destroy the Internet and replace it with the proprietary MSN using Microsoft's own protocols? Remember MS Bob? Remember COOl? Remember Hailstorm? Remember the HomeR project? Remember Modular Windows and MMOSA? Remember Windows on PPC, Alpha and Mips?

No, Microsoft did not plan this and most of their projects fail.

Re:yeah baby

[rseuhs]

Because the have IP from Sendo that they did not have before.

Wow, that IP can be summarized in "How to make Stinger run on a cellphone". Yes it's not completely worthless, but hardly vital to any business plan. Without that IP, Microsoft would do it themselves, so what.

It really doesn't matter what the implementation is at the moment, now they don't have to share profits with anyone like they would have before so the eventual working version to take over the market will be all MS profit.

I doubt MS will start building cellphones, so no, any profits will be shared between software maker and hardware maker.

Of course I hope it fails but I have seen far too many times how they appear to die, only to return and doominate.

Stop spreading FUD (yes I mean that literally).

It's just not true. There are only 2 projects making money at Microsoft: Windows and Office - everything else is losing money. And despite losing money you could maybe call Internet Explorer a success and WinCE at least not a failure (does fine on PDAs but miserably in the rest of the embedded-market). So you got 3 or 4 successful projects versus a long list of failed ones.

Of course this doesn't mean every project from MS will fail, but it proves that not every MS-project is succeeding.

And Microsoft's cellphone efforts are failing. Without a big cellphone-maker I don't see how it can succeed. Even with Sendo (= newcomer) it would be hard to get established in a saturated market, but now with a nobody (Orange) and an even more saturated market (1½ years later) the chances are even lower.

Destroying the internet - you mean like having a bunch of web pages that only work in a MS browser?

No, I was speaking about a Microsoft network where Microsoft-only servers talk to Microsoft-only clients over Microsoft-only protocols and everybody (servers and clients) have to pay a hefty fee to Microsoft for the priviledge to use their network.

Maybe you are too young to know, but that was Microsoft's big plan in the early 90's and that's why Bill Gates said "The Internet? We are not interested in it" and "Internet will never be popular" and that's why the then proprietary MSN got an icon that nobody used in Windows 95.

Of course now Microsoft pretends that this all never happened.

Already happens, and seems to be getting worse.

Again, FUD. I use Mozilla all the time and I maybe find 3 or 4 pages per year that don't work. And it's getting better, not worse. 2 years ago, browsing under Linux was a problem (but still not so terrible as you want us to believe), but now with Mozilla available and a very much improved Konqueror you have 2 very fine browsers.

Bob? Aspects of that resurfaced in other projects (including clippy) hated, yes, failure, no (don't ask me how that works).

Now that you have proved you have never seen MS Bob, can we go on?

(MS Bob was about a virtual home where every application was represented by a "real" item. For example if you wanted to write a letter, you would "go to" the office and click on the typewriter standing on the table. Kinda like those adventures like Leisure suite Larry or how it was called. Clippy had little to do with that, there was a "helper-dog" which could be vaguely be compared with clippy, but that's hardly enough to call MS Bob a success.)

Hailstorm is on hold while they build up more thunder, as it were.

FUD

Windows on Alpaha actually worked pretty well as I remember, MS simply decided to kill it... but I think that was more of a strategic choice than because it was a failure.

You mean like they only got 5% marketshare on Alpha left and Linux was wiping the floor with them like they do know on Itanium?

The trouble is, anytime you think they have failed all they have really done is gained ground for the next attack.

FUD

Be afraid of them! Be uncertain and doubtful of anything else!

I'm sorry but I'm not buying the apparent lack of stregth in anything MS is doing anymore, they are absolutley to be feared

Bill Gates loves your kind.

and fought against with full stregth no matter how weak they appear to be in any area.

The stronger they appear, the stronger they are.

A otherwise die-hard pro MS company which is a partner of my company are implementing Linux on embedded devices.

Why? Because they do not fear Microsoft and believed Linux will become the standard on embedded devices. (That was 1 year ago, by now Linux is already the de-facto standard on embedded devices except PDAs.) Again, we are talking about a pro-MS company here, 2 years ago non-MS systems weren't even allowed in the company.

I just hope the cell phone makers can hold MS off,

Then why do you spread the "all non-Microsoft platforms are doomed" - propaganda and FUD which is Microsoft's number one sales argument?

With Microsoft having about zero marketshare (the few units from Orange are neglectible, they are not even on sale in most parts of the world, AFAIK England is the only country), without a serious hardware partner (Orange is a provider, not a hardware maker - even with enough demand, Orange couldn't produce enough units to fullfill the demand. Also it is doubtful that Orange wants to start selling cellphones for competing providers and that competing providers would buy those), with an accepted standard all major hardware makers support (Symbian), with powerful enemies (both Nokia and Sony-Ericsson are larger than Microsoft. Siemens and Motorola are also not some startup like Netscape was.) and with at least 2 years of lost time, Microsoft's chances are not only slim, they are non-existant.

Speaking of "I just hope the cell phone makers can hold MS off" is pure FUD. Fear, Uncertainity and Doubt, all without any reason. Normally, FUD like this from people like you give Microsoft some extra marketing spin, but in this situation even that can't help them.

Re:yeah baby

[rseuhs]

"Under the SDMA, in the event of a Sendo bankruptcy, Microsoft would obtain an irrevocable, royalty free license to use Sendo's Z100 intellectual property, including rights to make, use, or copy the Sendo Smartphone to create other to create other Smartphones and to, most importantly for Microsoft, sublicense those rights to third parties."

Of course we don't know what the exact IP is, but it goes beyond making "stinger run on a cellphone".

No, it's lawyer-speak for exactly that. Nobody would stop them or somebody else from implementing Stinger without Sendo-IP.

Not all of them but the majority. I don't call loosing money a measure of failure - the XBox has been a success in that it has gotten MS the market share they want in the console market, and MS boxes in the home. Again, they are thinking in the long term.

Microsoft expected to sell 6 Million units by June 2001 but sold less than 4 Million. They sold a little more than half of what they wanted - and you usually make easily beatable expectations...

I thought the same way about Palm. At least in this case MS faces a body of determined foes, and so are less likley to have the other side make stupid choices that hands victory by default. But I'll believe it in three years if I see MS phones have gone no-where.

Well, there are differences:
1) Microsoft gets a big marketing bonus from people like you. Gullible people buy Microsoft because of this FUD. Nokia is no small startup like Palm. They are the big guys, no FUD in the world can destroy their reputation in building a successful platform, while it can with Palm. So while you are trying to talk Nokia dead, nobody will listen.
2) Palm made a few mistakes, they didn't supported the newer stuff (Videos, etc.) fast enough.
and most importantly 3) Palm is a proprietary one-vendor technology. That means a new vendor going to market doesn't have a big advantage choosing Palm. Symbian on the other hand is a consortium founded by all major cellphone makers, not a single-vendor effort.

Look, I'm not saying all other companies were doomed (though you could read that out of what I said before). What I'm saying is that you seem like you are taking them too lightly, basically fiddling while rome burns.

Wrong, Microsoft lives from "being not taken too lightly". You essentially advise people to consider Microsoft only because they are Microsoft, therefore generating sales for them.

In the platform business, getting ignored is the absolutely worst what can happen to you.

That's great that you are forwarding Linux in the embedded market, I agree that Linux has done very well there holding off MS.

They didn't "hold MS off", they completely destroyed them. In the mid-90's the majority of embedded apps ran on DOS, which as you remember very well is made by Microsoft. When you need lots of graphics, WinCE is still an option, but generally I would call it almost dead in the embedded space.

All I am trying to get across is that anyone competing against Microsoft should not be lulled into a false sense of security by an APPARENT lack of success in any market. Cell phone makers, embedded designers, anyone.

Well Sendo probably thought exactly that. (Microsoft is so great and eventually they will succeed so better we work with them instead of against them.) No other company would get such a deal. But Microsoft got it because they are Microsoft.

Microsoft's big FUD-machine supported by you and thousands of others at work.

Personally I think Microsoft is doomed as a company, but I still think they can use $40 billion (or whatever they have) to f*ck a lot of things up on the way down and I'm tired of other, non-MS companies and people letting it happen through inaction and sloth.

Inaction and sloth from people is the worst that can happen to Microsoft in a market they are not in. And the companies won't base their business tactics on postings from the Internet.

Also what everybody seems to forget is that running a startup like Sendo or Netscape into the ground is one thing, takling with several multi-billion enterprises is another.

Re:yeah baby

[unitron]

"Microsoft are not evil geniuses, they are incompetent bullies."

Bullying seems to be that at which they are most competent. You might even say that it's something for which they seem to have a sort of evil genius. I just wish they were as good at software.

They're suing *who* again?

[Skyshadow]

Seems like the lawsuit here really ought to be "Investors in Sendo v. Sendo Execs".

In MS's defense, there is no (nor should there be any) law against getting into really sweetheart deals at the expense of the other party. If I see an antique on eBay selling for $5 that I know to be incredibly valuable, I should buy it -- I'm under no imaginable obligation to contact the seller and let him know he's an idiot.

And so it appears in this case: whoever was making decisions at Sendo really, really screwed up. They gave MS the power to destroy them, then gave them huge incentive to do so.

That's life.

Re:They're suing *who* again?

[SerpentMage]

No there is a law against this. It is dealing in bad faith. Here is a link http://www.zreclaim.com/badfaith/contract.asp.

It states very clearly that you must act in good faith. Ok it deals with insurance and indivdual things, but law is the law...

Re:They're suing *who* again?

[Qzukk]

It appears that the deal included some expectation that Microsoft would make certain payments of capital, as well as provide the software on-time (or a reasonable software-world representation of such) which according to the story neither happened.

Its one thing if Sendo signed a paper saying "Go bankrupt and we get your stuff", another entirely if the paper said "We'll do these things to prevent you from going bankrupt, but if you do anyway, we get your stuff" and then not having "these things" done.

Re:They're suing *who* again?

[Anonymous Coward]

The problem with this statement, if you read the article completely, is that one of the key persons who was making these "bad decisions" was at the same time also employed as a business development manager for Microsoft. If anything that specific individual clearly engaged in business fraud, the presumption being that he did so at the knowing behest of his superiors. If this case goes anywhere, Microsoft has a convenient scapegoat they could hang out to dry and claim no knowledge about what this rogue employee did, unless, of course the discovery process manages to turn up one of those damn incriminating emails they never seem able to get rid of :). This one should be a fun ride...

Re:They're suing *who* again?

[Planesdragon]

I'm under no imaginable obligation to contact the seller and let him know he's an idiot.

No legal obligation, but there are plently of moral and ethical ones. In a like vein, if you were to contact the seller and your appraisal was accurate, he'd be under the same kind of non-legal obligation to give you first crack at the antique--or just a "finder's fee."

As someone else pointed out, there are laws against getting into extremely one-sided deals--Usury, bad faith, court policy, etc. No law against making a bad deal, but there are laws against one-sided "mafia" deals.

Re:They're suing *who* again?

[miffo.swe]

Never ever should the abused party be the one who gets the blame. They acted in good faith wich is in my world a good thing. If Microsoft then abused this good faith that is a bad thing done from Microsofts part.

Clearly even companies need to have some sort of regulation and rules to work by. Else doing business becomes "he who is the dirtiest snekiest win" and that doesnt benefit anyone but the one with the least concious possible. Anarchy and capitalism isnt the same thing.

Re:They're suing *who* again?

[Omnifarious]

I believe what Microsoft did constitutes criminal fraud. Not that any criminal behavior on the part of Microsoft will ever actually be punished by our judicial system.

Re:They're suing *who* again?

[will_die]

If I see an antique on eBay selling for $5 that I know to be incredibly valuable, I should buy it -- I'm under no imaginable obligation to contact the seller and let him know he's an idiot.
Different case here. This is more a case of you being a an antique appraiser and are hired to appaiser someones possesions, you then under value everything and when they offer to sell you or a friend purchase all they are selling.
Also in the ebay case you a have a pure buyer/seller relationship and you are perfectly in your rights to do whatever you can to get the best deal.

Re:They're suing *who* again?

[rseuhs]

If I see an antique on eBay selling for $5 that I know to be incredibly valuable, I should buy it -- I'm under no imaginable obligation to contact the seller and let him know he's an idiot.

OK, imagine you buy that antique for 5$. The seller promises after he got the money that he will ship it. 2 weeks after that he sais, that it is no ready yet. 2 months after that, it is still not ready, but will be soon. The next year he sells it to another one.

Who's the idiot now?

Re:They're suing *who* again?

[SerpentMage]

Outside of the fact that the antique is sold in the next year, it is exactly what you say it is.

If I buy something I expect certain things. And getting it when is said is part of it. And in fact there is a law against what you mention. If somebody keeps delaying the delivery then you have the legal right to sue even though the seller did not explicitly sell no.

So in other words even though the idiot undersold, if the product does not ship then they dealt in bad faith.

Now I understand why Sendo delivered the phone and then scrapped it. They kept up their part of the contract and acted in good faith.

Re:They're suing *who* again?

[pubjames]

If I see an antique on eBay selling for $5 that I know to be incredibly valuable, I should buy it -- I'm under no imaginable obligation to contact the seller and let him know he's an idiot.

Actually, the law may be more complex than you expect. There was a case in the UK - I believe the law in the UK is similar to the US - I can't remember the exact details, but the case was of an old lady who had led a very sheltered life and then suddenly got rich, and decided to do up her house. The builders realised that she didn't have a clue and so got her to sign contracts with greatly inflated prices. She signed them and everything was legit as far as the contracts were concerned, but friendly neighbours realised she'd been exploited and helped her take legal action against the builders. She won, despite having signed the contracts of her own free will.

Re:They're suing *who* again?

[monomania]

there is no (nor should there be any) law against getting into really sweetheart deals at the expense of the other party....

Three scenarios:

1. Your beloved wife dies, and you are paid her life insurance to compensate. You are rich, but miserable.

2. You have grown disenchanted with your marriage, and murder your wife for the insurance money.

3. You actively seek out rich women to marry and murder.

Now, business contracts with such terms as Sendo/MS implemented exist to obtain, if necessary, in worst cases, a situation similar to the First scenario. On the face of the evidence, MS operated according to the Second, and may additionally (upon examination) be shown to have operating along the lines of the Third.

This is not business as usual -- unless you are, say, an Enron executive. And it's a really bad time for MS to be proven of that ilk in court...

Re:They're suing *who* again?

[kin_korn_karn]

This case seems to fall under what they call "promissory estoppel". This is where a contract is entered that will cause grievous harm to the signee if it's not carried out. Microsoft didn't hold up their end of the deal, and Sendo failed. If Sendo can prove that M$ knew this would happen M$ is liable for the bankruptcy and probably whatever back pay the former employees are owned. If they can prove that M$ INTENDED for this to happen they can get punitive damages. I kind of hope this doesn't happen because the board types are the ones who pocket the damage money.

IANAL of course, but I remember this kind of thing from business law in school. If I'm wrong, mod me to -1 so nobody gets misinformed.

Re:They're suing *who* again?

[GooberToo]

Shesh! Either the parent poster is a complete dolt or he didn't bother to read the article. He's modded +5 when it should of been -1 troll some such thing. I point out the obvious and get rated -1 for off topic.

Love how some moderators don't seem to understand their job.

Re:They're suing *who* again?

[Chris Johnson]

Actually that's not proper anarchy because the most bad-faith person becomes the most powerful and hence the greatest authority. Anarchy is 'NOT-authority', not 'turn everything over to the meanest person and have them take authority'. Anarchy may not be practical on a large scale but it only works when people practice good faith.

Re:They're suing *who* again?

[TekPolitik]

This case seems to fall under what they call "promissory estoppel". This is where a contract is entered that will cause grievous harm to the signee if it's not carried out.

This isn't what promissory estoppel is - promissory estoppel is where there is reasonable reliance on a promise or expectation without there being a contract, or where the representation is contrary to contractual rights. There is no obvious estoppel arising here.

The facts as reported in the article, however, would clearly make out the tort of deceit (broadly - making a knowingly or recklessly incorrect representation that causes loss to the person to whom the representation was made. This amounts also to fraud if the person making the representation gains from it), several breaches of contract, and several breaches of fiduciary duty.

As described, the facts suggest the relationship was a partnership arrangement, although we'd need to know more about the facts to decide on this. If it was a partnership relationship (and the fact that they call it a partnership has no bearing on this question), then MS had a fiduciary duty to its partner that was clearly breached.

However the facts described also indicate Microsoft breached the contract by delivering software late and by not meeting its capital injenction obligations. Assuming the facts supplied to be true and not omitting any important details, then Microsoft would be liable to put the the victim in the position they would have been in if the obligations were met - including covering the value of any porofits that would have been made. This could be expensive even in Microsoft terms, although it won't compensate the shareholders because it won't account for stock market gains.

If they can prove that M$ INTENDED for this to happen they can get punitive damages

Punitive damages might arise from deceit, but not from an estoppel, breach of fiduciary duty or a breach of contract.

Re:They're suing *who* again?

[TekPolitik]

the case was of an old lady... The builders realised that she didn't have a clue and so got her to sign contracts with greatly inflated prices

This falls under unconscionable dealing. It is unlikely to ever apply where the victim is a corporation.

Re:They're suing *who* again?

[TekPolitik]

It states very clearly that you must act in good faith. Ok it deals with insurance and indivdual things, but law is the law...

Insurance contracts are a special case. In ordinary business contracts there is no requirement of good faith when negotiating the contract.

Re:They're suing *who* again?

[nathanh]

In MS's defense, there is no (nor should there be any) law against getting into really sweetheart deals at the expense of the other party. If I see an antique on eBay selling for $5 that I know to be incredibly valuable, I should buy it -- I'm under no imaginable obligation to contact the seller and let him know he's an idiot.

There ARE laws against this, and there most definitely SHOULD be.

In the UK it's called the Unfair Contract Terms ACT of 1977.

In Europe it's called Unfair Contractual Terms.

In the USA it's called Unfair or Deceptive Trade Practices.

Capitalism and laissez-faire markets don't mean you are legally allowed to screw the little guy!

How brazen can Microsoft's executives be?

[MonTemplar]

I mean, if I would have THIS clause in the contract, it is NORMAL to assume that MS would play hardball to then gain all the rights. This is to be expected. Unless they crossed some lines then (which to proove will be the problem of Sendo), Sendo got what they deserved - for neglecting the reality of harsh businesses practices.

This part doesn't suprise me much, having read up on the history of Microsoft's dealings with its 'partners' over the years.

What gets me is that this sequence of events started back in 2001, at the time that Judge Jackson was throwing the book at Microsoft for, amongst other misdemeanours, doing the very same thing they were evidently planning on doing to Sendo!

Even if Sendo's case falls flat, it will have served to make Microsoft's circle of friends even smaller. What more proof could you ask for to show that the people in charge of Microsoft have not learned to play fair?

Re:How brazen can Microsoft's executives be?

[haggar]

Interestingly, executives in software companies don't seem to learn from history/other's mistakes: I guess you know how MS stole valuable assets and IP from borland trough their engineers - made very high offers to the Borland engineers while contacting with Borland for "cooperation". Well, the same identical thing happened years later to Oracle (with Microsoft, of course), after which MS SQL server started to suck less.

Re:How brazen can Microsoft's executives be?

[MonTemplar]

Interestingly, executives in software companies don't seem to learn from history/other's mistakes: I guess you know how MS stole valuable assets and IP from borland trough their engineers - made very high offers to the Borland engineers while contacting with Borland for "cooperation".

Know all about that one - practically qualifies for a FAQ on the Borland newsgroups, the number of times people ask about it!

Well, the same identical thing happened years later to Oracle (with Microsoft, of course), after which MS SQL server started to suck less.

I'm a bit hazy on this one. Who did they lure away? When was this? Got any links?

Re:How brazen can Microsoft's executives be?

[Locutus]

can't figure it out why year after year and company after company falls prey from being a Microsoft "partner". It stunned me when Sun signed their now famous licensing agreement with Microsoft. The road was already littered with victims from legal contracts gone bad when one of the parties involved is Microsoft.

Maybe the legal experts hired are all so cocky they think they will be the ones to make a Microsoft "partnership" work. Maybe the exec's want to cash in on the quick boost in their stock price when the press releases hit. Personally, I think it ego and the exec's think they are smarter than all those that have failed before.

Sendo didn't "get what they deserved" but what they got was surely not unexpected if you've been in the industry for more than 5 years.

Regarding Oracle; maybe that's why they went dumpster diving? Larry surely has few kind words for the Redmond gang and would be willing to spend what it might take to fry Microsoft in court. With the right evidence of course.

LoB

Re:How brazen can Microsoft's executives be?

[haggar]

I agree with your points. But I must add, the DOJ had all the right evidence, and yet, it failed.
I am not going to analize why, that would really take us quite far, but I can't help thinking that 40 billion in cash gets you a long way.

Re:How brazen can Microsoft's executives be?

[Locutus]

From what I've heard it's not less than $30 billion but that's still enough to outlive any company in court costs. I'll bet that in many of the "settlement" meetings with Microsoft and it's former "partners", the list of how many appeals Microsoft would be willing to file is probably posted in 200pt font on the wall behind them.

I wonder if the economy has much to do with their $10 billion reduction of cash or is it going to all those countries BillG and gang are attempting to payoff to NOT use GNU/Linux and OSS? Their numbers seem to show they are still ripping off business's at the same rate as always so it's probably from investment losses and those billions spent on foreign governments. They have 3 more years worth at their current rate. :)

LoB

Re:How brazen can Microsoft's executives be?

[MonTemplar]

People with $40B in the bank don't need friends.

It's not that they don't need friends - if they don't take care, they won't have any friends!

Imagine what Microsoft will do when they have $100B in the bank, or $500B. Imagine that power. They could sign deals like this with ENTIRE COUNTRIES.

Given the amount of scrutiny that Microsoft will be under, and will continue to be under for the forseeable future, I'd expect the stockpile to decrease rather than increase.

Re:How brazen can Microsoft's executives be?

[jafac]

IIRC, it wasn't Oracle MS plundered to get MS SQL, it was Sybase. Oracle still has a product and marketshare. That's the first clue that it's a company that was never in a partnership with MS.

Re:How brazen can Microsoft's executives be?

[haggar]

Well, when in doubt, the best place to check a company's financial strength is the profile on yahoo, which shows MSFT's total cash at 40.5 billion. The page also shows a ludicrious profit margin of OVER 30%! That underscores pretty nicely what you just said about MS ripping off the industry, as usual. And this amidst all kinds of investments like MSN, Xbox etc! Believe me, these guys have fuel to burn. The whole Xbox fucking-around costed them "only" 700 million, including the 500 million propaganda campaign. And the Xbox is starting to sell, at least in UK, finally. I don't know how the game console story is gona end, but I know for sure that, if MS wanted to just give away 10 million Xboxen, they could do that and it would be but a blip on their accounting... what with their projected annual income of almost 10 billion!

See the numbers for yourself, and tel me it doesn't get you at least a little bit queasy.

Re:How brazen can Microsoft's executives be?

[haggar]

I promise I will double-check, 'coz indeed I'm not infallable, but I'm rather certain we're talking about Oracle. The fact that they're still in business is that they still have a lot of tech that it's better than MS's. But not even a better technology can save you, not even in the RDBMS business. See Informix: those guys have a fantastic RDBMS, yet they have fallen on hard times and are now just a way for IBM to get into their markets with DB2 (which is also a great product, no doubt about it).

Apropos MS SQL server an Sybase: my account wasn't about getting it, it was abot gettng it fixed. Among other things, IIRC (but here I'm really on thin ice) they got finer-grained locking to work.

Re:How brazen can Microsoft's executives be?

[haggar]

Well Jazman, I don't quite agree with your generalization of USA (I think you guys do learn, no less than anyone else) even though I am a European and it's really popular and politically correct to blame USA for everything, but this would get us way waayy offtopic and into politics, and we don't want to go there, now do we? Well, I don't for sure :o)

Re:How brazen can Microsoft's executives be?

[error0x100]

Sendo's execs probably got taken in for the same reason people fall victim to other scams, such as MLM schemes, Nigerian hoaxes etc: they get blinded by the (incorrect) thought that they are going to make lots and lots of money.

Microsoft's business model

[Anonymous Coward]

1. Profit. 2. Profit???? 3. Profit.

Re:Microsoft's business model

[Alan Partridge]

1.Promise
2.Confuse
3.Delay
4.Move Goalposts
5.Destroy
6.Get Sued?
7.Profit!

Re:Microsoft's business model

[Drishmung]

Yes, but...

• Profit is a reward, a byproduct and indicator of success.
• Profit cannot be a goal, as it cannot be directly produced.
• Profit arises from successful business practices, which are the motives of business.

If I set out to be The Richest Person On Earth, a business plan that says:

• Profit

isn't really much help. Profit indicates business success, but a company that says their chief goal is to make a profit has actually lost the plot.

Tiem will tell...

[vpreHoose]

if Sendo engineers can actually integrate onto a Series 60 platform.
Just because the OS can't do what you need, then just bypass it. A classic example of this is SIM Locking to a particular network, or group of networks. The SDK (Pocket PC 2002 and Smartphone) doesn't support this. Sendo complain, HTC, MiTac, Samsung, and Compal work around it (to varying degrees of success).

From the article:

[Amoeba]

But it was never a partnership of equals, alleges Sendo, and after promising that StinkerOS was ready in the middle of last year, Microsoft used the delays to uncover Sendo's integration secrets and carrier relationships, and then cut off their air supply, using this knowledge to promote its new sweetheart, the Orange SPV instead.

Emphasis mine. I really don't think I have to add anything to this quote. ;)

You'd better believe it...

[Anonymous Coward]

I knew about this months ago - no I don't work for Sendo, Microsoft or any subsiduaries or affiliates.

I kept telling people but all they said was 'well that's not the way we've heard it'. Eventually the truth appears and it is even worse than was origionally described to me, and that made my toes curl !!! (I believe there may be even more to come out yet.)

But this is how M$ has done business for a long time. What really boggles my mind is that people still queue up to do business with M$. They must know that if what they have is slightly inovative or 'required' by M$ they are going to get screwed over !

It's OK folks,

[countach]

Don't believe this nonsense. For example Microsoft would NEVER, screw over Miguel de Icaza and the MONO effort. Trust them. If Microsoft says they support the MONO effort, we can take them at their word. They are people of high integrity and whatever they say, they mean. They would never lead others along the garden path, with every intention of crushing them later on.

+5 Sarcasm.

Re:It's OK folks,

[miffo.swe]

I actually agree totally with you. I think MS will screw Miguel de Icaza so hard that he wont sit again in years. Mono in itself is admirarble but its origin spells bad future. Microsoft is just using Mono to be able to say .net is x-platform and then when market share is anough in comes version 1.1 breaking all compability with Mono.

Re:It's OK folks,

[Ilgaz]

they brand you insightful or informative. See how easy people are influenced :))

Miguel, I know you read Slashdot man, see this?

Re:It's OK folks,

[mrkurt]

This is why I am staying the hell away from Mono. Miguel would do better to put Ximian's efforts into other areas,like the desktop, Evolution, and anything else that gives them a real opportunity to grow. You play with fire, you get burned.

Re:It's OK folks,

[Malcontent]

If business is war then Miguel is an idiot for entering into a war with the last remaining superpower in the software industry. Remember when the taliban declared war on the US? It will be just like that. MS will bomb the shit out Mono and Miguel will die.

Re:It's OK folks,

[Chris Johnson]

More like +1 ROFL :)

It's funny, laugh!

Could the fate of microsoft be made in civil court

[WPIDalamar]

With all these civil cases going on, could they shape MS's behavior more than the antitrust trial?

I could see a future where microsoft is afraid to do the "bad things" they like to do for fear of lawsuits .... but then I think about their huge pile of money, and the idea seems laughable.

And what ever happened to the EU antitrust type trial?

Re:I'm starting to understand

[Anonymous Coward]

You can try to twist this in any pro-microsoft way you like, but the plain fact is that they have again been very, very bad.

And we are not talking about some presumed badness that may or may not happen in the far future. We are talking about well-documented badness that happened just now.

Running your business partners into the ground and stealing their trade secrets is NOT normal business practice.

They have proven it again.

[miffo.swe]

If you are a company with any intellectual holdings or patents, dont ever work with Microsoft. If you only manufacture things and dont know anything about what you do then its fine.

Its nearly written in stone since before. Microsoft is a midas touch to any company with any form of knowledge that works together with them. Sendo should have realized this ofcourse. Still that doesnt in any way defends what Microsoft did wich clearly fradulent behaviour and underhanded business practises. If every company behaived like Microsoft all resources would go to fighting instead of developing good products. This kind of mafia methods needs to stop now!

In my book thats bad for me and other consumers.

Another quote from the article

[markov_chain]

At this point Brown suggests that Microsoft convert the share deal into a loan, repayable in three stages, and in February (last year), Sendo agrees. Stinker still hasn't shipped, so Sendo can't sell a phone.

You know, I'm beginning to think that the article writer had something to do with this ;)

And you're surprised, why?

[Anonymous Coward]

You sleep with the devil, you're going to get hurt. Simple as that. Next time, just let them buy you outright and walk away.

Re:And you're surprised, why?

[SystematicPsycho]

I always thought it was if you play with fire you eventually get burnt.

Re:I'm starting to understand

[0x0d0a]

So any time there is an article about Microsoft on Slashdot, I am to assume they did something wrong.

Well...usually, but they have lost the occasional anti-trust lawsuit... :-)

Business as usual

[johann_moeller]

Let's face reality. That is the way business is exercised nowadays. I fully agree that it should not be that way, but there are certain points that enforce that behaviour. Hordes of shareholders demanding better results and higher profits every quarter are one side of the coin. Nobody believes that Microsoft will be able to keep its profits rising within the same industry for years and years. The aim is to increase the amonunt of industries and therefore increase the opportunities to push the Net Income even further above. No need to tell you that MSFT hat an income of $9.27 billion on sales of $30.0billion. Now it is your duty to show me a way to increase profits without increasing sales....

Summing up - The aim of Microsoft is to increase profits - no matter which methods they use. Time for the govt to step into the ring and show them what they are allowed to do and what they aren't.

Re:Business as usual

[HiThere]

Summing up - The aim of Microsoft is to increase profits - no matter which methods they use. Time for the govt to step into the ring and show them what they are allowed to do and what they aren't.

It did.

Contract is law

[Anonymous Coward]

In the Anglo Saxon legal system, a contract has equal status as the law and the contract terms are used by a judge to determine the outcome of any dispute.
However in germanic and roman law (Rest of Europe and large chunk of the world), the contract is the law, but is tempered by other laws that define that some clauses are innaceptable (an example would be the prohibition of contracts based on human organ trade).
If these 2 systems attain the same result most of the time, the germano-roman type of law gives some sort of implied guarantee to any type of contract.
One of these guarantees states that both parties in a contract should enter the agreement in good faith or else the contract is void.
The point of this diatribe is to state that when you see a bargain on a item because of an error or mischief, and you profit from it, your sales contract can be rendered void afterwards in Europe, but it can only be rendered void in the US and the UK if there is a cllause that covers that point in the contract.
So following this path of thought, if Microsoft is profiting from Sendo's poor management, they still would have had to prove that their tactics were not intended to harm their partner. That is if the trial was not in Texas!!!
My "European" 2 cents

Re:Contract is law

[Zontar The Mindless]

> In the Anglo Saxon legal system, a contract has equal status as the law...

Not quite. Clauses that require breaking the law are themselves illegal and can't be enforced.

Standards

[den_erpel]

From the article:
To Americans, the telecom world's model of promoting growth through vertical investments (a Nokia or an Ericsson bails out the carriers) and through IP sharing (yeuch!), and promoting common standards (that's goddam Communism!), must look like a filthy and incestuous business.

Perhaps slightly unrelated (yes, mod me down), but I wonder if the cell phone market would ever have been that successful as it is now without these common standards, especially if you think that the mobile market/penetration is the largest in Scandinavia. Imagine a world where a Nokia phone could not communicate with a Sony/Ericsson, what a waste of resources would that be, ... I would say we're lucky this technology wasn't determined by American companies (and I basically don't care if they are European or Asean), or else we'd pay double for our phones, just for the patents to use the proprietary communication format.

But hey, isn't that exactly what we have on the desktop?

Re:Standards

[CaptainZapp]

I would say we're lucky this technology wasn't determined by American companies (and I basically don't care if they are European or Asean), or else we'd pay double for our phones, just for the patents to use the proprietary communication format.

To the best of my knowledge, you pretty much describe Qualcomms business model.

From what I know they are liked in the industry about as much as Rambus.

Re:Standards

[mgs1000]

Qualcomm gets a royalty for equipment using the "European" WCDMA stardard.

Re:Standards

[HiThere]

In my opinion, your statement should be rephrased to:
Qualcomm gets a royalty for equipment using the "European" WCDMA "stardard".

Things which are not available are not standards. "standard" is the most that I can call them, and I usually prefer to limit it to spec or api.

A standard is a way that everyone can and should do things. Once someone has a monoploy on it, it ceases to be a standard. Now, possibly this spec is guaranteed available for a fixed fee forever. In that case only small companies and individuals couldn't use it. You could then make a kind of argument that it was a "sort of" standard. But I don't believe this as I haven't seen it explicitly claimed. And I have experienced prices being raised without expectation or warning.

This doesn't change anything

[Anonymous Custard]

1. Sendo sues MS.

2. MS fights for a little while.

3. Sendo gets more desperate, and settles with MS for enough money to appease their investors.

Case closed.

That's the hard way of doing it....

[countach]

The easier way is that MS just says "Sorry folks, we have a patent on XXXX, and you can't use MONO any more. Oh by the way, since it is now so ingrained into Gnome, you can't use it either. Oh, and since all those Linux disks have Gnome on them, you'll have to destroy them all too."

Re:That's the hard way of doing it....

[alext]

The fact that you can change window managers isn't the issue. Mono is a platform not a desktop, and the Mono hype is encouraging people to make huge commitments with their application developments.

We may not all realize it, but actually all Linux developments are in fairly desperate straits - we have to go cross (hardware) platform to be viable in a world of PDAs, tablets etc. but the only cross-platform solutions are Java and Mono.

Personally, I'd rather be in the same boat as Sun, IBM, Oracle and BEA than deal with the Beast, but a vocal minority on /. still likes to pretend that there's no difference between Sun's IPR policies and Microsoft's.

I wonder how many more stories like this it will take to convince them otherwise?

Re:That's the hard way of doing it....

[alext]

Well, we know that, but you'll see that whenever cross-platform issues come up, the solution proposed is usually 'recompile it, dummy'.

And layers like IBM Eclipse SWT are half-way between universal top-to-bottom implementations like Swing and semi-portable toolkits like Qt.

Re:And another thing..

[markov_chain]

Read the bottom of the article:

"What sank Sendo's Stinker"

This time, the typo is in the title-- for those busy editors who don't have time to read whole articles :^)

Re:And another thing..

[jez_f]

you read theregister regularly you will find that they always do this sort of thing. After freeserve was bought by the French government they were always calling it 'le freeserve'. There are loads of other examples but none that come to mind right now.

Re:And another thing..

[madprof]

They insult everyone, to try and be fair.
Hence Intel is ChipZilla and AMD is ChimpZilla.
The only exception to this really is when it comes to figures in the Linux world.

Re:Could the fate of microsoft be made in civil co

[Planesdragon]

I could see a future where microsoft is afraid to do the "bad things" they like to do for fear of lawsuits .... but then I think about their huge pile of money, and the idea seems laughable.

Their huge pile of money will only get them so far. If they start losing it by the billions, their stockholders (including Mr. Gates) will sit up and reign in the company.

$40 billion+ in the bank shouldn't be enough to avoid justice--but it should be enough to elminate a chance of appeal, or tiered payments, etc.

And what ever happened to the EU antitrust type trial?

AFAIK, it's still going on.

Nokia

[CaptainZapp]

This shows pretty nicely why Nokia was right to avoid the boys from Redmond like a mixture between syphillis and herpes.

Seemed to be a smart choice after all..

Enabling environment?

[Allt]

I found this interview with a former employee of Microsoft on Kuro5hin.

You worked at Microsoft for ten years, then left the company two-and-a-half years ago. From your perspective, do you think Microsoft has fundamentally changed as a result of the antitrust lawsuit?
My short answer would be "No".
There were many positive things about the Microsoft work environment. But there were some negatives. People use the term "enabling environment" to mean a situation that encourages someone to act in a negative way, such as drinking alcohol heavily, by mitigating the negative impact of the behavior, and providing tacit approval for it. Well, Microsoft constructed an enabling environment for socially obnoxious behavior: it was welcomed and rationalized into positives. If you were late for meetings it meant you were busy doing important work, if you were extremely confrontational it meant you were passionate about your job, if you required subordinates to work long hours it meant you were committed to the product, if you turned down everyone you interviewed it meant you weren't soft, and so on.
So Microsoft had this system that encouraged and rewarded people who acted a certain way. And some of that behavior trickled out into meetings with customers and partners, where they were correctly seen as negatives and helped foster the anti-Microsoft attitude. But since Microsoft kept hiring and promoting obnoxious people, they kept being obnoxious.

I don't know how much truth lies in this, but when any organization becomes big enough, culture plays a big role in dictating what is allowed and what's not.

Re:Enabling environment?

[imadork]

Snipped from the blurb on the kuro5hin interview:

So Microsoft had this system that encouraged and rewarded people who acted a certain way. And some of that behavior trickled out into meetings with customers and partners, where they were correctly seen as negatives and helped foster the anti-Microsoft attitude. But since Microsoft kept hiring and promoting obnoxious people, they kept being obnoxious.

You know, I have been wondering whether my dislike of Microsoft goes deeper than just not liking their products, and goes straight to the attitude and culture they encourage in the business world.

Consider some Microsoft ads that have been shown recently, pitched as "software for the agile business"...

- A wine seller noticed half of his stock was just destroyed in a tragic accident, then instantly updates his inventory and doubles his price so the guy currently buying cases gets screwed. Are we supposed to think this is how businesses should be run? Any reasonable store owner I know of carries insurance for these circumstances, because they understand that screwing the customer will lead to less customers.

- A bunch of Record Industry execs come up with a great marketing plan: somehow find out the E-mail addresses of everyone who bought a certain band's CD in a certain city, and send them e-mail direct marketing messages about concerts and other exciting offers. They even show that the fans are happy that they are getting this unsolicited spam! What gives?

I understand that the real point of the commercials was to show how well all the systems talk to each other, but I find their examples extremely outrageous.Maybe I'm just a disgruntled corporate drone, but is this how most "agile businesses" want to operate? Because if it is, we have more to worry about than just Microsoft!

Re:What's the big deal?

[wtom]

I am sure the Enron executives share your viewpoint, and wonder why they are in jail... After all, it's just doing business, isn't it?

Perhaps one day some of the Microsoft folks can join them. We can hope, at least...

Taking advantage of stupid or weak people/companies/customers/whatever is wrong, even if it *is* legal. It shouldn't be legal... One of those house-repair scammers tried to screw my grandmother (in her late 80's at the time). She did not fall victim, but others did. If she would have fell for it, would that have been OK? I see no moral difference between the small-time and big-time scammers.

Re:duh

[malkavian]

Uhh.. Score 5? Someone's got an odd concept of Capitalism.
Capitalism works fine when everyone's honourable, and keeps their word, and basically plays the game. People make products and make money. Best product wins (votes=money).
MS, as usual, are breaking the rules, and pulling their own game (kill all other contenders), which isn't Capitalism.
In Capitalism, you end up with a flourishing ecosystem of companies providing a variety of competing products. Evolution selects the best.
In the MS game, you end up with one monolithic power providing what it thinks is best for people.
In fact, MS' way is more like communism than capitalism.
"To each unto their needs'..
MS decides what each person needs, and that's what they get, like it or not. It attempts to take all competition out of the arena, so, if you want an office suite, you have MS office, as MS has killed the competition.
So, really, MS is anti-capitalist.

Malk

Re:And another thing..

[DanMilburn]

Well, no. Why is it irresponsible?

The Register are biased against Microsoft, and have good reason to be. Would you prefer that they don't reveal that bias?

Really, this is just what they do. Their tagline is 'Biting the hand that feeds IT', and they tend to take the piss out of anyone they feel like. It's one of the reasons I like them so much. :)

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

UK Sunday Press

[Martin S.]

Over the Week-end this was plastered all over the UK's Broadsheets (quality) news papers in the last few day; and not technology sections but in the Business. The damage to Microsoft's reputation for bad-faith with the 'Captains of Industry' from this episode will be profound.

There is also refuge for Sendo in UK bankruptcy laws, where Creditors have an incredible amount of power in the say of the winding up of a company. There are two forms, Administration, a private sector accountant is appointed to take over running of the business. He has absolute authority in to persue the Creditors best interests, even if the only real assets are IP, bad debts and damages. In this fails the next step is Insolvency, Government investigators from the DTI investigate why the business failed, have criminal investigative powers and can sequestrate assets of bad debtors, and prosecute offenders. If Sendo do go bust that is only the start of Microsoft problems.

Re:UK Sunday Press

[sheldon]

Over the Week-end this was plastered all over the UK's Broadsheets (quality) news papers in the last few day; and not technology sections but in the Business. The damage to Microsoft's reputation for bad-faith with the 'Captains of Industry' from this episode will be profound.

Heh. I like how you have to explain that the Register is not a credible news source. :)

Anyway, I read about this last week, not sure where. I have to agree that based on what I read(Sendo never received money MS and MS had an executive on Sendo's board) this places Microsoft in a really bad-faith situation.

You know, if Microsoft really did this, I hope they get slapped with a huge fine.

But I'll reserve judgement, it's quite possible the other side of the story is one of greedy executives on Sendo's board who are trying to lay blame on others. We've certainly seen a lot of that in the US markets this past year.

Patient, like Sauron

[ackthpt]

It seems that Microsoft had much more to gain from letting its partner fail than helping it to succeed: in the event of a bankruptcy, Microsoft acquired all of Sendo's intellectual property related to the z100 Stinger SmartPhone

IIRC Microsoft has a stake in General Magic, which developed video software for handheld devices. It was of note, a few years ago, because General Magic was down to $1 a share when Microsoft took interest. Last I looked General Magic closed September or early October and was winding down completely about December. Guess who will get their IP, as a significant debtor

Except under UK insolvency law

[Martin S.]

1. Sendo sues MS.

2. MS stalls for a long, long time. Judge is too wimpy to issue an injunction.

3. Microsoft refuses to settle. Sendo goes bankrupt from the legal fees.

4. The Sendo's Creditors including the Accountants and Lawyers gain Sendo assets including the right to sue Microsoft.

5. (Even more) profit for Accountants and Lawyers

6. Microsoft now have no choice but to settle in order to cap the legal fees.

Hum.. ?

[pxnoll]

Isn't this just like your ordinary golddigger marriage? ;/ If Anna Nicole can do it.. why can't Microsoft? ;/

Re:Hum.. ?

[TheLink]

The difference is the golddiggee was very happy to be screwed by Anna Nicole.

Stacker, Apple and others

[Martin S.]

They did the same thing to Stacker with it's disc compression software. Joint arrangement, Small Capital Investment as a sign of good faith, poached the best staff and deserted the deal after launching there own software.

They've pulled a similar stunts with Apple and games company who's name escapes me for the moment.

Re:Stacker, Apple and others

[silvaran]

How about IBM? (OS/2)

Re:duh

[Anonymous Coward]

LOL. Bourgeois logic is always good for a laugh.

"Microsoft is anti-capitalist". hehehehhe.

Sorry what you describe is perfect competition, which is only one of several ways the market can operate under capitalism. Perfect competition requires a delicate balance and is easily destroyed.

I think you are the one with an odd concept of capitalism. Monopolies are a part of capitalism just as much as perfect competition is.

Oh ya there are no rules in capitalism. Governments may or may not impose various rules on the market but these are not a part of capitalism. So really by complaining about microsoft you are being anti-capitalist.

heheheheh.

I guess they don't require any economics classes to get a computer science degree.

I mean do you even listen to what you say?

"Kill all contenders isn't capitalism"

So if your business is putting the competition out of business you should suddenly back off and let them take some of your marketshare or something? That's completely laughable. In fact the shareholders could sue you for doing something like that.

"Evolution selects the best"

This contradicts what you just said. In order for your earlier statement to make sense evolution would have to select a bunch of less than best. Otherwise all the contenders become extinct.

Bah, why do i even bother...

ms man on sendo board

[geoff lane]

remember, MS had a man on the Sendo board. MS cannot now claim to not know the situation Sendo was in. If Sendo can show that the MS man acted against the interests of Sendo he's wide open to be sued by the shareholders. If Sendo can show that the MS man acted in bad faith on behalf of MS then MS is in deep s.h.i.t.

Re:Why fraud pays

[bruthasj]

Like all magic potions and wonder drugs, fraud doesn't always work. Take Enron and especially the accounting firm that influenced some of their decisions. They're lying flat on their backs because of fraudulent behavior. Now if Enron isn't big enough in your definition, I don't know what is.

Re:learned to play fair?

[MonTemplar]

As most geeks have probably learnt the hard way; Popular bullies are rarely challenged by the authorities.

I suspect Microsoft will find out this year just how 'popular' they are, one way or another.

Read the article? How novel!

[AndyMouse GoHard]

Erm... which part of "Sendo didn't go bankrupt" don't you understand? Otis, if that's your real name, do try to read the article. Microsoft was not free to do whatever they wanted because the necessary precondition to that was not met.

Bill

It's quite simple really.

[Lethyos]

Do not partner with Microsoft. Do not become inolved with a company that has a long, pathetic history of screwing-over anyone and everyone they even remotely deal with.

Learn, people! If you play with fire, you'll get burned! Instead, choose to deal with organizations that are friendly because they understand the concept of doing good work to stay in business (open source vendors for example).

Product development and business 101.

[zerofoo]

Anyone familiar with the term "critical path"? That is the path in the development cycle that affects all others, and ultimately the deliverablilty of the product. If you delay the critical path, you delay the product.

If you are planning a product that will determine the success of your company, you should make sure that critical path is kept in-house where it can be controlled. Sendo's management obviously didn't get this. (A better buisiness decision might have been to use an open source operating system and hire a bunch of developers to customize it for you.)

This is why many smaller broadband companies went belly up in the ".com roaring 90's". They depended on someone else (telcos and cable companies) to deliver on their critical path. That's just plain stupid.

-ted

That wasn't their business plan

[Quila]

(A better buisiness decision might have been to use an open source operating system and hire a bunch of developers to customize it for you.)

Their plan was to leverage Microsoft's marketing muscle in order for their product to be successful. Open source wouldn't have achieved that.

Unfortunately for them if you lie down with dogs, you wake up with fleas.

Oops, they did it again.

[kfg]

I mean, really. Anyone considering a deal with MS that involves the transfer, licensing, ownership of IP to Microsoft should click their heels together three times and say:

"Spyglass, Spyglass, Spyglass."

It's not like MS hasn't been caught redhanded pulling this sort of crap before.

KFG

Re:Oops, they did it again.

[sheldon]

Spyglass was setup to sell off licensing to the NCSA Mosaic code. Microsoft bought a license, thinking at the time that's what they had to do.

Netscape didn't buy a license, they just stole the code by stealing the developers of the original Mosaic, who then went on to write Navigator in a better way having learned the lesson of how not to write it with Mosaic. They later ended up settling a lawsuit with the University over that very issue.

But then in around about IE 3.0 Microsoft rewrote the whole thing from scratch without using the Mosaic code. They only licensed Mosaic from Spyglass to get IE 1.0(or was it 2.0?) out the door quickly.

So what's the problem with Spyglass? They received some licensing money, but they didn't have a long term revenue stream from it. Should they? Does Opera have a license with spyglass? Legitimate question, I don't know... but are you saying that to create a browser you need it?

Now why you're ragging on Microsoft I don't understand. If someone was working on an open source browser at the time(prior to Netscape dumping Navigator off), do you think they would have licensed the code from Spyglass?

This is gratutious Microsoft bashing, plain and simple and a completely different situation than this Sendo story.

Re:Oops, they did it again.

[runderwo]

Selective perception?

They only licensed Mosaic from Spyglass to get IE 1.0(or was it 2.0?) out the door quickly.

Yes, and as part of the license agreement, Spyglass would receive royalties on every copy of IE that was sold. Guess what happened, and why they sued Microsoft later and won a pittance? (Read the bottom half, if you bother.)

But then in around about IE 3.0 Microsoft rewrote the whole thing from scratch without using the Mosaic code.

Funny, you seem to know things that even Microsoft does not. Look in the "About" box in IE6 if you really believe there was ever a rewrite "from scratch".

You claim that Netscape did some devilish thing and was sued for it, yet I have no memory of, and can find no record of, such an event ever having taken place. Are you thinking of the Netscape=>Microsoft antitrust suit?

Does Opera have a license with spyglass?

Does Opera use Spyglass code? What's your point?

Legitimate question, I don't know... but are you saying that to create a browser you need it?

No, but if their code is used, they should be expected to be compensated for it. Microsoft subverted that compensation, which is why this is an on-topic thread for this discussion.

This is gratutious Microsoft bashing, plain and simple and a completely different situation than this Sendo story.

Maybe if you actually knew or cared to know the facts, you'd think differently. Somehow, I doubt it.

Re:Oops, they did it again.

[runderwo]

I wouldn't call $20M "a pittance". At the time Mosaic was an out-of-date POS that was basically worthless in the market.

Well, if you mean at the time of the award, you are correct. Another way to look at it is in terms of the missed opportunities that Spyglass had to endure because their partner hosed them.

Netscape was started by the NCSA Mosaic guys.

Actually, they were two completely separate projects that were worked on by people that originated at UIUC. I won't claim that there weren't similarities (wink wink), but in practice the projects were completely divorced from each other at the time that Netscape went commercial.

Re:duh

[sqlgeek]

If everyone is honorable and keeps their word, etc., as you imagine then any given economic system will work well whether it be capitalist or marxist. The great and abiding issue is how to yoke the baser impulses within humanity into a just, viable economic system. Quite simply, how do we encourage the honorable, and punish the thieves?

Scott

Rights...

[stubear]

I keep hearing on /. about this thing called a Constitution which guarantees one to be innocent until proven guilty. I guess that only applies selectively according to the whims of geeks? Rights exist to protect ALL whether you agree with or even like others. I guess all the whining is really the releasing of a bunch of hot air from people with no life.

What did you expect IN THE FILING FROM SENDO?!?!?! "Microsoft treated us with the utmost respect, w screwed up and lost a bunch of money but we're going to use anti-Microsoft sentiment to push this case along and get a crack at the 40+ billion dollars they have sitting around just itching to be plundered by a bunch of lawyers."

The filing is Sendo's side of the case but since it's a lawsuit against Microsoft and /. doesn't like Microsoft, ANY lawsuit, regardless of merits, is a good thing. Until the judge rules, neither side is guilty, PERIOD.

Re:Rights...

[stubear]

The rights are still guaranteed regardless of the case being civil or criminal. The difference between the two is the burden of proof. I shoud have clarified that a bit more, but you're right, we do have a moral and ethical responsibility to not assume guilt, regardless of who's on trial. Guilt is for 12 jurors and/or a judge to decide, not internet forums or the news media.

Re:Rights...

[sconeu]

People are assuming MS is guilty due to past actions...

Go! Computer
Stac Electronics
Borland

etc...

Re:Rights...

[mao che minh]

I wish I lived in the same magical and fantastic world where Microsoft Corporation might actually be innocent of wrong doing and practice honorable business practices. Unfortunately, I reside in reality.

And in the link to the related article too!!

[Reziac]

And it's repeated FOUR times on that page, including in the link at the bottom to "Related Stories: What sank Sendo's Stinker?" http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/54/28000.html which in turn repeats it in its own headline and once more below to boot!

Nope, I no longer believe this is a typo!!

His Evilness at least lives up to his contracts

[TheConfusedOne]

Cutting a deal with the evil one at least gets you the terms of the contract. (They may be interpretted exteremely literally, but he can't break the words.)

In this case, MS didn't even live up to their end of the contract while (allegedly) actively working to undermine their partner.

Re:His Evilness at least lives up to his contracts

[TheLink]

Just curious. How are you so sure about the evil one?

Or are you talking about a "popular culture" version of the evil one?

Re:His Evilness at least lives up to his contracts

[TheLink]

One of those NDA's eh?

No thanks, I'll pass ;).

Stinger and Canary

[phorm]

(Microsoft hates the "Stinker" moniker so much, that it's rebranded Stinker as "Canary" - perhaps unaware of the bird's history as a sacrificial and disposable early warning system for miners. When the Canary dies - you clear out fast).

This from the linked article, it sounds like exactly what this case should be saying to any other phone vendors (or other platforms) dealing with MS. The canary has died (though it's taking MS to court), and it's time for everyone else to clear the building.

Re:duh

[N3WBI3]

Noth American Capitalism *IS* Capitalism, dont confuse welfare states with private ownership of goods with capitalism.

Bullshit!

[DerFeuervogel]

Bullshit!
A business's responsibility is to its stockholders, not its customers, not its partners or anyone else for that matter.

If anyone wants to know why American Capitalism is failing this view says it all. Customers don't mean shit. The unfortunate thing is so many people believe this bullshit that it's hard to speak otherwise.

Here is an idea. Start a _privately_ owned company and make a product and tell me again why customers don't matter. Seems that the minute the company goes public they are no longer in business to make anyone but Wall Street happy. This kind of idiotic thinking has just got to stop.

Lion's share...

[lynx_user_abroad]

Borrowed from Dr. Larry Fogelberg but originally from Aesop:

The lion approached the wolf and the fox, and suggested that they form a partnership for the purpose of hunting game. The lion explained that each had particular talents that would lend themselves to such a partnership. The fox was wily and could trick the quarry into the open; and the wolf was swift of foot, so that he could direct the quarry to where the lion lay in wait to complete the kill. After some discussion, the wolf and the fox agreed to enter into a partnership with the lion. All went as planned and a deer was killed, but when the wolf and the fox tried to share in the kill, the lion challenged them. They stood by, helplessly, and watched the lion devour the entire carcass. Afterward, they asked the lion why he had only left them a few scraps. The lion replied, "All I took was the lion's share."

Midas had a golden touch

[Dusabre]

Midas turned things to gold with his touch. Sendo turned to ... Perhaps gorgon gaze would an appropriate classical allusion. And kiss of death would be a more modern one and perhaps more appropriate if you're comparing somebody to the mob.

Re:Midas had a golden touch

[miffo.swe]

Have you read the whole story about Midas? He, midas, turned people into gold when he touched them. That was profitable for midas but hardly for the ones touched by him. Not very fun being turned into gold and in the same time snuffed off?

Re:Midas had a golden touch

[Danse]

Well.. Sendo did turn to gold for Microsoft.. it just sucks to be the one that turns into gold rather than the one doing the turning.

Re:And another thing..

[ChaosDiscord]

This isn't bad editing, it's on purpose and only undermines the impact of the story by showing where the Register's bias is.

I totally agree. I hate it when a news source shows where its bias is. Bias should be subtle so you get the illusion that you're just getting facts, making it easier to deceive myself that I'm getting objective news instead of slanted news. Have the bias hanging out, it's like a news organization's private parts hanging out. Won't someone think of the children!

Now if you'll excuse me, I need to go review the carefully researched, reasoned, and unbiased discussion on the Wall Street Journal's editorial page.

oh please!

[Ender Ryan]

Microsoft has a long history of treating their business partners like shit, helping them to collapse and reaping the benefits. I see people criticizing Microsoft for that, which is a valid complaint. Treating business partners in such a manner is NOT standard business practice, but it's standard practice for Microsoft.

What gets me is that persons like yourself come to their defense so quickly. The same /.ers who complain about Microsoft also complain about Linux companies when they do equally "bad" things.

And furthermore, WTF are you talking about "innocent until proven guilty"? THEY HAVE BEEN PROVEN GUILTY, IN COURT, MORE THAN ONCE!

Sweet leaping Jesus, do you just ignore those facts so you can paint people who dislike Microsoft with a very broad brush?

Re:oh please!

[stubear]

They were proven guilty of using their monopoly illegally, not of violating Sendo's intellectual property. Until they are, they are innocent.

Re:oh please!

[Lochin Rabbar]

They were proven guilty of using their monopoly illegally, not of violating Sendo's intellectual property. Until they are, they are innocent. No, until proven found in a court one is innocent in the eyes of the law. Actual guilt or innocence is a matter of fact and entirely independent of a courts findings. Any individual, not involved in the legal process, is entitled to their opinions on the matter of actual guilt or innocence. A finding of not guilty in the court does not prevent an individual from expressing an opinion that a person was actually guilty. Think of the OJ trial and the subsequent civil trial.

What are you smoking?

[Moderation abuser]

If these allegations are true it could have very serious consequences for Microsoft. That's pretty obvious.

What are you on? Show examples of Microsoft's behavior having had any significant consequences at all.

It just won't happen. Some judge will talk very sternly at them for a couple of hours and that'll be it.

Re:What are you smoking?

[madprof]

Okay. Microsoft witheld code that they should have produced and Sendo lost out as a result. They may go insolvent. That is, clearly, a consequence and if they broke the contract twice then they can clearly be sued for that.

I'm not holding my breath,,,

[TrentC]

I guess finally history is catching up to MS.

Everyone thought the antitrust trial was where MS was going to meet up with its karma, too. Look where that got us -- a watered-down sweetheart "settlement" which does nothing to address the real problems with MS, let alone the issues presented at the antitrust trial.

If this case turns into a serious legal threat, I wonder how many bribes^H^H^H^H^H^Hdonations and contributions MS will have to make in order to get another toothless "settlement".

Jay (=

No

[mao che minh]

Haven't you learned that our legal system was bought and sold a long time ago? Microsoft will never be given any sound defeat in a US court. This very sad, but very true.

Probably Redundant, but my Karma can afford it

[EmagGeek]

But, anyone who actually believes Microsoft actually wants to be their "partner" in bringing "new products" to "market" is a blithering IDIOT. Microsoft isn't interested in being anyone's partner. M$ has enough money to go out and start its own mobile phone company. It's just cheaper and easier to spend $12M to steal the research and IP.

These little startups, in their eagerness to play "big company" to impress their fourbucks-going friends, will ink any deal that brings in money, because that's all they see. They don't think ahead, and don't have any idea whom their friends and enemies are. Microsoft was probably interting and rotating the knife in their backs before the ink was even dry...

Re:What's the big deal?

[Dunark]

I am sure the Enron executives share your viewpoint, and wonder why they are in jail...

Umm, how many Enron execs are in jail? The last time I counted, it was zero.

Sure it does

[sh0rtie]

sure it pays,

• Is Enron still in business today ?
  
• Is Anderson Consulting still in business ?
  
• Is Kenneth Lay and his family living in a trailer park in poverty ?
  
• Are the top 20 executives in Enron or Anderson and their families + friends living in trailer parks or tents pennyless too ?
  
• Will the Enron/Tyco/AC/*.company fraudsters who are going to jail going to come out in 7yrs to poverty like usual petty fraudsters ?
  
• How many of the top executives involved in the corporate frauds gonna retire in poverty like all the poor sods who lost their 401k's ?
  

Now I don't know what your definition is of not working is, but if cash/assets are any measure of success i think the said "fraudsters" have done pretty well out of it don't you think ?, going to prison for 7 - 15years to come out a multi-millionaire from your embezzeled cash is hardly a failure.

Re:Sure it does

[HiThere]

I can imagine prisons where I would not consider that winning. But somehow I doubt that the convicted will be going to those.

Despite that most of the prisons in the country appear to qualify.

Re:Sure it does

[cpeterso]

and are these guilty executives going to a pound-me-in-the-ass prison? I think not.

It's called "writing style" and audience pandering

[mao che minh]

Comp 101

Re:duh

[malkavian]

Evolution actually requires competition to improve. MS doesn't even want to allow anything else in the arena whatsoever. Given that it's the only player in the field, you end up with stagnation, and an end to evolution. This in turn leads to degredation and decay.
MS, curerrently is definately a false maximum fitness speaking, and it's using non-evolutionary measures (read lawyers) to tip the balance, to prevent evolution taking it's course.
A large part of the reason MS still has it's dominance is keeping everyone else running scared of it's Lawyers. Oh, and it's political lobbying. None of which is Capitalism, more like Corruption.
Please don't mistake the two. :)
Capitalism is about operating in a free market. Now, a Free Market is defined as a market operating with little to no restriction on supply and demand.
Take the new licensing agreement for example. You do things when MS want you to, or you pay WAY more. This creates an artificial demand (thus, no longer a free market for that product, unless you have alternatives).
As for alternatives, MS are definately unhappy about people using the methods for reading their data, or interoperation with their OS. This restricts supply of products rather badly, if you're already in MS territory (unless you want to spend WAY more escaping their clutches).
In the Sendo case, they promised supply of a product (namely the operating system for the phone), then failed to produce it while Sendo went down the tubes. That's seriously restricting supply to Sendo.
As soon as they starved a partner, not a competitor even, they opened supply wide open.
I'm sure your economics class that you got while not doing your comp sci one will let you pick and choose a whole slew of tactics used by MS to avoid coming out into a Free Market.
And a Free Market is what Capitalism is all about.
No Free Market, no Capitalism.

Malk.

Re:duh

[malkavian]

Interesting.. Many people think that Humans are at the height of the evolutionary chain, simply because we eat most of the lower animals, and we've made inroads on a lot of diseases.
However, the big problem currently is that Bacteria seem to evolve a darn sight faster than we do. Currently there are strains around that we can do the square root of sod all about, apart from stick the infected person into isolation until they die or get over it themselves.
These resistant strains are only going to get more predominant as they share genes, which will probably give humanity a run for it's money in the nearish future.
We may be the most advanced life on Earth (probably anyway), but, don't let that fool you into thinking we're the end of the line. If evolution gets arsy about us, the little guys still have plenty of tricks up their sleeves we don't have a clue about yet..
I'd like to think Humanity's got the potential for the best, in the evolutionary terms.. But we could still head for a fall yet.
Oh, and a monopoly isn't the end point of evolutionary capitalism. Monopoly is to Capitalism what Cancer is to a biological entity.
Grows fast, spreads out as far as it can, until it's all there is left. Usually killing it's own environment in the process.

Malk

Re:All things considered

[Frobnicator]

Can any honest, unbiased and Slashdot/Register editor/user please post the rebuttal from Microsoft for the same case? You know to get a balanced view, or All thing considered(TM)

I'll try it, and standard /. disclaimers apply...

I've seen other corporate contracts before, the 'if one party fails, the other gets the rights' is a common thing. In this case, Sendo was not worried about MS failing, so they let the clause slip. That's not a big thing.

MS had invested in sendo by buying shares in the company, followed by other agreements. While the agreements may have been a good business decision and run by one set of managers, the financial managers may have seen the shares in the company as a bad investment (after all, they aren't putting out the product on time...) and decided to order a buy-back on the investment.

Other than that, though, I can't come up with a pro-MS view for it. The articles and MS's own Press Pass area show a lack-luster support for their "partner" (Initial press release with Sendo, This should have been the pre-launch party with Sendo, The MS Technology is hyped, their partner is... mentioned., and what would have been the press release at the same time as Stinger was to be released is the press release "Microsoft Launches Windows Powered Smartphone Software", so they keep the target date and product, just changed people.)

"Rights" versus "historical precidence"

[TheConfusedOne]

The main thing here that most people are saying is, "Well, DUH! It's not like they haven't done this before."

As some people have correctly pointed out, the accused was recently slapped down (though not terribly hard) for behavior exactly like this.

Finally, since we're not the body responsible for trying this case we're certainly allowed to think anything we want. As long as the body that actually does resolve this is impartial than that's all that matters.

HOW THE STORY ENDS

[nutznboltz]

MicroSoft's lawyers cream Sendo's lawyers and MicroSoft gets away scott-free and goes after the next sucker. There's one born every minute.

Re:And another thing..

[HiThere]

Possibly. But if they feel the change in name is deserved, then they might justify it. (I'm not sure whether it's because they didn't like the product, or just couldn't think of another joke. With ChimpZilla, I assume that's because they are saying that AMD is apeing Intel. But again I'm not sure.)

N.B.: Take this with a grain of salt. I don't read the Register regularly, so I might just have missed where they explained it. But it is an artistic criticism of the habit.

Re:duh

[MickLinux]

I agree that a big monopoly is the end of the line. A monopoly is to capitalism what cancer is to a formerly healthy individual. (sorry, borrowed from a parallel post, but he had it wrong.)

Nonetheless, I would argue that capitalism isn't a feel-good idealist system. Capitalism is what results from people dealing honestly with each other.

On the other hand, it is no secret that when people start to believe that their strength is their wealth, then they also begin to steal from each other, and you descend into feudalism. Pol Pot, here we come.

Capitalism is the blessing that we had from those all-to-few groups like the Amish, like William Penn's colony, like hardworking American farmers who *didn't* steal from the Indians [and there were many of those]. These people built integrity that happened to take the form of a system.

On the other hand you have the Puritans, who stimulated King Philip's War and slaughtered the Indians who helped them just a generation before.

They gave us a lot of the bad effects of the Industrial Revolution that Thoreau wrote about; they gave us a number of robber barons, were a strong force for the War of Northern Agression, and in the end converted our Constitutional Republic into the first stages of an Empire.

And, you might say, it has led to this. Not capitalism, but *neoliberal capitalism*. There's a world of difference.

Re:This story is about the future.... 5/1/2003???

[Platinum Dragon]

Just a typo, but looks like there's a dyslexic editor on the Register's website. 5/1/2003 appears to be a bit too far into the future.

Only if you're in North America. In Europe and much of the world, dates are written day/month/year, instead of month/day/year.

Incidentally, it was a date-style conflict that convinced many people the anthrax letters from late 2001 were written by an American.

Succeed for who?

[raehl]

This is business, and the fittest businesses will prevail. A business which signs a contract giving all of their property to the other party in the event of a bankruptcy when the other party can more or less determine when that business goes bankrupt is obviously NOT a fit business.

This is free enterpirse at it's finest: Sendo ceases to exist because it was simply a poorly run business.

The only thing Microsoft is "guilty" of is preying upon the stupid. The relationship succeeded just fine - for the only party in the relationship that had a clue as to what it was doing. (That wasn't Sendo.)

Next Slashdot News Story: "Man makes deal with Devil, sues when faced with eternal damnation after death."

Man Sues Satan

[raehl]

OSHKOSH, WI (AP) - Oshkosh resident Al Grand filed suit in Oshkosh District Court Thursday against Lucifer, commonly known in the area as "The Devil", citing a breach of contract, following his untimely death in a bizarre automobile accident on Wednesday.

"Lucifer made me an offer on Monday, promising to give me everything I could ever want on Earth in exchange for my soul. I had not been using my soul for much lately, so after sleeping on it, I signed the contract on Tuesday."

That's when Al made his first request. "I didn't want to be too greedy right off the bat, but I've always wanted one of those Hummers, so I asked for one," said Al.

But tragedy shortly followed: When driving through town on Wednesday, the vehicle's brakes failed and Al's new vehicle collided with a frieght train, pulled by CSX's engine No. 666.

"Lucifer did not provide me what he promised. Instead of everything I ever wanted on Earth, all I got was a premature death and eternal damnation. I had no idea Lucifer could be so selfish and treacherous."

When reached for comment, Lucifer's publicist Azreal stated, "The contract clearly specifies that upon his death, Al Grand's soul becomes the property of Lucifer Limited. We made no guarantees as to the time or manner of Mr. Grand's death. The Hummer's End User License Agreement, clearly printed in 6 pt. type in the user manual, also clearly states that the vehicle was provided as is, with no guarantees as to the suitability of the vehicle for any particular purpose, including driving."

I wonder....

[SerpentMage]

Here is why I wonder. The software industry and the telco industry are TWO separate things. Even now with MS going with T-Online has Orange concerned. Orange networks had a MS device, but now is one of many providers of that "same" MS device.

Basically MS is giving punches before they are even established in the market. I am tempted to believe that they will not make it.

Here is why. My wife just got a new phone. It was an Ericsson T68. REAL sweet. Small, has colour and many other neat features. MS competitors are huge devices with little battery power. And having talked to my MS friend in the US he tells me only MS employees are the ones using these types of devices. BTW this includes the Palm devices as well. It seems that people want small devices....

What does this have to do with Sendo? I think that MS seriously has the lower hand and will loose this battle. And the reason is because they cannot get traction like they could in other markets.

Re:I wonder....

[Ben Hutchings]

In the GSM world it is normal for the same handset to be available on competing networks. Orange only had exclusivity on the HTC phone for a limited period.

Re:I'm starting to understand

[Audacious]

This is what(?) the five or six hundreth company this has happened to? Remember Excel? Internet Explorer? Think it can't happen to your business? Think again. Even IBM is scared of Microsoft.

How long before the rest of the business world goes "Thanks - but no thanks" and jumps on the Linux bandwagon? How many times do you think other companies can continue to be burned like this?

Heh. Sort of like how Enron went about their business. It may take a while but eventually the same thing will happen. As they say in business - someone will blink and then the excrement will hit the rotational blade. :-)

Is Microsoft a Tiger?

[jlrowe]

This is an old limerick that I used for a sig for years. I think it captures the essence of the case at hand:

There once was a lady from Niger
Who smiled as she rode on a Tiger
They returned from the ride
With the lady inside
And the smile on the face of the Tiger.

Re:duh

[unitron]

"...like hardworking American farmers who *didn't* steal from the Indians..."

So when they came over here from Europe they brought their own farmland with them?

Re:duh

[MickLinux]

It's called hydroponics. Of course, the Federal Government frowns on that sort of thing, nowadays, because it is often used to grow a native American herb that is also used in ropemaking...

Just joking of course. But I do know one guy who was taken down as a "drug dealer" and sent to prison for a combination of a user's amount of mj (a few grams), and having a business that sold hydroponics equipment, and refusing to give records of his sales to the DEA without a warrent.
In the end, he got a few years, they got the records they wanted (without a warrant), and that was that.

In reality, it isn't fair to say that all American farmers stole their land or supported the genocide of the indians. They didn't. One of my ancestors, once removed, was the orator Daniel Webster--but I'm not nearly as proud of him as I am of a direct ancestor who was an adopted chief. That is, he was a European-American, but they made him a chief. He was so adopted, because he treated the indians fairly, and helped them get fair deals when they dealt with his compatriots.

Not all were evil. Honestly. Read about William Penn.

My business plan

[Felinoid]

Develup product ask Microsoft for help.
Do it once the wrong way. Do it again the right way in secret.
Microsoft gets the insecure back doored doomed to crash and burn version.

Then when they steal it they'll have to sue me to take it back.

Ohh atomic reactor yeah right under the magnetic media.
Not for the REAL vershion we use batterys.

Yah. You have to trust at some point.

[TheLink]

Y'know there's a reason why they call it organized crime. Mobster bosses are used to doing deals without legal contracts.

Contracts if any, typically occur if someone breaks the deal ;).

Microsoft seem to be full of people who perversely follow the letter of the law/contract, not the spirit. They often seem to do it just for the sake of doing it, even when it's counter productive. They're like a childish smart ass kid, that keeps trying to weasel out of things. A rich kid with no real friends.

That sort of thing doesn't go well with mobster bosses. They don't usually do that, and you sure don't try that with them. "You said I have to pay you by Sunday, you didn't say which Sunday". Yeah right.

I'd rather have enemies than a partner that I can't trust. When ten enemies stick daggers between your ribs it doesn't hurt as much as if your partner stabs you in the back.

Microsoft seems to operate as if there can only be one company in the whole world and it has to be Microsoft. Do companies ever get lonely without friends?