For Microsoft, Market Dominance Isn't Enough

chemstar writes "Last summer Orlando Ayala, then the top sales executive at Microsoft Corp., sent an e-mail titled 'Microsoft Confidential' to senior managers laying out a strategy to dissuade governments across the globe from choosing cheaper alternatives to the ubiquitous Windows operating system. Ayala's e-mail told executives that if a deal involving governments or large institutions looked doomed, they were authorized to draw from a special internal fund to offer software at a steep discount, or free, if necessary. Steve Ballmer, the Microsoft chief executive, was sent a copy of the e-mail. The memo, which focused on system software for desktop computers, specifically targeted Linux, a still small but emerging competitor. "Under NO circumstances lose against Linux," Ayala said." Perhaps that's because, as roomisigloomis writes, "Seems that MS' licensing practices are working against the company," pointing out this article which "suggests that open source, Linux and other software is actively being sought."

Comments

Re: My own experience

[Black Parrot]

> It seemed that they would do anything not to lose to Linux

They're crapola software engineers, but they do understand the concept of a landslide. If cutting over to Linux ever becomes the 'in' thing to do - for whatever reason, good or bad - then Microsoft stock will share a spot in the bathroom beside SCO's. Unlike IBM, Microsoft can't adopt free software and live off hardware sales and technical services.

This is raw survival for Microsoft. If it were almost anyone else I'd feel sorry for them.

Illegal Monopoly

[meehawl]

there is nothing wrong with this. If Microsoft "donates" or "discounts" its products for whatever "spin reason" they want to put on it, it's totally legal. It's dubious, but legal.

Under US law you are totally wrong. It is illegal for a company that enjoys a monopoly in one area of business to use financial or "tying" arrangements to extend that monopoly into other areas. That was what MS was found guilty of. Sherman Act. Go look it up. It's there for a very good reason: a small dose of regulation to try to promote a healthy dose of fair competition so that the end consumers benefit.

Re:Microsoft can't dominate the BSD Babe!

[studious jew]

Hey, most of the pics at that site are mine. I went to LinuxWorld 2000 in NYC, and while my friend was playing Quake 3 all day, I was busy snapping choice shots of Ceren's (her name) hot bod! No fair!

Microsoft's foot shooting

[Punk Walrus]

I work for a very large company that uses thousands of MS machines, and when Microsoft said after Win2K, they would no longer let us site license, we started to look at alternatives. Microsoft said "there is no way to get Product activation disabled, you must account for every computer." They stood to make millions from us, they must have thought.

So we started a policy that banned XP for "security reasons" and made a sweet deal with Red Hat. Unless you had a valid reason to use an XP product, you used Win2K or Linux. Linux meant that we could use older machines on our server farms and pay virtually nothing because, funny enough, Red Hat gave us a site license for support. Not that we use it (or need to) very much.

Suddenly, Microsoft "produced" a disk with Product activation disabled (sort of, it's kind of complicated), but claimed all kinds of voodoo like it had a copy protection so complex, we couldn't burn a new one from the master... even sector-by-sector copying. Bollocks. You could use any XP disk, just as long as you followed the directions MS gave us for the "master CD." Now we have a lot of the CDs all over the place, with a site key (and no, I won't give it to you, use Linux and be free) and the "process" to make it work legally by our contract. It took them two years to backpedal that far.

It's weird, because for so long, Windows was essentially "free" (although, not legally) because until WinXP, more than half the people I knew had "borrowed" an OS CD from "somewhere." Microsoft knew that (I mean, come on), and like a drug pusher, made sure the buyer was hooked before they started charging (my proof is how they made MSIE a dominant browser over Netscape). But it's not that easy anymore. Linux desktops are getting better and better, and while Windows is easier to use for the most part, it's lack of flexibility, anti-customer anticompetitive stance, and their brazen arrogance in the field is really dulling their blade.

But in this case, I can't fault them for trying to give away freebies, I mean, trade shows do that all the time. But what we should really be wary of is when they get politics involved, and claim stuff like DeCSS is proof that Linux should be banned in the US or something equally as stupid to us techies, but is all greek to your average politician who could be $wayed by $ome other thing$...

__________________________________________________
www. - where else can you get blogged to death?