Slashdot Mirror
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."
Thank you for making that comparison. You're a fucking sensationalist troll.
That is all.
"superior Linux-based products from Debian, Red Hat, and Caldera."
/. - we don't do Caldera (aka SCO) here, except in the context of 'do with a large stick'.
This is
Beep beep.
On the other hand, for people who are ready to learn some new things (just like they had to do with Windows when they first saw it), Linux has been ready for the desktop for years.
Escher was the first MC and Giger invented the HR department.
Oh, please. Microsoft is not dead. Microsoft is one of the longest running software companies in the world, if not *the*. Plus, it intentionally hires the best software developers in the world, at least on the west side of it. They're very aggressive on hiring software coders and visionaries they know can and will deliver good work. Not only that, but there's the small fact that it is sitting on over $40 billion. That's nothing to sneeze at.
Then there's the fact that Microsoft has one keen advantage over OSS. That is the fact that it's centerally managed. In the end, one person has the final say over things, keeping things constant, consistent and flowing smoothly. While with the OSS, there is constant bickering and bantering going on with internal fighting, and code splitting. One recent example is the XFree86 incident. A lot of times reading about OSS development is like being brought back into high school with all the "he said, she said" bullshit.
Say what you will about Microsoft - good, bad, indifferent, but it's here to stay.
"We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars." - Oscar Wilde
Linux has been doing this for years!
/own/ tactics. What if MS were to start giving the OS away free to everyone? (Like Sun has started doing in a limited way) What would you say then?
Give it away free, easiest way to cut into other's market share. Netscape and IE BOTH did it (Netscape was NEVER not available for free, atleast it never was to me)
You can't really complain about someone picking up on your
"You can't do that! Because, uh... were doing that and then we wouldn't be able to compete.. er..."
And if Linux is allowed to have lobby groups and SIGs that lobby educational and government entities on the suposed benefits of using "Open source only", why not Microsoft doing the opposite? I mean you have to expect it! Instead we get more whining.
Linux has set up a huge and market dangerous precident by giving away so much functionality for free. If that's the way Sun (partially already), Microsoft (also partially already) and Apple all go over the next few years, where will that leave Linux?
When you set up unorthodox battle rules, don't be suprised when your enemy follows your tactics...
Contrary to popular belief, coding is not all free blow-jobs and beer. Those things cost MONEY!