Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft Planning to Buy Open Source Companies?
mjasay writes "At the Web 2.0 Summit, Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer admitted that Microsoft 'will do some buying of companies that are built around open-source products,' suggesting that to avoid open-source companies would 'take us out of the acquisition market quite dramatically.' Ballmer has apparently come a long way since dubbing Linux a 'cancer.' The real question, however, is which open-source companies make sense within the Microsoft product portfolio, both from a technology and philosophy perspective. Novell? 37Signals? Jive? SugarCRM? And, equally importantly, which companies could look their communities in the eye after selling to Microsoft?"
What i want to know is, will they change the license of the software after purchase?
This is an absolutely textbook way of getting rid of competition - buy it and either assimilate their product into your own or simply close it down.
Microsoft aren't bothered about small projects which don't attract much attention. Nor are they particularly bothered about large projects, provided there isn't any serious commercial backing to them.
They're bothered about commercially backed projects where there is the potential to offer significant competition. Their spouting about how "you won't get any real support" (which is probably about their only reasonably sensible piece of FUD) only works when there aren't many commercially backed solutions based on open source software. If I worked for someone like KnowledgeTree or SugarCRM right now I'd be slightly nervous.
If msft buys any OSS companies, it will probably be just to kill the competition. Remember Foxpro?
"You will be assimilated. We will add your biological and technological distinctiveness to our own. Resistance is futile."
Well, here we go, buying up this open-source company to kill competition. What do you mean our users "forked" our product? What do you mean the staff we just layed off just made a new company to support this fork? What did we pay umpteen gazillion dollars for?
Karma Whoring for Fun and Profit.
Geek to suit: "Hey look, Microsoft are now *really* getting scared by open source stuff! They want to throw *real money* at it!"
Also, people might now start investing in open source projects in the hope of getting a slice of that MS cash a few years down the line. This looks like a Good Thing.
anything the company that was bought by microsoft was doing. No offense, it is an issue of trust. Microsoft screwed so many partners and non partners in the past. We cant just put that much effort on our spare time into things that can be sent to hell by microsoft in a given point in time.
Read radical news here
the OSS "buy-me" trolls?
1. fork the most recent open release of a recently MS bought out OSS project.
2. improve and offer support for it.
3. Now MS either has to improve its own branch or buy you out too (which is the 3b. Profit!!! part)
I mean, seriously, isn't Microsoft going to prove money can be made with OSS?
---- MISSING MISCELLANEOUS DATA SEGMENT --- [sigdash] trolololol
"If you can't beat 'em, buy 'em!"
"Every great cause begins as a movement, becomes a business, and eventually degenerates into a racket." -- Eric Hoffer
The beautiful thing about the GPL and similar licenses is that you cannot Shut Them Down. Imagine, just for once, that all the code in the whole Linux kernel belonged to Linus (i.e. all contributers would've signed over their copyright or, where not permitted by law, an exclusive license). Now imagine Linus would suddenly decide he doesn't like Linux anymore and change the kernel's license to Microsoft's Windows 95 EULA after running an s/microsoft/linus torvalds/g over it.
Would it change a thing? A bit. Linux couldn't be called Linux anymore, cause Linus would own that trademark. Linus may not continue being the benvolent dictator. Fin. The existing community would fork Linux version (change to new license - 1), call it LOLix and continue as before. It would fork. It would change it's name, but as long as somebody's interested, it would never ever die.
according the TFS Ballmer said companies that were built around Open Source, not Open Source projects.
This - to me - speaks more of people like Linksys, some of the CRMs (as suggested) or perhaps even TiVO . That is companies that use Open Source software in their products rather than those that specifically and only produce Open Source software.
Both Novel and RedHat are publicly traded companies, which means by law they hold their investor's interests above all else. Last time I checked, you could buy pretty much anything from investors at the right price. Microsoft buying Novel and RedHat would cause less of a riot than when Murdoch bought the Wall Street Journal.
Novel's market cap: $2B
Red Hat's market cap: $4B
Microsoft's market cap: $292B
Microsoft could easily buy the two largest open-source companies on the planet without denting their reserves. If Microsoft ever suspects Linux is a significant threat, they'll just buy out the largest players. Let's face it... that's how #1 companies remain #1.
Beer is proof that God loves us, and wants us to be happy.
Only problem with your theory is that Microsoft is a convicted monopolist. There would be an amazing number of regulatory hurdles it would have to jump through even to think about buying a company that makes a competing OS.
The bigotry of the nonbeliever is for me nearly as funny as the bigotry of the believer. - Albert Einstein
If I were a deep-pockets-legal-department-with-gold-plated-business-cards type of company, I'd try it.
I'd be willing to bet that a judge will look at it and say, "Well this part is GPL'd, but you own it, so you can still enforce your GPL rights. This part is not, and because the project is yours, you can do with it what you want."
So, who of you want to cough up the funds to defend against that kind of legal team?
...sound of crickets heard...Daffy mutters to himself.
Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong fix.
While normally I'd agree with you, I'll risk more "flamebait" mods and predict that the Bush administration would be all for Microsoft's acquisitions. We split up AT&T, yet there were no major hurdles placed against AT&T re-merging. AT&T just bought both my cellular and home phone companies (Cingular and Bell South). They even provide my DSL. I keep my Sprint long-distance as a protest, but 90% of my money now goes to AT&T, half of it without a single reasonable competitor (my land-line). And what about Murdoch buying the Wall Street Journal? Big Business is the current administration's base.
Beer is proof that God loves us, and wants us to be happy.
Who cares. If the product was OSS and GPL or BSD licensed. the OSS community can always fork it and continue on unhindered.
That is the incredible power of OSS. you cant make it go away, you cant take it from the people.
Even if you make it illegal, it's still there thriving..... DECSS anyone?
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
What does Microsoft care about changing the license? Do you not realize that first and foremost, Microsoft is likely to just terminate the project?
/. could even give another option a moments notice. Microsoft exists because of Windows and anything they touch gets destroyed if it does not work ONLY with Windows. That's in 20 years of history folks. When Java was knocking on Microsofts door they responded by purchasing promising Java based companies and closing them down. Netscape got the same treatment. Why would anybody not think this was their plan for open source companies they purchased since most open source projects work on more than Windows and that is a threat to Windows? The top level at Microsoft look at everything as a threat first since Microsoft exists because Windows exists and without Windows, they are history.
And I have to wonder how anybody on
And the sad thing is that Steve Balmer was the one saying this yet nobody in half the posts mentioned them just terminating the project. WTF?
LoB
"Anyone who stands out in the middle of a road looks like roadkill to me." --Linus
Sadly, Big Business ends up every administration's base.
Careful. That's what software patents are for.
Luckily, what will happen if MS buys RH and starts forcing people to pay for their patents is that they will discover US patent law extends very little beyond its borders.
As I said before, it's sad the US tech industry will suffer, but IT companies can always move to other countries. A lot of them would be very happy to harbor the next Google if the US ends up being a hostile environment for new developments.
http://www.dieblinkenlights.com