Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft To Buy $100M More SUSE Support Vouchers
CWmike writes "Microsoft will buy and resell up to another $100 million worth of enterprise support subscriptions for Novell's SUSE Linux Enterprise Server operating system. Two years ago, Microsoft agreed to buy and resell $240 million worth of the vouchers. Susan Hauser, general manager of strategic partnerships and licensing at Microsoft, confirmed that some of the subscription vouchers were sold to customers for less than face value, though none were given away for free."
Why would you buy Linux support from MS? You would think you'd get better support buying it from, oh, a lemonade stand perhaps?
-1 Uncomfortable Truth
I believe, though I'm not certain, that by providing these vouchers, M$ is in fact helping to support interoperablity across platforms. Or, at least, they can be seen to be trying to help this. As a side benefit, they cycle some revenue through Novell, who they currently aren't at war with.
I think this is part of the contact they entered into with Novell that everyone initially said would be used to fragment the OSS people by saying that only Novell would be unencumbered by patent claims.
That's probably oversimplified, but that's my quick take on it.
Cheers
Lost at C:>. Found at C.
$100MM seems like a lot, but is this an under the table way to fund Moonlight (Mono version of Silverlight) to help them gain traction on Flash?
Well it's certainly an under-the-table something. Microsoft always hides large money transfers for underhanded deals under some other guise. It could be that, or it could be that Microsoft is trying to get SuSE to do something else that would further splinter the free and open source software communities further.
My blog
I would suspect Microsoft is doing this to maintain control of its customer base. They get a new client they run Linux and Windows, with slim chance of them getting away from Linux. Downplaying or dissing Linux will not lead to good relations to the client. Supporting Linux isn't their cup of tea. So they sell them at reduced cost SUSE Support vouchers to their clients, so they can go to them for the Linux Problems, Microsoft Consultants while working with the client can use support which the client paid mostly for, and charge for the hour to sit there and wait for the SUSE support to come with an answer. As well being on location Microsoft makes sure that Linux doesn't creep onto its territory. Their Client is happy as they got Linux support cheap, and Microsoft is not pressing them to get off Linux. Thus having a client happy with Microsoft. Being Microsoft is there to prevent creep in one direction and the customer over time is soften up a bit. Perhaps just perhaps they may decide that they may replace the stressed out MySQL server with an MSSQL server and while MSSQL is there you may want to upgrade their intranet to Sharepoint. Or get Mono working great on their servers and get some new ASP.NET development using MS Visual Studios.
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
All of the places that I've worked have been mixed Windows/Linux server environments, with some of the servers being Windows to take care of Outlook stuff and the web servers and database servers running linux. If you've got a smaller shop with just a few servers, and you want support, Microsoft is now able to provide you with a complete solution. If you're a tinfoil wearer, you can go ahead and assume that they're going to use this to push their clients towards windows exclusivity over the next few years as well. If you're naive and don't study history, you can assume that they're doing this because they want to be 100% interoperable, and this is the first step. If you live in the real world with me, you can assume that a little of both is true - interoperability is a goal for them, and they would also like to be in a position to nudge you closer to windows.
It is called hedging your bets and cutting your losses.
Let's say I'm a CIO who is considering putting Linux in my shop and dropping Microsoft. I'm a little scared, but I want to take the plunge.
Microsoft comes in, and says "we'll work with you. We'll see you commercial support for Linux, and push you in the direction of a Linux distro aimed at interoperability with Microsoft products."
Instead of Microsoft losing money completely, they make up the loss of Microsoft licenses with profits from support contracts, and convince the CIO to not drop Microsoft completely, but rather mix Linux and Microsoft products. They keep a close relationship with the CIO, and establish goodwill in the hopes the CIO will return completely to the Microsoft fold.
All the while they earn interoperability brownie points with the EU.
Is this evil? No. It is in fact really smart business and I applaud them following legitimate smart business tactics as opposed to some of their old ones.
http://blindscribblings.com - Tasty pop-culture in conceptual fashion.
Antitrust isn't about market share so much as how well you play with others. You can be anti-competitive without a commanding market share. For instance, Intel is in hot water for demanding retailers not carry AMD products and without shipments from retailers who did. Intel doesn't have a 90% market share, but they can be held responsible for their tactics.
Conversely, the local utility company has no competition, yet they are a legal monopoly. In some states, these "natural" monopolies are regulated.
Microsoft can have a 93% OS market share, and get a pass if they behave well and play nicely with the other kids in the sandbox. Interoperability is precisely what the EU called for.
http://blindscribblings.com - Tasty pop-culture in conceptual fashion.
insert car analogy here ...
Ford giving you a discount on your next Chevy (and service on the thing while you own it, too!)
Dunno what would be more incredulous - selling the scheme with a straight face, or actually buying into it with one.
(hey, you asked...)
Quo usque tandem abutere, Nimbus, patientia nostra?
If you look/remember MS Halloween documents which are verified to be true, you will notice they figured out the weak spot of community: Easy to divide.
So, each person boycotting Novell for a very good reason or doesn't use Gnome because of Icaza is a win for Microsoft. $100M is nothing for them, absolutely nothing.
There do seem some subtle effects on SUSE, though. If you install version 11.0 on a machine which has Windows pre-installed (because you couldn't buy the Laptop without the Microsoft tax), it no longer gives yo a pref=configured option to remove the Windows. The only way, it seems, to remove Windows now is to go through a manual partitioning process which may be a bit daunting for the average home user. In versions prior to the Microsoft partnership, there was a convenient option to do a clean install removing all existing partitions including an MS partition. Fritz
I suppose $100m will pay some Mono developers' salaries for a while longer, though I reckon if they wanted to really support Linux interoperability and suchlike, they'd have bought RedHat vouchers instead/as well.
They tried to offer the same deal to Red Hat more than once I think. But while Red Hat was quite happy to offer to work work with them on interoperability as much as they liked, they refused to enter into any cross patent protection deal like Novell. So no "You open source commies are stealing our IP" deal was possible.
It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his job depends on not understanding it.
"MS$ has never been at war with Novell. MS$ has always been at war with IBM...."
That is so not true. Here lay NetWare and Word Perfect, May they rest in peace. And not to forget poor DR-DOS.
The spirit of resistance to government is so valuable on certain occasions that I wish it to be always kept alive