Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Microsoft/Siemens in Joint Linux Venture?

Posted by ryuzaki0 on from the as-the-rumor-mill-turns dept.

angelatlarge writes "Very strange news on LinuxToday about .net Jury claiming that Microsoft/Siemens are in a secret joint venture to create a Linux distro. Is this real?" The rumor's been floating all over the place this weekend. So far, we don't have any confirmation from the purported sources of it all, Prix Arts Electronica in Austria and The Society for Old and New Media in The Netherlands. Perhaps some Slashdot readers in Europe can help us out here. Update 1146 a.m. EDT Okay, it's been confirmed - as a hoax. Over 100 people submitted the story to us. Interesting to watch how something like this can spread, isn't it?

11 of 88 comments (clear)

  1. MS-Linux by drwiii · · Score: 2

    MS Linux has been out there for awhile now.

  2. MS will never make a Linux distro by for(;;); · · Score: 2

    MS will probably want to cash in on the Linux hype, and want to put out some competition for it in the OS market. But it would make a lot more sense for them to take a BSD and proprietize it, rather than going with a GPLed kernel. (The re-licensing freedom of the BSD is probably a reason why Apple chose it for Darwin; Woz's ties to Berkeley might be another.) They'd then either need to rewrite any BSD components under the GPL (I can't recall which components of, say, FreeBSD those are) or slap a Win98/NT/etc layer on top of BSD and run user stuff there (leaving admin tasks in the BSD layer). The resulting "Winux" would have a UNIX administrative interface (which would make a lot of [not all] sysadmins happy), the MS brand name and possibly the Win98/NT/etc interface (which would make a lot of [not all] PHBs and technophobe users happy) and would be proprietary (which would make MS happy all over).

    DISCLAIMER: This is not a comment on the relative technical merits of Linux, the BSDs, or the Windowses. I'm just saying that FROM MS'S PERSPECTIVE, repackaging a BSD would be a more likely choice from the licensing angle.

    --

    "Whatever happened to fair use?"
    -- Duff-Man
  3. MS WOuld be stupid. by CmdData · · Score: 2

    Microsoft would be stupid to release a version of Linux. I've been using Linux at different jobs for about six years now and there is no way that Microsoft will hurt it's customers buy throwing a complicated/hard to install OS on them. It just isn't going to happen. They know that ease of use and support for every piece of hardware under the sun is what matters to most of their customers. I graduated with honors at UCLA with a double major in physics and computer science and I find Linux to be too time consuming to learn/install. If it's that way for me then I know that Microsoft will not thrust this upon their customers.

  4. It's a hoax by GrenDel+Fuego · · Score: 3

    According to the webpage, there's an update which says that this is in fact a hoax.

  5. ms linux by Akeldama · · Score: 3
    not too long ago, someone at securityfocus.com said something along the lines of...it's only a matter of time before ms comes out with their own distro of linux. the guy then got flamed. he then wrote a piece about his opinion and reasons behind them.


    check it out at http://securityportal.com/coverst ory19990830.html

    1. Re:ms linux by John+Campbell · · Score: 2

      Merced won't be an x86... Disclaimer: This is not an attempt to express an opinion either way on whether Microsoft could, would, or should create their own Linux distro.

  6. Not the time by ajs · · Score: 2

    One and a half or two years ago, this kind of rumor got started, and it would have made sense. MS could have nuked NT2K (pronounced nut tweek), pushed win98 forward into the graphic arts arena to kill the last vestiges of Apple and then released Linux + Win32API as their server platform with remote-display capabilities for their office apps using the X11 protocol (Ok, I'm dreaming, here but it would have been very cool).

    Now, MS is locked in to releasse NT2K as a server platform which is doomed because it just can never be stable. It's doomed against Apple which is once again entrenched in the graphic arts arena, and on the general office desktop, Linux is starting to build on its server success and with Sun's acqusition of Star Office, we may begin to see NT2K get real competion on the desktop from Sun/Linux on X86 and PPC boxen.

    MS is in big trouble, but they don't have an angle for Linux any more. Are they just creating a side venture as a Linux hedge? Might make sense, but it's risky. In one sense it's wise though (and this comes from having read Cryptonomicon too recently). They may have to deal with an awful lot of shareholder lawsuits when they start to loose money. Being able to claim that they tried to get on the Linux bandwagon may be a point in their favor.

    Then again, it's likely just a rumor. MS would be practically admitting defeat by selling a Linux distribution. Embrace and extend? I actually don't think that's an option with Linux, but I could be proven wrong.

  7. Re:whoah... by dattaway · · Score: 2

    Seimens makes almost everything when it comes to manufacturing electronics. If you wanted to build an assembly line, they have the controls equipment and can fix you up. Who knows, they might support Linux soon when it comes to programming their fine PLC's. I sure hope so, because I'm getting sick of DOS and Windows when programming industrial controls.

  8. The "Labor Day Memo" by JordanH · · Score: 2

    Hoax or trial balloon?

    I've come into possession of this email from Steve Ballmer to Bill Gates which lays it all out.

    From: Steve Ballmer
    To: Bill Gates
    Subject: Linux Strategy
    Date: September 6, 1999

    Bill,

    I've been working out a strategy to combat Linux on the desktop and I think I have a few important key directions we can take to beat them at their own game.

    As you know, we've been incredibly successful in the past few years in combatting the menace posed by the Internet, I think we can leverage that experience in combatting the Linux Threat.

    First, the growth of companies like RedHat poses the biggest challenge. We need to come up with a strategy that will give us control over this burgeoning Linux market and wrest it from those pesky startups. It occurs to me that we can offer a Linux distribution (MS/Linux) of our own, price it competitively at stores, and offer it free for download over the Internet. This will allow us to cut off the air supply of companies like RedHat.

    We can get the folks at Mindcraft to pre-configure the server elements to optimize this technology to assure our continued competitive advantage.

    Next, we have to address the simple development environment that has made it possible for just anybody to write programs for Linux at virtually no cost and requiring no expensive IDE or 4-inch thick books like "Learn Active/DCOM/Visual Basic Internet Development in 19 days for Dummies!".

    Linux supports a number of powerful development languages, but the one I'm most concerned about is C. All of the Linux Kernel was written in it and most of the free software for Linux is being developed in C with just a text editor.

    What we need to do is poison the C landscape with our own version of the language that will fragment the C programming marketplace. Sure, you say "But, we've been doing this for years with VC++ Visual Studio.", but I'm thinking of something a lot more dramatic that will really spread across the industry.

    In this regard, I think an utter redesign of low-level memory management facilities in the C language is in order. What we've come up with in marketing is a new set of routines with MSalloc() to replace malloc(). With our years of experience in corrupted heap management, I'm sure that our big brains down in the lab can come up with an utterly incompatible API that we'll force all of our MS/Linux code to use. We'll remove malloc() and it's cousins from all libraries on MS/Linux. Maybe we should integrate MSalloc() into all the Windows code too. I'm pretty sure that malloc() problems are at the heart of a lot of our OS instability problems. Maybe an API redesign is just what we need here.

    We'll need to move quickly on this as Linux sales are shooting through the roof. With any luck, this time next year we'll be looking at RedHat and all the rest of those pretenders marginalized just like what we did to Netscape.

    Thanks.

    Steve

    When I saw this, I couldn't help but be amazed at their thinking. Microsoft is demonstrating to me that they are certainly a company that can quickly adapt to a changing marketplace!

  9. Re:I buy it if... by dattaway · · Score: 2

    Just over two years ago, I first tried Linux with Redhat 4.1 on my new laptop. Used it for about a month and got the feel for how I wanted it to work for me and enjoyed its crashproof nature. Everytime I use Windows, I am often reminded why I switched to Linux.

  10. Why bother? by DrDude · · Score: 2

    Well, the way I see it, Win9x rules more than 85% desktop PC's. Which is darn good, by any standards. The tendancy is for the PC market to keep on growing, even if that means that MS has to lower its prices to keep OEMs on track.

    So what if Linux can grab 20% of the PC desktop market in the next 2/3/4 years?! MS will still have the majority of users in its hold, and will keep making alot of money from it, giving it a stronghold on new and powerful actions to respond any Linux attacks.

    The best tactic MS has, is to try to use its strong presence on desktop as a leverage to force enterprises use its NT platform. I'm sure, we will see, more and more, server specific / client specific applications show up on NT and Windows (ie Exchange Premium); applications with proprietary protocols, that no linux will be allowed to replicate, client or server side.

    I guess Linus is right when he says, "World Domination and fast!", because the less time MS has to think about it, the better!
    ---