Comments on: Ballmer repeats threats against Linux

In no-nonsense presentation to New York analysts, Microsoft's CEO warns Linux sellers that open-source "is not free."

[avfolk--2008]

Ballmer: Take your (stolen) marbles and go home

OHMYGAWD. Ballmer is worried about ethics and propriety???

Wow, who's the genius behind this marketing ploy / distraction?
I can see the ads now: Vista may be lame and buggy -- but at
least the world's most powerful corporation won't sue your
arse...

MICROSOFT IS DEAD MEAT. And as users awaken to the fact
thay they've been bludgeoned, beat, coerced, threatened and
sued into supine compliance with a mindless bully (read,
Ballmer et. al.), they will switch to any reliable OS vendor with a
clue... Apple and many others.

Monkey boy should have split when Allchin did -- and bought a
Mac.

[noname_h]

Better idea for microsoft (free as in free beer)

Patent the patenting process itself - that way it is easier to get a cut from all the future patents in the world.

- a life longs developer of Microsoft technologies

[littlejon2]

Or is the plot to kill Novell?

Is MS/Ballmer really just undermining Novell? If he gets the
opensource community to kick out Novell for the patent
agreement, then abandons Novell, is Novell done for?

[tundraboy]

Ballmer proving my thesis.

I've always asserted that Microsoft's primary skill set is not software design. Their primary skill set is in the acquisition, propagation, and extension of monopoly power through timely and shrewd contracting and not a little bit of raw intimidation. That they are doing this in the software industry is an accident of history. A century ago Rockefeller did the same thing in oil.

And here comes Mr. Ballmer doing what they do best.

How about hiring a few good programmers and industrial designers and just build a better product eh, Mr. Ballmer? Your company is looking more and more like GM you know.

[dargon19888]

The reality is that Balmer is RIGHT!...

Now that I caught your attention, let me explain.

Microsoft probably does hold a couple of patents that if push came to shove, a competent lawyer could use it for grounds a lawsuit.

But Microsoft will never sue anyone.Balmer's comments are to create FUD amongst corporate America who is looking for more cost effective desktops.

Balmer's comments are meant to cause risk adverse managers to stay within the Microsoft camp. Nobody but IBM or Microsoft could afford to toss money away on frivilous lawsuits.

So on the surface, Balmer is correct. They hold patents. And that there may be some infringements on one of these untold number of patents. So why risk a lawsuit?

Should this stop anyone from purchasing a Linux distro for corporate use? No.

Balmer is no idiot. His comments are measured and are carefully worded in an effort to create FUD while minimizing any potential backlash.

Scary huh?

[Schratboy]

He who has more money and lawyers wins

Regardless of the validity of patent infringement claims, whomever seeks to defend a patent must have the cash and legal resources in place to do so. MS has a humongous advantage over everyone else. If if MS is on shaky grounds, just the basic due diligence would cost millions or dollars, bleeding cash from their opponents may be just one vector for attach from the gods at MS. The path of least resistance is an out-of-court settlement, which, of course, MS wins. Again, he who has the most money and lawyers wins. Point to the pasty-faced Stevie B.

[J. Blow]

Check again

Microsoft owns hundreds of patents that open source is stepping on. They paid people to develop and patent the technology.

I can't think of any reason they shouldn't be able to defend them and more then any other company has a right now.

Go do your homework next time.

[Schratboy]

Ballmer's threat: the musings of a megalomaniacal doofus

Really, can't everyone just take Steve's words for what they are? This guy is the 15th wealthiest dude on the globe. He's got more personal "jack" than the entire stock value of some of the companies he's sniping. All this bleating about IP is nothing but Steve aspiring to achieve world domination by killing all the competitors, thus leaving the single largest over-bloated software behemoth to morph into Jaba the Hut. The grotesque beast will then lay about, seeking the company of fine looking females, chained about their necks and made to feed cheese doodles and Diet Cokes to Steve at his whim.

[benjiernmd]

Be afraid, be very scared!

Oooooh! Shivers!

[Pauldsu]

Cuba to migrate to Linux

Try to sue Cuba ....MS

[Lindy01]

Cuba

got everything else from Russia...why not their OS as well.

[fred dunn]

Oh Yeah Cuba's a real power player....

It wouldn't matter if they migrated all of their 9 machines.

[Pauldsu]

IP Only stop innovation

The whole purpose of IP is to stop innovation and monopoly for all company. Half the IP issue is a jokes. I wissh they have get rid whole thing all together let the community innovate.

[benjiernmd]

Sue BSD, and Mac OS X, too!

Ha ha ha ha ha ha. Sue everybody else that does not comply with
MS empire.

[C_G_K]

Timing seems no accident

Interesting that this should come out right now. Seems like M$ is looking to scare the corporate world into staying away from Linux. Are they a little worried that Vista will be a bomb and businesses will just skip it? Or even worse, look at Linux? Also this comes as IBM has announced plans to release business software that runs on Linux, Apple and Windows, allowing businesses to pick and choose which platform they want to use at any given time. I think this scares the begeebers out of M$. I am hoping that IBM will threaten a patent war with M$ if M$ goes after it's customers that are using it's software on Linux. Even Ballmer would realize it would be idiotic to get into such a war. Maybe then M$ would get the message...just compete on a level playing field and forget the threats and anti-competitive behavior.

[qwerty75]

If only

Every time they have been forced to play on a level playing field they have failed. Zune being the newest example. Even the xbox is a fiscal failure, and frankly would not even exist if not for a small handful(2-3 original xbox titles) of games produced by third parties.

[sundance_tree]

Writing is on the wall..

Micro$oft is running out of real reasons why people shouldnt shift to open source. Bullying and scaring companies not to shift only shows how insecure the people (specially the guy in the corner office) in redmond are.

[furball123A]

Playing out in the EU...

Since the Justice Dept didn't have the cajones to take care of Microsoft during their anti-trust trial...just wondering what the EU anti-trust folks are going to say if Balmer starts doing the same stuff over there? For some reason the folks in the EU seem to be able to do what the USA's Justice was unwilling to do.

[ozidigga]

The New 'Free' World order.

That's becasue the EU is fast becoming the voice of the free world. Everyone knows US law is bought out. Money Talks...the Ballmer walks.

[tundraboy]

It's the Bushies. Again.

The DoJ under the Dems were going after Microsoft bigtime then the corporate ****** also known as the Bush administration took over and decided to give them a slap on the wrist.

Bill Gates supported Bush in '00 not because he thought the moron would be good for the country but because he knew it would be good for Microsoft.

If Microsoft had been broken up back then, the components would have been lean, mean fighting machines with most of their antitrust worries behind them setting them free to turn out products that are timely, innovative, and truly wow-inducing.

With the OS component independent of the apps component, Windows would probably have chucked legacy support and would have been rebuilt from the ground up into an efficient, 21st century, non-resource hogging OS.

[Orion Blastar]

Partly right

Windows NT 3.1 was once called Microsoft OS/2 3.0 and was able to run OS/2 1.0 applications in a virtual environment. It used Unix code for the POSIX virtual environment. When Windows 95 was created it was Windows 3.1 code with OS/2 3.0 code added to it by Microsoft. You forgot to mention that Microsoft wrote OS/2 for IBM, and it was originally called Advanced DOS, and when IBM asked Microsoft to write it, they put Windows 2.0 on the back burner and wrote OS/2 1.0 for IBM just like they did IBM PC-DOS 1.0 and other versions of DOS.

When IBM was arm wrestling with Microsoft over OS/2 2.0, IBM was using the Windows 3.1 source code to allow OS/2 2.0 to run Windows applications. That upset Microsoft because it cut into sales of MS-DOS and Windows 3.1. Microsoft wrote their own version of OS/2 3.0 but IBM rejected it and wrote their own OS/2 3.0 version that was different than Microsoft's version. At that point Microsoft stopped all OS/2 support and focused on Windows, and made Windows for Workgroups 3.11 and went to work on Chiago, aka Windows 95.

Fast forward to Windows XP being based on NT code, and heavily modified into Windows Vista which seems to be using *BSD Unix, OSX, and Linux code that replaces the leftover OS/2 3.0 code.

Linux was created to mimick Minix, a small kernel version of Unix, not OS/2. The Linux kernel was written from the ground up using open source development. The code to Linux has been seen by billions of eyeballs and they'd notice if there was OS/2 code in it.

Notice that nobody can see the Windows code, to see if they used anyone else's code within it. Also that Microsoft has refused to allow court inspectors to examine it. While the Linux code is free to be examined by anyone.

Your entire argument is illogical, and fallacious, and of a big disrepect to the Star Trek character of Mr. Spock who was none of those things.

[djcolley]

Hey Bill

Who are you going to get to clean up the mess, then Ballmer is gone? Just curious.

[Had_to_be_said]

As Microsoft continues to flounder...

"Zune", "X-Box", "MS-DRM", "Vista", Legal-troubles, Increasing-competition, Etc...

...their desperation is becoming more, and more, apparent and irrational.

And, have you noticed just how small the number of people with any apparent sympathy, for Microsoft, is becoming..?

Too bad Microsoft just couldnt/wouldnt compete fairly.

Ill, almost, miss their antics...

I do wonder, however, with that much money, and the obvious-corruption, backing them up... just how steep will their inevitable collapse be..?

...short, and linear... or, long, and exponential..? Oh well, either way... the story of their rise-and-fall will be one for the "Business 101" textbooks.

[DrDreg]

Fast

One of Balmer's comments last week: http://biz.yahoo.com/rb/
070215/microsoft.html?.v=3

AFTER Vista, Zune and XBox 360 development are complete,
operating expenses for '08 will RISE by "ONLY $2.7 BILLION."

That's GROWTH in expenses at a time when they are at a lull in
several development cycles.

This is a fat corporation moving into a mean and lean century.
When the **** hits the fan, they'll tumble fast.

[tundraboy]

Microsoft has 2 products: Office, Windows.

That's it. If the billions upon billions of dollars they wasted on Longhorn, Xbox, Zune and all their other flops were used to a) develop a totally rebuilt *nix-based legacy-free version of Windows, b) port Office into this new OS, and c) subsidize their customers' migration to this new OS, MS shareholders would have been better off.

[frankwick]

2 products?

I guess I don't understand your "2 products" comment. In a home environment they have 2 primary products: Windows and Office (which is really a suite of multiple products). However, in the corporate world (the real world) we work with products from multi-vendors and yes, MS has more than 2 products. Perhaps you have heard of Exchange and SQL Server? Exchange is now the #1 messaging system, and SQL Server is the #2 db behind Oracle. Then there's stuff like SMS, Great Plains ERP, etc...

Now, let's not forget about what makes MS so attractive to developers. Their development environments are the easiest to use, make developing complex apps much easier than other IDEs, and are one of the main reason why Windows was adopted so fast in the 1990s and is still the market leader.

Next to IBM, MS has the highest number of useful products and that number is greater than two.

[frankwick]

2 products?

I guess I don't understand your "2 products" comment. In a home environment they have 2 primary products: Windows and Office (which is really a suite of multiple products). However, in the corporate world (the real world) we work with products from multi-vendors and yes, MS has more than 2 products. Perhaps you have heard of Exchange and SQL Server? Exchange is now the #1 messaging system, and SQL Server is the #2 db behind Oracle. Then there's stuff like SMS, Great Plains ERP, etc...

Now, let's not forget about what makes MS so attractive to developers. Their development environments are the easiest to use, make developing complex apps much easier than other IDEs, and are one of the main reason why Windows was adopted so fast in the 1990s and is still the market leader.

Next to IBM, MS has the highest number of useful products and that number is greater than two.

[charger57]

Microsoft scared of Oracle and Linux - here's the trueth

Microsoft is battling two fronts.
First Front:
The biggest scare to them is Oracle's ability to run their business applications on Linux. Head to head with Oracle MS loses on TCO due to this, then they lose an account and a large money stream. Microsoft hardly makes money on its OS. The OS is just an enabler so they decided to sign an agreement with Novell to receive all the good press that their business applications also run on Linux. Now they can battle Oracle on TCO.
Second Front:
However the Second Front is they don't want to lose anymore business to Linux so the throw this FUD around that burns through the fearful like a summer California brush fire. Don't belive the hype. They are battling two fronts. Everyone knows that if MS can prove that their code is in Linux the community could rip it out and replace it fast. So their threats are mute.
Anyway, MS wanted the patent agreement b/c they don't want Novell to sue them more. Novell wanted it only because it helps a lot of customers feel comfortable with adapting more Linux. Anyway, MS history is full of them riping code from other companies, ie. Novell's eDirectory was around long before Active Directory and MS doesn't want to go to court over that code.

Linux will always be open and free. Now, let's open and free some minds from the FUD.

[FutureGuy]

The truth will set you free..

Do you have any facts/numbers to back up you claim that MS is running scared? Or is it all just plain BS, just like the countless other who have been predicting MS demise for decades, if any of them were true MS shouldn?t even have existed today. The last I checked MS is doing very well in all the markets it competes; here are the latest stats on the server front. If anyone is losing that battle it seems to be Apache+Linux

http://news.netcraft.com/archives/2007/02/02/february_2007_web_server_survey.html

[FutureGuy]

IBM!!!

IBM is nothing these days. It can be view primarily as an outsourcer. If IBM gets into a patent war with MS, IBM will go bankrupt in a month.

[Penguinisto]

ROTFL!

Hmm, let's see:

* IBM is in the final stages of strangling SCOX out of existence, and has a long history of winning in court over IP issues, with few exceptions.

* MSFT has a history of mostly losing in court over IP issues, with few exceptions.

--

* IBM is highly diversified and profitable in many industries throughout IT and beyond.

* MSFT has exactly two positive revenue streams at this time: Windows and Office... and those two are shrinking according to Microsoft itself. The rest of their ventures (Xbox, Zune) are still negative cash flow operations.

--

* IBM has literally millions of patents from which to draw.

* Microsoft has (at best) a few thousand, of dubious value since none have been challenged to this date.

--

Both have market caps in the tens of billions, and cash-on-hand to match. You're talking about two companies who could each buy a couple of new nuclear-powered aircraft carriers in cash, fully stocked.

Given that, let's just say that "a month" is a really stupid timeframe on your part.

Given relative expertise in litigation over IP issues, let's just say that MSFT's chances of winning are one of two: "slim" (as in - "winning the Powerball Jackpot two times in a row" slim), and "none".

/P

[Jim Hubbard]

Thank you Novell!

Novell's actions are the only thing that gave this whole ridiculous idea any credence whatsoever.

Thanks Novell.....

[Penguinisto]

Actually -

to Novell's credit, they refuted the whole idea in public back when Ballmer went about mouthing these threats the first time.

/P