On Jun 19, 12:57 am, Roy Schestowitz <newsgro...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
> ____/ 7 on Monday 18 June 2007 21:52 : \____
> > Roy Schestowitz wrote:
> >> Patent threats bad for Microsoft business - Red Hat
> >>http://www.tectonic.co.za/view.php?src=rss&id=1594
>
> > Who would have thought last year that Linux would reduce
> > Micoshaft Corporation into a patent trolling company within a year?
> > SCO$ should have patented the patent trolling business model,
> > because I think Micoshaft Corporation wants to muscle in on
> > this patent troll market to steal it and use it for itself!!
Microsoft tried really hard to convince corporate IT decision
makers that NT 4.0 would be a better server than Linux/Unix.
Over the next few years, as NT servers began replicating like
rabbits, DLL conflicts, multiple redundant servers, box booters,
drive re-images, and runaway TCO began to sour the IT department.
Microsoft tried to push Windows 2000 as a server, but after
Application server developers had projects that were 300% late
and 500% over budget, they weren't real eager to try and rewrite
all of their applications to support MTS, MSMQ, and DCOM. Even
renaming it to COM+ didn't really help.
Microsoft introduced Windows 2003, and .NET, and tried to promote
SQL Server as an enterprise class database. Ultimately, the only
real market turned out to be "forced upgrades" of NT 4.0 servers.
Microsoft still gets the bragging rights of saying that most
servers are sold with Windows licenses - because IT Managers
want to get as much "bang for the buck" out of their entirprise
or data center licenses as possible, and in order to transfer
these licenses to a new machine, they have to purchase the
machine with NT Server OEM licenses.
Most of the replaced servers, however, become Linux servers.
Many companies now rotate out their Windows servers every year
to get better performance, and provide new Linux servers to
projects needing a "spare" server.
In production environments Linux blades have become very popular.
It's not unusual to see an IT show with around a hundred blades
in a 19 inch rack, connected to a rack full of SAN storage.
In the server market, Linux and Unix continue to dominate.
> Your assessment might be correct.
> They are no longer shy about their (bad) image.
The bad image really started when Microsoft tried to force
corporate IT managers to "Upgrade or Die" when XP was released.
Many CIOs and CTOs were ordered to come up with a Migration plan
to be implemented if Microsoft tried a similar stunt with their
next version.
After almost 6 years of hype, Longhorn/Steer/Vista arrived, and
turned out to be a nightmere - especially for Microsoft. Microsoft
was able to sell some Vista PCs to the early adopters, but even they
were not happy. Microsoft tried to force an "Either Vista OR Linux"
decision, hoping to exclude Linux. The result has been an increasing
demand for Windows XP, mostly people rushing to get the XP machines
while they still can, hoping to avoid Vista.
This time, Linux isn't just a curiousity that might be worth trying.
The proliferation of nearly 500 million copies of FireFox and nearly
300 million copies of OpenOffice, combined with hundreds of millions
of LiveCDs has made it much easier for IT managers to know which
machines are ready for Linux and can be upgraded to Linux in an hour
or less.
Apple is selling as many machines as they can manufacture.
People are waiting in line for up to an hour for a turn at
an iMac in the Apple stores. People who don't like Microsoft
but need the hand-holding and warrantee are turning to Apple.
OEMs have already had to discount Vista machines as much as 50%,
and some machines are already being sold for less than cost.
The OEMs are looking to Linux, not Vista, as the way to generate
better profit margins.
Microsoft is trying to cash in any way it can. At this point,
they are just trying to stay in the game. They going to the
Linux market, giving them huge wads of cash and asking them
to "share" the PC with them. Microsoft now realizes that their
best hope for the future is to make sure that they can continue
to exist as a VM Client for Linux, and that the Windows VM is
included on the OEM platform. This at least keeps the distribution
channel open for MS-Project, Visio, and Access.
> SCO or not SCO, they have just sued
> a small company (nothing related to
> Linux though).
Going after small companies is a good strategy for Microsoft.
They can't afford a protracted legal battle, and don't want
to set a precedent. Microsoft is probably hoping one of them
will fight, just so they can get a Judge to establish a precedent
they can use against "bigger fish". More importantly, getting
the little targets to accept an onerous license term gives them
more protection from FTC, SEC, and Antitrust actions when they
demand the same concessions from the big OEMs.
> Let's see how a company
> of marketers and defence attorneys
> turns into a groups of propaganda marketers,
> shills, and 'offence' lawyers.
Microsoft has always considered enforcement of copyrights,
and now patents, to be a critical part of their business
strategy. The biggest problem with patents is that enforcement
actions can back-fire. Asserting a patent increases the risk
that the defendent, or friend of the court, will present prior
art not listed in the patent application. This can nullify
the patent, or significantly diminish it's value and enforcebility.
Going after smaller companies gives Microsoft a chance to establish
the validity of the patents.
> That company used to be about technology and
> engineering, but these days are
> behind us. Microsoft is not just employing
> trolls. It *is* a troll.
Microsoft hasn't been about technology since the mid 1980s.
Most of their technology has been the product of aquisitions,
joint projects, and appropriation of BSD-style licensed code.
Microsoft's strengths have been:
Help systems (Wizards, templates, dancing paper clips...)
Exclusive control of OEM channel (even in defiance of court orders).
Aggressive copyright and patent enforcement.
Aggressive quota-based marketing to the largest corporations.
Carefully worded contracts and License agreements.
Carefully worded settlements, often written before the crime is
even committed.
> SCO's poppa's comes to school to help his son
> unleash some terror onto the classroom.
SCO has been a thorn in Microsoft's side for almost 20 years.
Caldera overextended itself just enough to let Microsoft's agents
get control of the company.
Microsoft may have brokered the financing of the case in hopes
of getting customers to switch to Windows 2003, but the tactic
seems to have back-fired. It created higher visibility for Linux,
made it clear, based on SCO's claims, that Linux was better than
Unix, which had already been accepted as better than Windows, just
too expensive for most workstations.
> When this story is over, it will certainly make
> a good Wikipedia article that will teach future
> generations how giant corporations can rise and
> quickly fall, due to brutality, disregard to
> antitrust laws, and fraud.
Microsoft is already a good Wikipedia story of a
company that created the richest man in the world
through fraud, extortion, blackmail, sabotage,
callusion, and obstruction of justice.
Bill Gates became the richest man in the world,
is invited to spend time with the President and
cabinet, and can replace any world leader in
less than 24 months.
Sadly, most people see Bill Gates, his money,
and decide that this should be the model for
doing business. For some companies, like Enron,
WorldCom, and others, the "success story" ends
with a trip to federal prison, the liquidation
of teacher pensions, and general distrust of
corporations, of government, and of business
leaders.
Rex Ballard
http://www.open4success.org
|
|
