Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 internet speed test! No Flash necessary and runs on all devices. ×
Microsoft

Microsoft Urged Linux Retaliation 560

Rossalina W Sanchez writes: "Yahoo is reporting that an internal Microsoft memo from August of 2000 urged employees to 'work underground' to hurt companies, like Intel, who support Linux. When will they learn that these memos always come back to haunt them ..."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Microsoft Urged Linux Retaliation

Comments Filter:
  • So what (Score:2, Insightful)

    I'd imagine the internal letters between linux developers on crippling microsoft are 100x worse.
    • Probably... (Score:5, Funny)

      by NorthDude ( 560769 ) on Tuesday May 14, 2002 @01:52PM (#3518957)
      I'd imagine the internal letters between linux developers on crippling microsoft are 100x worse.


      Yes, but they are GPL'ed and everyone can use/modify them

      This must be the reason why MS bashing post on Slashdot are so redundant, they are just different distros.
    • Re:So what (Score:3, Insightful)

      by grytpype ( 53367 )
      Linux developers, totally unlike Microsoft, are in no position to punish anyone, much less Microsoft itself.
      • Re:So what (Score:4, Insightful)

        by neuroticia ( 557805 ) <neuroticia@@@yahoo...com> on Tuesday May 14, 2002 @03:41PM (#3519808) Journal
        Let's see...

        Linux offers a stable, powerful, secure, and heavily developed alternative OS.

        Linux offers an alternative to Windows, which is currently being bombarded by a.) the legal system b.) crackers, and c.) viruses.

        Linux offers a way out of the .net hell where companies are forced into a bizzare dance of upgrade or rebuy.

        Yes, Linux is in a position to do some pretty damaging things to the other OSes out there if things continue on the path they're currently on. (Microsoft going out of its way to be arrogant and kick itself in the butt by writing memos like this, and opensource developers pushing the envelope and coming out with increasingly feature-filled, stable, and secure software.)

        I doubt that Linux developers have the time to write "Let's get Microsoft!", though. They seem too busy developing the OS to participate in the "We have an inferior product, let's squash the competition" insanity that goes on behind the doors of some other developers. =]

        -Sara
    • Re:So what (Score:5, Insightful)

      by xcomputer_man ( 513295 ) on Tuesday May 14, 2002 @01:56PM (#3518995) Homepage
      Yeah, I'm sure all those kernel hackers were really busy sending out emails on the lkml on how they should punish companies that refuse to embrace linux.

      Alan Cox must have proclaimed on the lkml that important technical information must be witholden from such companies, and they must face the consequences of committing such a dastardly sin as not using Linux.

      They must be threatening such companies with high prices and severance of OEM contracts.

      They must be spending 50% of their time focusing on how to write viruses and works to make Windows systems break and puke. They must be working really hard on developing algorithms by which Linux can be used to crack and break Windows systems. Linux is seriously crippling Microsoft's revenue stream right now.

      Yeah, I know there is some hypocrisy on Slashdot, but please.
      • by wytcld ( 179112 )
        Linux is a virus using human engineering as a vector to infect hardware whose natural symbiont is Windows.

        Linux is a woman who gives you the sex for free but then wants you to maintain her forever; Windows is the (sometimes diseased) whore who takes cash up front but then insists you cannot touch her in certain ways.

        Linux is a vehicle suited for the smart and poor; Windows is a better ride for the stupid and rich. So if Linux wins, the world ends up with more smart poor; if Windows, more stupid rich.
        ___
    • Re:So what (Score:2, Insightful)

      by bourne ( 539955 )

      I'd imagine the internal letters between linux developers on crippling microsoft are 100x worse.



      Of course, but the reason that monopoly law exists is that there's a huge difference between a bunch of - excuse me - small powerless people and a large corporation with domineering market segment. The large corporation might actually be in a position where they CAN cripple their opposition unfairly.



      Note that Microsoft's defense is essentially, "Well, yeah, but that was just wishful thinking, no one actually DID anything about it." It only matters when it is done by someone large enough to have an unfair advantage.

    • I'd imagine the internal letters between linux developers on crippling microsoft are 100x worse.

      Developers think code. And MS has already proven that they can dominate the market with unfair business practices even with bad code. That is kinda what the case is about.
    • Re:So what (Score:5, Insightful)

      by jimmcq ( 88033 ) on Tuesday May 14, 2002 @02:21PM (#3519197) Journal
      I'd imagine the internal letters between linux developers on crippling microsoft are 100x worse.

      and there is absolutely nothing wrong with that, unless they happen to hold monoply power in the market. Microsoft holds a monopoly in the OS market. That is a fact of law. It also means that their business practices are under restrictions that others are not.
    • by Anonymous Brave Guy ( 457657 ) on Tuesday May 14, 2002 @02:40PM (#3519336)

      The point of introducing the memo would be to demonstrate that Microsoft, after being convicted of the abuses previously, continued to consider illegal abusive action a legitimate business tactic. That adds a very significant weight to the argument that they should have their future behaviour heavily curtailed, because they can't be trusted to respect any penalty that is based only on fixing what they've done in the past. Winning that argument would be game, set and match to the states.

  • Ugh (Score:4, Funny)

    by twisted_pickle ( 528898 ) on Tuesday May 14, 2002 @01:48PM (#3518920)
    'work underground'
    Well, a mine is a terrible thing to waste...
  • Learn? (Score:4, Insightful)

    by thrillbert ( 146343 ) on Tuesday May 14, 2002 @01:48PM (#3518923) Homepage
    When will they learn that these memos always come back to haunt them ...

    Right around the same time they learn to secure their software I reckon...

    Of course, right now, with $43billion in cash, it's not quite a priority...

    ---
    "I drak what?!?!?" -Socrates
  • They should really consider committing R&D to building a time machien, to go back and preventing Linus Torvalds' birth. Problem solved.
    • The T-900 terminator chases Sarah Torvalds down the gloomily lit high tech factory. It's limping along, having been severely damaged by a bomb blast. She can't outrun it, she's injured herself... things look bad for humanity and open source software. No one to save her now.

      Switch to the terminator "eye view".

      Little graphs and probability charts flash into is awareness as he chases his target. Whether or not a lunge is a good strategy, or chase her until she is exhausted. Determinations whether she has any remaining weaponry that can stop him. Then, a big blue box clouds the metal asassin's vision.

      "Windows 2010 Combat Edition. A fatal exception OE has occured at 0028:C001539A. The current application will be terminated.
      * Press any key to terminate the current application
      * Press CTRL+ALT+DEL again to restart your computer. You will lose any unsaved information in all applications"

      Fate has stepped in, and prevented a timeline where no choice was possible. Fade to black.
  • Haunt? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Scotch Game ( 442068 ) on Tuesday May 14, 2002 @01:49PM (#3518928)
    Exactly how is the unearthing of this memo going to dent their $40 billion in cash reserves or their dominance in the marketplace. They've already been sued by the U.S. gov and the states as well as by their peers and competitors.

    But this memo will haunt them.

    I think it's pretty obvious that Microsoft is, in part, so arrogant precisely because this stuff never really does haunt them.

    Let them eat cake!
    • Re:Haunt? (Score:2, Informative)

      by WeirdKid ( 260577 )
      Nor will it haunt them in this instance, since the judge disallowed the memo as evidence.
      • Never mind the court case. It's become public knowlege that they were thumbing their nose at the judge (which is what precipitated his off the bench remarks to begin with...). Moreso with this. People won't want to deal with companies that are this corrupt (which is what it is...).
    • Actually, MS is in the process of being sued by its competitors. In particular, Netscape and Be have filed lawsuits. This would probably make a good document to attach to a suit from Red Hat.

      The DoJ's suit does not try to redress previous wrongs. It is supposed to keep the behavior from occurring in the future. It is up to individual companies to file suit against MS for the damages from the previous transgressions. Of course, that ol' triple damages 'cause they're a monopoly clause is probably making a few lawyers salivate.
    • Executive Memo, To all Employees and Personnel of Microsoft, NO MORE GODDAMN MEMOS! Signed, Steve Balmer (With Bill Gates hand up my ass like a puppet)
  • by MoneyT ( 548795 ) on Tuesday May 14, 2002 @01:49PM (#3518934) Journal
    Just pick-up and join in on the Be lawsuit (www.beincorporated.com). Be has a much stronger case than the states in my opinion.
  • Quite a while ago (Score:3, Insightful)

    by KoopaTroopa ( 549540 ) on Tuesday May 14, 2002 @01:50PM (#3518936) Homepage
    The memo was dated August 2000?

    Sounds to me like they haven't been terribly successful thus far.
  • Also worth reading (Score:2, Informative)

    by municio ( 465355 )
    Similar startegies:
    http://news.com.com/2100-1001-912906. html?tag=fd_t op
  • Now we know... (Score:4, Interesting)

    by TechnoLust ( 528463 ) <kai.technolustNO@SPAMgmail.com> on Tuesday May 14, 2002 @01:50PM (#3518938) Homepage Journal
    why the XBOX2 will have an AMD processor in it.
  • by fabiolrs ( 536338 ) on Tuesday May 14, 2002 @01:50PM (#3518942) Homepage
    urged employees to 'work underground' to hurt companies...

    they did a good job, they built WINDOWS XP!!!
  • by dmccarty ( 152630 ) on Tuesday May 14, 2002 @01:51PM (#3518947)
    ...justice officials also noted that an encrypted Microsoft memo read, "!seineew era sreenigne xuniL" and appealed to member of the open source community to help them decode the message.
    • ...justice officials also noted that an encrypted Microsoft memo read, "!seineew era sreenigne xuniL" and appealed to member of the open source community to help them decode the message. ... at which point, half of the developers created a distributed computing program to attempt to use brute-force to crack the code, while the other half worked on a decryption algorithm. This continued for several months without success, until a ten-year-old boy, who knew absolutely nothing about cryptography or computers, pointed out that the message was simply written backwards.
  • Memo (Score:5, Funny)

    by notaspy ( 457709 ) <imnotaspy.yahoo@com> on Tuesday May 14, 2002 @01:52PM (#3518950)
    From: Bill Gates
    To: All M$ Employees and Shills
    Re: Anti-M$ Publicity

    Kill Slashdot.
    Fat bonus to whomever Slashdots those bastards.

    xoxox
    Bill
  • Business as usual. (Score:2, Insightful)

    by papasui ( 567265 )
    Does it really shock anyone? It's like everyone expects them to get along? When was the last time you saw two competiting grocery stores run newspaper ads supporting each other. It's just the way the US business world works, you make your money at the expense of others. I'm not a Microsoft fan but jeez it's not like this sort of stuff doesn't happen in every other corporation. Bad mouthing the competition and saying how great your company is, is a tatic to try and get employees motivated, whether it works or not is questionable but the fact that Microsoft bad mouths a competing OS, or tries to force companies to use its software shouldn't surprise anyone.
    • This is a very good anology. Just as Apple/Linux/Microsoft are competing for business, so also the grocery stores are.

      Microsoft is only doing their "job" if you will in bashing other competitors. Granted it would be better if they secured their stuff and got it working right! But hey, you can't blame Acme for having mold all over the floor and BiLo doesn't.. I'll just go to BiLo, and let those other people go to Acme :)
    • by JWW ( 79176 )
      This is beyond badmouthing. They are "punishing" companies that help Linux.

      They have been found to be a monopoly. Monopolies are not supposed to do that.

      This whole case is about Microsoft forcing its will on other companies in the Computer industry because they have no choice.

    • This is something that people constantly point out here on Slashdot, so here it goes again. The courts have found the Microsoft is a monopoly. This places them under extra obligations that other businesses are not under. Amongst other things, it limits how they are allowed to compete. Trying to crush a competitor by throwing around their monopoly power is totally different than claiming that your product is better than the product of one of your competitors.

      One of the things they talk about here is dragging their feet with hardware companies that support Linux, and giving more favorable deals to those who don't. I'd say that's an abuse of monopoly power.

  • They won't learn (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Dark Paladin ( 116525 ) <jhummel&johnhummel,net> on Tuesday May 14, 2002 @01:52PM (#3518954) Homepage
    Because it doesn't hurt them.

    Look out there in the business world. See any companies saying "Hey, Microsoft is unfair? We should shift our stuff over and stop using them!"

    No, what you see is "Well, we have to change our licensing and pay more money. We don't have any choice."

    Of all the things that I don't like Microsoft for, that's the #1 thing. I see people saying "But...I can't get a Mac - it won't work with my stuff", where stuff == Microsoft Office and Adobe Acrobat. I see IT Staffs scrambling to count licenses for fear that the SBA will knock on the door and find that one computer without a piece of paper stating that Windows 2000 was paid for.

    I see hopelessness, and I see just a resigned acceptance.

    Learn? Why should they learn. Microsoft gets paid because people are either too lazy, or unwilling to see the alternatives. So they won't learn from their "mistakes" - until the day it hits them in the pocketbook. And that's not happening yet.

    If ever.
    • by ari{Dal} ( 68669 )
      Don't give up hope yet.. not everyone out there is completely apathetic (though the majority are pure sheep). it's because of things like this that my next hardware purchase will be a mac (new or powerbook.. going to the store next week!).

      I don't know... Apple gets some bad press because of their stringent defense of the "Aqua" and general mac look, but in general I have less trouble spending $4k on a mac than $2k on a notebook and seeing MS BS every time I turn around...

      That and well, macs are just so pretty!

      Take solace in the fact that there are some people out there who are turning away from Windows, either to *nix or OSX. It's slow, but it's happening...

      *heads off to dream of shiny new titanium powerbook...*
    • Yes, but... (Score:3, Insightful)

      by TechnoLust ( 528463 )
      From the article: Red Hat chief technology officer Michael Tiemann said computer makers had rebuffed his attempts in recent years to pre-install the Linux operating system on their machines because they feared Microsoft's response.

      I don't think this is a valid argument from the manufacturers. If Dell or Gateway or Compaq started preloading Linux on their machines, what is microsoft going to do? Say, "OK, we aren't selling windows licenses to Dell anymore." I don't think so. Especially since that is where they get their huge user base. Because most PCs COME WITH WINDOWS ON THEM! Now they might be so arrgant as to think if they stop selling copies of Windows to Gateway, Gateway will cease to be. But I don't think this is the case. First of all, geeks would flock to order PCs where they didn't have to pay the "Microsoft Tax" (i.e. buying an OS license they will never use.) Second, most of the non-geeks that I know think their operating system is Office 2000, so they aren't going to know what Linux means when they order it. Sure this will generate some returns, but most people will either figure it out, or be too proud to admit they don't know what they are talking about. Third, if one does it, the others will, too. And MS can't stop selling licenses to EVERY PC retailer. It would be suicide. One of the big PC companies just needs to step up to the plate and tell MS to sod off, and offer Linux certified systems. With hardware that has available drivers, already set up and configured, with the latest kernel, KDE, etc. I'm telling you it would work.

      As for interoperability, most of the software we write these days is CGI or Java, and runs on any modern web browser. Also with StarOffice, I've almost got 100% MS Office compatibility. I can do almost anything on my Linux box that I can with my MS box. (I still can't write Visual Basic programs in Linux, but I'm sure someone is working on that!)

      • Re:Yes, but... (Score:4, Insightful)

        by Dark Paladin ( 116525 ) <jhummel&johnhummel,net> on Tuesday May 14, 2002 @02:16PM (#3519168) Homepage
        Actually, they do something. In the recent BeOS case, they say:

        "Dell, either you knock it the fuck off with this BeOS thing, or we'll charge you double for Windows".

        Dell needs Microsoft. Microsoft can do business with Gateway, Dell, HPQ, Micron (do they still make PC's), and a host of others.

        Margins are razor thin, and if MS decided to play hardball with Dell, Dell would lose.

        That's why Red Hat's complaining - and they're right. That's what the trial is suppose to fix.
      • I would point at that they sent a letter to Compaq informing them of the cancellation of their OEM license back when Compaq was installing Netscape's Navigator onto their boxes.

        At the time Compaq was either #1 or #2, so I don't think that's so far fetched a scenario.

        Remember, if they cancelled Dell's license that doesn't mean that MS would suddenly lose all of Dell's customers as Windows buyers. It means that Dell would lose all of its customers to companies that still had an OEM license.
      • I don't think this is a valid argument from the manufacturers. If Dell or Gateway or Compaq started preloading Linux on their machines, what is microsoft going to do?
        Microsoft is going to charge them more for each Windows license, or be less cooperative in giving them details the OEMs might need to make sure their hardware works well with Windows.
  • by pq ( 42856 ) <rfc2324&yahoo,com> on Tuesday May 14, 2002 @01:53PM (#3518960) Homepage
    "Kempin said Microsoft should withhold technical information from Intel and "work underground" to promote its competitors in the computer chip industry"

    Ah, and then AMD testified in favor of Microsoft out of the goodness of their hearts.

    And this just speaks for itself: "I would further try to restrict source code deliveries where possible and be less gracious when interpreting agreements -- again without being obvious about it," Kempin wrote.

  • disallowed?!? (Score:5, Informative)

    by Maditude ( 473526 ) on Tuesday May 14, 2002 @01:53PM (#3518969)
    from the article:
    U.S. District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly disallowed the Kempin memo -- along with several others -- during Gates' testimony after Microsoft's lawyers objected to it.
    I'm having a hard time imagining why the judge would have agreed to disallow this memo from being presented. Seems like a pretty good corroboration of the actions they are alleged to have done -- why would a memo stating that "hey, we should do this" NOT be allowed?
    • Re:disallowed?!? (Score:3, Informative)

      by blakestah ( 91866 )
      I'm having a hard time imagining why the judge would have agreed to disallow this memo from being presented.

      It could be because it is irrelevant. This case is specifically about browsers. Really, it is about Microsoft using its OS monopoly to leverage into the browser market. More generally, the case MAY also be about Microsoft using similar tactics to leverage its monopoly into other markets, such as email clients, media players, ISPs, etc.

      But the case is NOT about Microsoft using its monopoly to prevent entry into the OS market. And this memo speaks directly to that issue, but not to any issue relevant to leveraging the OS monopoly into new markets. From an antitrust perspective, those are not the same issue.
      • Re:disallowed?!? (Score:3, Insightful)

        by peddrenth ( 575761 )
        It could be because it is irrelevant. This case is specifically about browsers

        ...which is exactly why the case itself is irrelevant. The browser wars are over now that mozilla 1 is out, people are starting to get decent email clients, and everyone has a fast enough net connection to download netscape as one of the first things they do after installing Windows.

        So why are people still arguing about the browser "monopoly"? For goodness' sake, lets allow businesses to LEGALLY SELL OTHER OPERATING SYSTEMS, let's have a publication of the MS-Office formats, and let's have a marketplace where people selling computers without Windows are not routinely accused of piracy!

    • Re:disallowed?!? (Score:3, Informative)

      by bourne ( 539955 )

      I'm having a hard time imagining why the judge would have agreed to disallow this memo from being presented.

      I have notices that Judge Kollar-Kotelly appears to be clearly giving Microsoft the benefit of the doubt on most evidentiary matters. Two possible reasons come to mind:

      • The hearings are a sham, and MS will be rubberstamped with a "Get out of jail free" card.
      • After seeing how Judge Jackson was discredited after the previous trial for being clearly opinionated, Kollar-Kotelly is being extremely careful that her objectivity cannot be questioned by Microsoft after the trial.

      I'm actually leaning toward the latter. Nobody wants to pull an Ito, and (I'd like to believe) judges are a lot harder to buy or exert pressure on than politicians - there are plenty of examples of Judges quite happily making horrendously unpopular and, if one could be objective, perhaps unjust judgements without any real censure.

    • Seems like a pretty good corroboration of the actions they are alleged to have done

      Because they aren't alleged accusations. Microsoft has already been found guilty of monopolistic practices. It is the settlement that is the issue. I think everyone is tired of hearing about what a big bad company MS is, I know I am. It is accepted fact.

      Now I just hope they punish them into the stone-age for it.

      Microsoft + Monopoly = Micropoly [cafepress.com]

    • The problems have to do with the rules of cross-examination. New evidence can only be entered in during cross-examination of it directly corroborates or contradicts a statment of the witness. Cross-examination isn't the time to enter unrelated evidence into the proceeding. That is supposed to be done during the prosecution's presentation. This is also why the Judge was so reluctant to admit the later cancelled XP Embedded demonstration into the proceedings.

      The game has certain rules, granted they don't make much sense, but they have rules nonetheless.

      <#include std.IANAL>
    • Re:disallowed?!? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Elias Israel ( 182882 ) <eli@promanage-inc.com> on Tuesday May 14, 2002 @03:18PM (#3519658)
      why would a memo stating that "hey, we should do this" NOT be allowed?

      Because presenting a random email from one employee is not the same thing as demonstrating the intent or the actual practices of the company.

      Or do you think that you speak for Slashdot?

      One opinion is just that: one opinion.

      Surely you don't think that if a Microsoft employee had written a "memo" (let's face it, these are just captured emails) advocating that their $40B be used to purchase NASA, that Bill Gates was intending to go into the commercial launch business, do you?

  • Maybe we're doing something right!
  • And? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by zpengo ( 99887 ) on Tuesday May 14, 2002 @01:54PM (#3518972) Homepage
    How long has the Linux community been urging Microsoft retaliation? ;-)
  • by FearUncertaintyDoubt ( 578295 ) on Tuesday May 14, 2002 @01:57PM (#3519001)
    ...is with their relationship with Intel. Intel must have known that Microsoft was giving them a bit of the cold shoulder, but it's hard to address that diplomatically. But now the Intel management can act shocked - shocked! that Microsoft would be secretly scheming against them.

    Whenever Microsoft gets caught with its hand in the cookie jar, they try hard to make up for it. If Intel and IBM got together and said, we're going to put a Linux desktop out there that the average joe wants and can use as easily as windows, Microsoft will have something to fear. I suspect that they will make a lot of conciliatory gestures towards Intel. Kind of an Ike Turner thing -- take me back, baby, I never meant to hurt you!

  • what else is new (Score:2, Interesting)

    by theCat ( 36907 )
    Joachim Kempin was thinking out loud, so they say, and nothing came of it. The truth is, these kinds of discussions go on all the time in business. Business is all about relationship building and sometimes you use a carrot and sometimes you use a stick to keep partners in line (and a lot of business people have no great skill other than creatively wielding carrot/stick, IMHO).

    What gets M$ into trouble is that they have a monopoly and a one-sided advantage because of it, so their "relationship building" always looks like Hitler invading Poland. You can draw out that comparison to it's logical conclusion if you care to.
  • tip of iceberg (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Cryogenes ( 324121 ) on Tuesday May 14, 2002 @01:57PM (#3519004)
    When will they learn that these memos always come back to haunt them ...
    Always? I think it is more likely that perhaps one percent of those notes come back to haunt them.

    Do you believe in death after life?

  • Poppycock! (Score:4, Funny)

    by 4of12 ( 97621 ) on Tuesday May 14, 2002 @01:58PM (#3519012) Homepage Journal

    Yahoo is reporting that an internal Microsoft memo from August of 2000 urged employees to 'work underground' to hurt companies, like Intel, who support Linux.

    Well, that's simply preposterous!

    I mean, <boost target="microsoft">how could one the worlds foremost respected software manufacturers, a company that literally spends billions on research and development specifically addressing customers needs for an integrated business experience based upon Microsoft Innovation® possibly stoop to such tactics?

    I mean, give me a break, you <create_mud target="Linux"> DeCSS-hacking, copyright-infringing, intellectual property destroying, Linux zealots have some good points now and then but on this you're way off the mark!


    Copyright © 2002 Microsoft Slashdot Posting Engine, All Rights Reserved. Not to be reprinted without permission.

  • by smoondog ( 85133 ) on Tuesday May 14, 2002 @02:00PM (#3519031)
    Don't worry! Its all OK. Geez, didn't you even read the article? See it says right here:

    Microsoft spokesman Jim Desler said Kempin's memo was "irrelevant" because the company never acted on his ideas.

    I knew this was another one of /.'s unwarranted rants.

    -Sean
    • ...because it's one of their execs openly spouting off like that when he SHOULD have kept his mouth shut (they were still in the original final throes of the trial over this VERY thing...). Just because they "didn't act on it" openly doesn't mean they didn't act on it or that we shouldn't be deeply troubled about the conduct all the same.
      • "...because it's one of their execs openly spouting off like that when he SHOULD have kept his mouth shut "

        Umm his job as an executive is to come up with ideas on how to stay in business. Contraversial? Oh yeah! But no proof has been provided showing that any crime has been committed. Frankly, the only reason its interesting to /. is because people love to hate MS. Yadda yadda yadda.

        They really should provide evidence instead of trying to propaganda MS to death.

        'MS told Gateway not to sell computers without Windows' -- that is evidence.

        'Somebody at MS said they shouldnt allow Gateway to sell computers without Windows' -- not a crime. Free speech. Expression of ideas. No proven illegal action.

        I know Ill probably get modded down for this. So just to be clear, Im not saying MS isnt doing anything wrong, IM saying that *this particular piece of 'evidence'* is not very interesting. Its sad that they're using stuff like this to prove intentions instead of using facts to prove guilt.
  • And... (Score:3, Interesting)

    by blankmange ( 571591 ) on Tuesday May 14, 2002 @02:03PM (#3519063)
    Water is wet

    the sky is blue

    people lie

    This is news???? I am sure that the yet-to-be-disclosed memos from Microsoft (or any other company) are just as bad or worse. Better yet, somebody type up a memo, with [insert company name here]'s letterhead on it, making sure that it says a lot of ugly things about the competition, then leak it to the media so it will get distributed as news.

    Come on people -- this is not news!

  • Microsoft PR (Score:2, Interesting)

    by dankinit ( 131249 )
    I'm no conspiracy theorist, but if you think about it logically for Microsoft, it's good anytime one of these memos is put together or "leaked". Microsoft continues to trumpet the so called "threat" of Linux and Apple and thus govt and other interested parties are less likely to scream that Microsoft is dominating the software industry. I believe for the same underlying reason they loaned Apple $200 million when they needed it (it hurts Microsoft in the end to be the only one left standing (govt doens't like this)).

    This is why every time I read one of these "leaked" emails I just shrug picturing somebody at Microsoft's HQ smiling that everybody here and on various other sites all go into hoots over "leaked" email.
  • by Vicegrip ( 82853 ) on Tuesday May 14, 2002 @02:08PM (#3519104) Journal
    "When will they learn that these memos always come back to haunt them"

    Hopefully never.
  • Of course! (Score:5, Interesting)

    by imadork ( 226897 ) on Tuesday May 14, 2002 @02:10PM (#3519116) Homepage
    Kempin said Microsoft should withhold technical information from Intel and "work underground" to promote its competitors in the computer chip industry, according to portions of the memo disclosed in the states' legal filing.
    "I would further try to restrict source code deliveries where possible and be less gracious when interpreting agreements -- again without being obvious about it," Kempin wrote.
    Microsoft spokesman Jim Desler said Kempin's memo was "irrelevant" because the company never acted on his ideas.

    Nope, if Microsoft would have acted on those ideas, they would have done something like promise to provide support in Windows for AMD's 64-bit architecture instead of a comparable Intel architecture. [theregister.co.uk]

    Aren't you glad we have Microsoft Spokesmen to set the record straight?

    • Re:Of course! (Score:3, Interesting)

      by spectecjr ( 31235 )
      Nope, if Microsoft would have acted on those ideas, they would have done something like promise to provide support in Windows for AMD's 64-bit architecture instead of a comparable Intel architecture. [theregister.co.uk]

      Microsoft already have an IA64 version of Windows available. So... what exactly AREN'T Microsoft doing for Intel in your example?

      Simon
  • Remember when rumours were abound about Microsoft going the AMD way for the chip on Xbox2 ? Everyone wondered why they would ditch Intel ?

    These guys are committing SNAFUs all year round.
  • by WebMasterJoe ( 253077 ) <joe@joestone r . c om> on Tuesday May 14, 2002 @02:21PM (#3519204) Homepage Journal
    We complain about Yahoo [slashdot.org], then we complain that nobody is doing anything about it [slashdot.org], then we send them lots of traffic. Why??

    Let's link to the same story found on Reuters. That's where Yahoo got the story from: The Reuters article [reuters.com]

  • "When will they learn that these memos always come back to haunt them ..."

    Hopefully never. These memos have been invaluable in showing the world (and the courts) how consistently underhanded and criminal MS has been all along.
  • Kinda makes the idea that the annoying /. pro-M$ trolls are an organized effort a bit more real.

    Of course, as always, just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they're not out to get you
  • Gee, another memo. (Score:2, Interesting)

    by glh ( 14273 )
    I admit MS has the ability to wrongly influence the economy. A capitalistic pig will do what a capitalistic pig will do (aka "boys will be boys"). However, how can you really blame them? MS will do what it takes to make a buck, ethical or not (some will even argue legal or not). In one way, this actually helps the competition (aka, AMD) which means lower prices for everyone. At least that's one way of looking at it.

    MS has the power to punish those who are against it (reistance is futile). To quote spider man-- "With great power, there must also come great responsibility". Lets hope one of these days Billg realizes that. Reagardless, the DOJ must be the ones to step in and try to level the playing field when a defacto monopoly such as MS abuses its power, but with caution.

    Here's an interesting irony- America is all about capitalism, which encourages monopolies (a capitalistic market means you have to eliminate your competition to succeed, but also depends on competition). But when you get to the top, no one wants you there.
  • Yahoo is publishing.

    Reuters is reporting.

    It's important.

  • by Ilan Volow ( 539597 ) on Tuesday May 14, 2002 @02:43PM (#3519363) Homepage
    Microsoft moles can be identified by their unwavering committment to preventing windows users from installing linux. A microsoft mole might be identified by one or more of the following activities:
    1. Tells a newbie who is having a problem to shut up and RTFM
    2. Claims that a user-hostile program that lacks any kind of usability is "perfectly ready for the desktop"
    3. Tells said developer of program to "keep up the good work"
    4. Tells people who criticize a badly designed free software UI to "quit whining" or "you get what you pay for"
    5. Uses the word "Idiot","Simpleton" or "Moron" in the same sentance as "GUI". An example would be the sentance "GUI's are for morons who can't think".
    6. Runs around screaming "Don't standardize linux GUI's. It's a matter of choice--don't promote facism."

    If you see your friend, spouse, employer, LUG members, or poster to on-line forums such as Slashdot engaging in one or more of these counter-revolutionary activities, there is a very good chance that they are agents of microsoft committed to making sure that linux will not be installed on the machines of existing windows users.

  • by vinsci ( 537958 ) on Tuesday May 14, 2002 @03:20PM (#3519672) Journal
    "Microsoft spokesman Jim Desler said Kempin's memo was "irrelevant" because the company never acted on his ideas."

    Not entirely true, it turns out. See what AMD has to say about this (source at bottom):

    "
    Tailored for Compatibility with Microsoft® Windows® XP

    The AMD Athlon(TM) XP processor offers compelling performance for running Microsoft® Windows® XP operating system, as well as outstanding performance on previous versions of Windows. The raw power and robust features of the AMD Athlon XP processor help enable users to make the most of multitasking and user switching capabilities offered in Windows XP. Microsoft optimized the DirectX 8.0 interface for Windows XP specifically for the AMD Athlon XP processor.

    AMD processors were used for the design, development, and testing of Windows XP. AMD processors are designed to deliver high levels of performance with this latest version of the Microsoft Windows operating system.

    The AMD Athlon XP processor allows you to take full advantage of the power of Windows XP in multiple ways.

    • High quality digital media, such as audio, video, and photos from digital devices benefit from the advanced capabilities of AMD processors and the integrated features of Windows XP.
    • The AMD/Windows combination provides an enhanced Internet experience with smoother streaming audio and video.
    • Communication with family and friends via video, voice, and instant messaging is quick and easy when powered by the next-generation features found in AMD processors.
    • AMD processor-based Windows XP workstations running financial. modeling, scientific, engineering, or graphic design applications have the sheer computing power to handle highly demanding applications.
    • AMD processors are designed for the multi-threaded and mission-critical applications of cutting-edge Windows XP Professional software applications.

    Through this collaboration, AMD can offer you excellent integration and compatibility in your computer's functioning, resulting in outstanding computing performance across a broad spectrum of applications."

    Source:
    http://athlonxp.amd.com/overview/microsoftWindowsX P.jspa [amd.com]

  • by gnetwerker ( 526997 ) on Tuesday May 14, 2002 @06:02PM (#3520689) Journal

    If this memo, and the behaviour that it endorses, worries you, let me pile it on: neither of the two proposed remedies is likely to correct this kind of corporate culture at Microsoft, at least in the near term.

    This is because, no matter how heinous their actions, Intel will never complain to the States or the DoJ about Microsoft. Intel needs Microsoft too much to risk it.

    Once upon a time the OEMs feared Intel, because processor supplies were short and Intel was the monopoly. The crossover begain happening in the mid-90s, beginning with Windows95, as Microsoft consolidated their control over the market with well-known highly-restrictive licensing terms.

    This is when Microsoft first got a taste for directly threatening Intel, and by manipulating Intel by threatening OEMs. Nothing has changed since then, except that Intel has lost even more market share to AMD, and Microsoft has become more powerful.

    Intel continues to hedge its bets (on the server only!) by supporting Linux, but everything desktop-related at Intel is 100% pro-Microsoft, and most of the execs there don't see a problem with that, and wouldn't complain about retaliation even if they did.

    Now, don't get me wrong, the States' proposal is much better, in that (theoretically) it would allow an anonymous or confidential complaint to the Special Master, but in practice it's hard to imagine Intel using even that venue.

    Bottom line: Linux developers and supporters -- don't look to the anti-trust settlement to stop the dirty tricks. Learn to live with them. Learn to love them. Learn jujitsu.

    gn

  • by NineNine ( 235196 ) on Tuesday May 14, 2002 @08:08PM (#3521399)
    I love Slashdot... it's so full of half-thoughts and knee-jerking.
    The denizens of Slashdot declare that MS's monopoly is wrong. At the same time, MS is dead, and Linux has taken over.
    Funny, I thought that the definition of a monopoly is NO competition.
    So which is it kids? Is there a monopoly, in which case Linux is an abject failure, or is Linux a success, in which case there really is no monopoly?

You can tune a piano, but you can't tuna fish. You can tune a filesystem, but you can't tuna fish. -- from the tunefs(8) man page

Working...