Comment Microsoft is just protecting their cash cows (Score 2, Insightful) 672
Premise 1: Microsoft makes money from their software (mostly though they do dabble in hardware and also make money off financial tricks).
Premise 2: As the courts agreed on 8 separate counts, they leverage their existing software to ensure further software success.
Premise 3: They will protect their ability to "own" and leverage their software. This is obvious but must be stated.
Microsoft's problem 1: If they don't either stop GPL/OSS or themselves go OSS/GPL ultimately they will suffer because GPL/OSS software is so much more useful. Microsoft could publish Microsoft Excel, but how long would it be before there was a "better" Excel out there? Sure, the improvements would be marginal at best - but still! The improved Excel might work best on Linux not Windows. How could they charge for Excel then? Their cash cow is threatened - the GPL/OSS must be discredited.
Microsoft's problem 2: This is so often overlooked, it makes me crazy. I thought maybe I should make it item 1, but oh well. Microsoft needs to discredit the GPL in particular. Why? Patents. They have been funding universities increasingly all around the world. But universities are pre-disposed to making their discoveries GPL because of their academic environment. Pre-GPL this was no problem for MS who had no compulsion to post resulting improvements as free stuff. But now, universities are saying "here's our latest stuff and it's GPL" which means that *everything* downstream from that MUST be GPL. Where does that leave Microsoft? Think about it.
Microsoft's problem 3: Governments like the idea of GPL as well. So of course they are pre-disposed to making all government software GPL/OSS (like European and South American governments have done). How is Microsoft trying to counter this? Microsoft wants to fund Microsoft computers for the school system and they are trying to create a "govtalk" system for government communications - using Microsoft software.
Why Intel/IBM/APPLE/SUN do not have a problem with GPL/OSS! Here's the fun bit. This is the rub for Microsoft. IBM sells soooo muh hardware that if Linux/GPL/OSS takes off on the AS/400 they still win! If Star Office decimates the Microsoft Office cash cow, IBM will also win. What can IBM lose? Warp/OS2 is already dead. All their other Os' are so far behind the curve - only 5 years ago did some of their stuff get "windowing" (in response to the Java JVM requirement). And Apple? They don't mind their OS being hurt, because they make money off ultra-cool hardware anyway! How long before Apple ships Linux on their hardware? Intel is the same.
It's the people with their fingers in the hardware business who love the idea of OSS/GPL. They are the ones crying with glee "yes software should be free, spend your money on hardware!". In the end, GPL and OSS will prevail. Microsoft's attempts to portray it as uncool, dangerous, hippie, un-secure, un-American and all the rest - it must fail. Microsoft will then be the "specialist" (we do the best X/Y/Z) - much like Apple is now - but for broad mass appeal Lindows will win (or something like Lindows anyway).
Premise 2: As the courts agreed on 8 separate counts, they leverage their existing software to ensure further software success.
Premise 3: They will protect their ability to "own" and leverage their software. This is obvious but must be stated.
Microsoft's problem 1: If they don't either stop GPL/OSS or themselves go OSS/GPL ultimately they will suffer because GPL/OSS software is so much more useful. Microsoft could publish Microsoft Excel, but how long would it be before there was a "better" Excel out there? Sure, the improvements would be marginal at best - but still! The improved Excel might work best on Linux not Windows. How could they charge for Excel then? Their cash cow is threatened - the GPL/OSS must be discredited.
Microsoft's problem 2: This is so often overlooked, it makes me crazy. I thought maybe I should make it item 1, but oh well. Microsoft needs to discredit the GPL in particular. Why? Patents. They have been funding universities increasingly all around the world. But universities are pre-disposed to making their discoveries GPL because of their academic environment. Pre-GPL this was no problem for MS who had no compulsion to post resulting improvements as free stuff. But now, universities are saying "here's our latest stuff and it's GPL" which means that *everything* downstream from that MUST be GPL. Where does that leave Microsoft? Think about it.
Microsoft's problem 3: Governments like the idea of GPL as well. So of course they are pre-disposed to making all government software GPL/OSS (like European and South American governments have done). How is Microsoft trying to counter this? Microsoft wants to fund Microsoft computers for the school system and they are trying to create a "govtalk" system for government communications - using Microsoft software.
Why Intel/IBM/APPLE/SUN do not have a problem with GPL/OSS! Here's the fun bit. This is the rub for Microsoft. IBM sells soooo muh hardware that if Linux/GPL/OSS takes off on the AS/400 they still win! If Star Office decimates the Microsoft Office cash cow, IBM will also win. What can IBM lose? Warp/OS2 is already dead. All their other Os' are so far behind the curve - only 5 years ago did some of their stuff get "windowing" (in response to the Java JVM requirement). And Apple? They don't mind their OS being hurt, because they make money off ultra-cool hardware anyway! How long before Apple ships Linux on their hardware? Intel is the same.
It's the people with their fingers in the hardware business who love the idea of OSS/GPL. They are the ones crying with glee "yes software should be free, spend your money on hardware!". In the end, GPL and OSS will prevail. Microsoft's attempts to portray it as uncool, dangerous, hippie, un-secure, un-American and all the rest - it must fail. Microsoft will then be the "specialist" (we do the best X/Y/Z) - much like Apple is now - but for broad mass appeal Lindows will win (or something like Lindows anyway).
