Topic: Heads Roll As Microsoft Misses Vista Target

[Mr_Tricorder]

http://www.informationweek.com/windows/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=183702744

This really comes as no surprise.  It's just the next step in Microsoft's failure cycle.

1.  Deny it's a failure (quote from Microsoft after the delay was anounced.)

...“Product quality and a great out-of-box experience have been two of our key drivers for Windows Vista, and we are on track to deliver on both,” said Jim Allchin, co-president for the Platforms & Services Division at Microsoft. “But the industry requires greater lead time to deliver Windows Vista on new PCs during holiday. We must optimize for the industry, so we’ve decided to separate business and consumer availability.”...

2.  Give in to the fact that it's a failure and start pointing fingers.

3.  Fire the losers of the finger-pointing contest.

[Nemesis]

2.  Give in to the fact that it's a failure and start pointing fingers.

The finger pointing begins.

Link to full article

Forbes:You mention intellectual property. What's going on in terms of Microsoft IP showing up in Linux? And what are you going to do about it?

Steve Ballmer: Well, I think there are experts who claim Linux violates our intellectual property. I'm not going to comment. But to the degree that that's the case, of course we owe it to our shareholders to have a strategy. And when there is something interesting to say, you'll be the first to hear it.

Many people think that the SCO vs IBM (and other SCO vs cases) are Microsoft using a proxy to fight a FUD war against Linux.  So far there has after a mere 3 years been no evidence that SCO has been willing to let the general public see of violations of SCO IP.  Now Microsoft seems to want to try it direct or at least spread FUD by hinting that they may try it. 

I think that if Microsoft goes this route they will find themselves with problems that they don't expect but should.  Even an 800 pound gorilla finds it difficult to fight army ants.

[Mr_Tricorder]

Steve Ballmer really likes to say a whole lot of nothing seasoned with chuncks of big fat obvious statements.

(From the article provided by Nemesis)

Ballmer: One, people value their time. Our stuff does more, and they like that. Two, people value their time, and those [free] things tend to be clunky. Let's say you think you can save $50. And then you go and waste three hours. You tell me how quick that payback is. You can sketch that out at the enterprise level as much as you can at the individual end-user level. So people value their time, and people value their capability. Frankly, people value not only the compatibility our stuff has with itself, but they value the add-ons and the third-party customization that people have done. As long as we keep pushing the pace of innovation and delivering that value, I think we have a great opportunity.

The only part of that that wasn't overly vague, incoherent, or just plain wrong was "people value their time".

You know, IBM (nyse: IBM -  news  -  people ) doesn't stand behind Linux. They promote Linux, but if there's a bug in Linux, IBM is not the responsible party to fix that. It's whoever in the community. And you know, let's say that person has a death in the family. I'm not saying we're perfect, but at least you can expect appropriate commercial responses out of a commercial entity.

Ok, we're all members of the Dynaverse community in one way or another, and most of us are in some way involved in other online communities.  Has anyone here experience a time when a community was unable to function because of the death of a family member?  I mean, seriously, a community is about people pitching in and helping especially in a time of crisis, and not because they are paid to but because they genuinely care and want to help.

Clearly something I'm saying must be right, because that is what's happening.

That statement deserves a big fat 
By that logic, I could say that ice cream sales cause heat strokes because when the rate of ice cream sales increase, the rate of heat strokes also increase (completely leaving out the fact that both are caused by the heat of the summer).

Forbes:  How closely do you follow the open source world? Do you watch the debates over the new GPLv3 license? Do you get that granular about what's going on out there?

Ballmer:  We have people that do.

Translation - no, I don't.

(continuing from the same paragraph)

I probably know more now than I did six months or a year ago, about what's going on. So I'm getting smarter every day.

This is a total no-brainer.  If I didn't know anything about Linux six months ago and someone just said to me, "hey, there's this thing called Linux," then I would definitely (not probably) know more now than I did six months or a year ago.  You can only gain that kind of knowledge.  The only way if you could possibly know less about something than you did six months or a year ago is if you've taken a severe blow to the head since then.

We know how we are competing, and it's working. We just have to keep running the same playbook hard.

Does Steve Ballmer watch (American) Football (or just about any sport for that matter)?  Does he know what happens when you keep running the same playbook?  The other team learns how to counter it and you lose.

I know that I may not be totally fair and am certainly not being unbiased in dealing these blows to Steve Ballmer, but he makes it so easy.  At least Bill Gates can speak intelligently.  Ballmer speaks too much like a salesperson, trying to make you feel really good about what he's selling you without giving any real information about it.  Even if I wasn't biased against Microsoft, I just can't respect someone who talks like that.

[Nemesis]

As I understand it under U.S. law a convicted abusive monopolist who sues (a would be competitor) over patents is likely to have the court rule that they (the monopolist) either can't enforce the patents (enforcing would restrict competion even more) or may only collect nominal licensing fees and will be given no choice about issuing the licenses.  If I'm right then Microsoft is in the position where if they go beyond FUD to the actual court they may technically win but give the fruits of victory to the new licensees.  Rather like the DOJ won the anti-trust suit and Microsoft won the settlement.

There is also the fact that any patent fight with open source will have 100,000 pairs of eyes looking for prior art that invalidates the patents.  Like the FAT patent for example.  How could the patent office issue a patent on the DOS file system in the 21st century?  The rules prohibit any patent from being applied for if a product that is covered by the patent has been on the market for more than a year.  Microsoft can't pretend not to know when they first marketed the DOS FAT system.

[Mr_Tricorder]

Whether or not Microsoft knew about the rules is irrelevant.  By now it should be pretty obvious that Microsoft doesn't care what the rules are.  They're going to do what they think they can get away with.

As far as actually bringing legal action against Linux, I seriously doubt this is anything more than an empty threat in order to generate more FUD.

[Lepton]

FUD???

[Mr_Tricorder]

FUD???

Fear,
Uncertainty, and
Doubt

[Sarek]

There is also the fact that any patent fight with open source will have 100,000 pairs of eyes looking for prior art that invalidates the patents.  Like the FAT patent for example.  How could the patent office issue a patent on the DOS file system in the 21st century?  The rules prohibit any patent from being applied for if a product that is covered by the patent has been on the market for more than a year.  Microsoft can't pretend not to know when they first marketed the DOS FAT system.

Yet the Patent Office did issue the patent and the patent was upheld.  What good are 100,000 pairs of eyes if the process doesn't take into account what they see?

[Nemesis]

Yet the Patent Office did issue the patent and the patent was upheld.

The patent office also issued one for how to operate a swing (in the traditional manner children have used for centuries at least).  So a patent being issued means nothing about its validity.

As to it being upheld.  That is a little more complex and dependss on your definition of the word upheld (no I'm not imitating Clinton).  It was challenged within the patent office and revoked.  The final appeal (within the patent office) had it reinstated.  The final appeal however is Microsoft in a closed room with the reviewer no other inputs.  Not exactly reasonable.  The opposition had no opportunity at that point to give a rebuttal to any claims Microsoft may have made.  It has not been fought out in court yet and there I would expect a judge to overturn it.

Why hasn't it been fought in court yet?  No one who has refused to pay Microsoft when licensing fees were demanded has been charged my Microsoft.  Microsoft has also not been making public statements about those who don't have a license so that they can take the initiative in court on the grounds that Microsofts statements are hurting their business and they need the validity of the patent determined so their business can go back to normal, either by paying Microsofts license fees or by being vindicated.   In short Microsoft has not caused it to go before a judge.

If it does go before a Judge and is upheld the Linux loses a great deal of ability to interact with Windows as it would have to remove support for the file systems on Windows formated HD, Flash memory cards (all styles) and digital cameras.  At least until a Judge ruled that Linux could retain the use of the patent in the name of competition.