Comment: Microsoft's latest Linux offensive is an enormous blunder

 

Gallery

Posted on 16 Jan 2007 at 15:30

With Bill Gates getting ready to clear his desk and spend more time with his family (of servers), there had never been a better opportunity for Microsoft to shed its reputation as the 'Evil Empire'. Goodbye to the surly, unrepentant Mr Microsoft, and hello to cuddly Steve Ballmer, infamous for bounding around the stage at company get-togethers.

Sadly, the leopard isn't about to change its spots. On the contrary, it's sharpening its claws by picking a futile fight with the Linux lobby. What started life as a groundbreaking deal between Microsoft and Novell to foster 'broad collaboration on Windows and Linux interoperability and support' has descended into open warfare.

Initially, the Microsoft/Novell deal appeared to be a genuine step towards conciliation. The companies stated they wanted to make life easier for IT managers running mixed-source environments, by making Windows and Novell's SUSE Linux 'work better together'. Microsoft had seemingly dropped its antipathy towards anything open source, even offering to distribute SUSE Linux to its customers. It was a busy day for dentists, as jaws hit floors across the world.

Notably, Microsoft proclaimed this deal was 'good for the open-source community.' Why?
Because Microsoft had 'resolved our patent issues' with Novell, averting legal action over unproven allegations that sections of Linux were ripped off from Windows. The very same release quoted Stuart Cohen from the Open Source Development Labs saying: 'We're glad to see these two companies collaborating to further diminish the legal threat posed to developers and customers by patent assertions.'

What Cohen probably didn't realise was the legal threat hadn't been diminished, but greatly multiplied. Just days after the ink dried on the Novell agreement, Ballmer gave an interview proclaiming Linux 'uses our patented intellectual property', adding Microsoft 'spends $7 billion a year on R&D, [and] our shareholders expect us to protect or license or get economic benefit from our patented innovations'. In other words, 'Linux makers: we're coming after you'.

What's more, Ballmer clearly regarded the Novell agreement as a protection racket. 'They've [Novell] appropriately compensated Microsoft for our intellectual property, which is important to us,' he said. Naturally, the open-source community was up in arms, accusing Novell of selling out to the arch enemy. Novell's position was weakened further when Ballmer revealed Microsoft had offered a similar deal to Red Hat, but it had sensibly declined. Novell tried some hasty back-pedalling, claiming it disagreed with
Microsoft over the patent issue and the deal was 'in no way an acknowledgement that Linux infringes upon any Microsoft intellectual property,' but the damage
was done. If Ballmer's aim was to drive a wedge into the open-source community, he'd succeeded.

But if companies such as Red Hat weren't going to roll over, Ballmer had another trick up his sleeve. 'In a sense, you could say anybody who has got Linux in their data centre today sort of has an undisclosed balance sheet liability,' he claimed. Having failed to
intimidate the likes of Red Hat, he's hoping to put the wind up their customers by implying Microsoft's lawyers could come knocking at their door.

So in one Ballmer interview, we've gone from a deal that makes the life of cross-platform companies easier to a threat of legal action if you're running a non-SUSE variant of Linux. Yet, Ballmer's strong-arm tactics are woefully misjudged. Businesses don't like being bullied - indeed, several Linux customers have openly claimed Ballmer's stance has galvanised their resolve to rid their companies of Microsoft software.