Comment: What is Microsoft's new position on Linux?

 

Gallery

Posted on 17 Nov 2006 at 17:55

What is Microsoft's Steve Ballmer going on about? According to reports, he's been wooing Linux vendors to cut deals in a similar vein to that announced between Microsoft and Linux. But according to Novell's SEC filing, Microsoft is supposed to steer clear of 'substantially' similar agreements for another three years.

When the parties first announced the deal, eWeek cited Microsoft's CEO as saying that rival vendors 'are certainly welcome to get involved to quickly provide these covenants not to sue'. But, aside from patent issues, Ballmer also highlighted other technological factors, 'in which our technical cooperation is a definite advantage to Novell,' when referring to teaming up with Linux vendors.

Ballmer told India's Economic Times that: 'We will love to put that kind of agreement in place with anyone who distributes Linux software, Red Hat, whoever else.'

Now, at an SQL database software conference in Seattle, Ballmer is quoted as saying: 'We are willing to do the same deal with Red Hat Linux and other Linux distributors.' And in this instance, he's talking to people about running SQL on Linux and Windows: a technical, rather than patent, issue.

The wording of the Novell agreement, however, appears to preclude this. 'Under the business collaboration agreement, Microsoft agreed that for three years, it will not enter into an agreement with another Linux distributor to encourage adoption of Linux/Windows virtualization solutions through a Linux subscription certificate program.'

Novell's Kevan Barney told us: 'The agreement language is fairly clear, so the key appears to be with the term "substantially similar." I wasn't involved with the negotiations so I can't vouch for what exactly that refers to, but certainly it leaves the door open for Microsoft to make other agreements that aren't "substantially" similar.'

Microsoft clarified this further: 'Microsoft won't engage in a similar program of acquiring and distributing Linux support agreements for a three year period. This kind of limited and time-based provision is common in broad collaboration agreements. There is no exclusivity in the deal around a number of technical areas. For example our work on management and office file formats has absolutely no exclusivity elements built in. There is also no exclusivity with respect to the patent agreement. So, while Microsoft cannot enter into exactly the same set of agreements with another Linux provider based on the few areas of exclusivity noted above, Microsoft can and would be willing to entertain similar deals that contain many (in fact, most) of the same elements that are at the core of the Novell agreement.'

A better question might be why Novell would want to build in any kind of exclusivity in the first place. Novell will benefit from Microsoft's scale in reselling support licences to its SUSE platform, but Red Hat is a much bigger player to begin with in the Linux world. And Red Hat's success, with some four-fifths of the commercial Linux market, is built on a pure open-source play, not the mixed open/closed source approach of Novell. Witness that SQL conference, where Ballmer was pleased with the full house responding to his poll of delegates using Windows, but less so to see that nearly the same number were using Linux too.