Linux Section

Microsoft and Linux

We've all heard Microsoft's sabre rattling about copyright and patent violations. For the most part, I haven't changed my mind about any of this: it worries me a little, but on the other hand there's just too much momentum behind Linux. It's possible that Microsoft could damage commercial Linux, but they risk a backlash that they really can't afford right now.

There's also the general confusion of the provenance of any code, including Microsoft's own. We know that Microsoft has dipped heavily into the BSD code well, but who knows what else they might have lifted over the years? This is a very big company with a lot of employees; it would be very unlikely if there was no code whatsoever of impure origin.

It's unfortunate that Microsoft won the FAT patent issue, but the fact that they did meet resistance and haven't done more might indicate that Linus Torvald's assessment on the "prior art" issues is dead on.

For these reasons, I think Microsoft has to be very careful about any real legal movements agains Linux on patent grounds. Also, many of us have thought that Microsoft does more damage to Linux by threatening these suits than it could do by actually bringing them: if their arguments are as weak as we think they are, the FUD from threats is better for them than risking losing in court. Once they lose, they have to shut up forever, but threatening can go on for decades, and can certainly cause potential customers to hesitate.

However, this recent Information Week post by John Foley does wrinkle my eyes a bit: Microsoft Tight-Lipped On Unix Ownership Question. Apparently Foley wanted an interview to find out just how much Unix Microsoft owns. They have refused that interview.

What bothers me is the refusal. We know Microsoft retained rights to code; anybody who ever watched the copyrights on a SCO box knows that. Most of us assumed it was the old junk that SCO used in its "Advanced File and Print Server" product, but who knows - there could be much more. But surely it can't be important? This is old, old stuff, and Microsoft didn't write most of it anyway: they licensed it from AT&T and borrowed more from BSD. How can it have any value today?

But if it's not important, why is Microsoft folding its arms and closing its mouth? Obviously they've "lawyered up" - there is some reason that they don't want anyone shooting off their mouths. And it has to be pretty serious too, because otherwise they'd prep the people they were sending out and say "Just don't mention xyz, ok?".

Microsoft is in trouble. Vista is a flop; Mac is chipping away at the power user base (I see more and more Windows tech folk carrying Macs) and low end Linux PC's are starting to bite their toes. They aren't doing as well overseas as they'd like, particularly in the more socialistic countries. Yes, yes, they are still Number One without question, but there is real danger of slipping and they know it. Our question is, what are they going to do about it?

Could this reluctance to talk about Unix be a clue to internal plans? Could be..

2 comments

More Articles by Anthony Lawrence - Find me on Google+

Click here to add your comments




Thu Dec 13 18:41:49 2007:   anonymous


"What are they going to do about it?"

Say they've got something better than anyone else in the pipeline and hope everyone believes them?



Thu Dec 13 19:17:00 2007:   TonyLawrence


No, I think they are going to be a bit nastier than that..

Don't miss responses! Subscribe to Comments by RSS or by Email

Click here to add your comments

If you want a picture to show with your comment, go get a Gravatar

Jump to Comments

Many of the products and books I review are things I purchased for my own use. Some were given to me specifically for the purpose of reviewing them. I resell or can earn commissions from the sale of some of these items. Links within these pages may be affiliate links that pay me for referring you to them. That's mostly insignificant amounts of money; whenever it is not I have made my relationship plain. I also may own stock in companies mentioned here. If you have any question, please do feel free to contact me.

Specific links that take you to pages that allow you to purchase the item I reviewed are very likely to pay me a commission. Many of the books I review were given to me by the publishers specifically for the purpose of writing a review. These gifts and referral fees do not affect my opinions; I often give bad reviews anyway.

We use Google third-party advertising companies to serve ads when you visit our website. These companies may use information (not including your name, address, email address, or telephone number) about your visits to this and other websites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services of interest to you. If you would like more information about this practice and to know your choices about not having this information used by these companies, click here.