Re: [Off Topic] An EXCELLENT Microsoft Confidential document on
On Thu, 5 Nov 1998, Jiri Baum wrote:
> Say like this:
> --c--
> < This is a classic play out of the Microsoft handbook.
> --
> > While this appears at first sight to be a classic play out of the
> > Microsoft handbook, there is a subtle but very important
> > distinction. By releasing the source code, the program is
> > immediately useful to a much wider audience than a binary-only
> > distribution could be, due to the ability of the users to extend or
> > modify it according to their immediate requirements.
>
> Does that make sense?
>
But Microsoft must, at all costs, prevent any extention or modification by
the user that results in any additional utility without additional income
to Microsoft. They might not also want to reveal code that detects
competing products and sabotages them or gives misleading error messages.
They might release PORTIONS of their source, probably code they have not
touched in years, but I doubt they would ever release the whole thing
unless they really went through it and cleaned up all the dirty tricks.
There is just too much of a risk of someone developing improvements (say
better device drivers) that cause parts of the OS to work better when
another vendor might have been sold exclusive access to this code so their
device drivers would work best. It risks the relationships they have with
other software and hardware vendors. On one hand, it would allow ANYONE to
write really great apps and drivers but on the other hand, if the best
vendors no longer had exclusive access to the code, they may start making
drivers for competing operating systems and therefore improve the quality
of the competition.
You might see LinModems, etc. In a situation like this, hardware and
applications become a commodity item and Microsoft knows they can not
compete in a commodity market because their developers are payroll, Open
Source developers are, in most cases, not. If I sell beans for 10 cents /
pound and you sell beans for 1 cent / pound and beans is beans, whose
beans are going to sell the best?
In the current situation, the vendor gets exclusive OS information that
allows them to build better hardware that performs better than that built
by people without the information. In exchange for this, they promise not
to give device information to outside parties without a fee that I am sure
Microsoft gets a large portion of. They get to use Microsoft logos on
their product, their drivers ship with Windows, sales are relatively high
margin. If you turn the model into a commodity, the game is low margin,
high volume. To get the highest volume you start selling your hardware for
as many operating systems as you can. This increases the utility of the
other operating systems meaning there is less reason to own Windows.
Microsoft can not afford to compete on a commodity basis, Linux LIVES in a
commodity market. Every software vendor that ports to Linux and every
hardware vendor that produces a Linux driver weakens Microsoft's
stranglehold. In return the vendor can expect reduced favor from Microsoft
but that can be made up in higher volume sales.
So, why was I2O released?
George Bonser
The Linux "We're never going out of business" sale at an FTP site near you!
Reply to: