Interesting, almost a Reverse Catch22 for Microsoft
|
| Author | Content |
|---|---|
| vainrveenr Mar 24, 2008 8:49 PM EDT |
.... If the blog's premises are entirely correct (which they may NOT be!!) Roy Schestowitz writes this response to a comment by a Chris Cox: Quoting:You escape the main point. Microsoft wants GNU/Linux converted to a Mac OS equivalent, i.e. an O/S which requires cross-licensing. The strategy is already being implemented (Hyper-V being a recent example). Microsoft openly says that it’s the cost of Linux that’s daunting. If Microsoft can change this, there goes the competitive advantage. Of course, for those at Novell who want to charge $50 per year for use of the O/S, none of this is contradictory.Therefore, there remain several plausible conclusions of this comment and the piece in general : - GNU/Linux is to remain "free as in beer", Microsoft will remain as the proprietary and high-profit evil empire it has always been, and Novell is moving much more powerfully to this for-profit Microsoft model far away from its "free as in beer" Linux roots - Microsoft is gingerly embracing those aspects of FOSS it is able to with the sole purpose of integrating its benefits into itself ("Microvell?"), other companies it can control/buyout, or those it can temporarily partner with or guide along (Silverlight, the open source side of the Mono project?) - Microsoft subtly and not-so-subtly contnues to throw out patent suit threats against companies or FOSS-projects MS cannot co-opt, control/buyout, or partner with. The thread entitled 'Same old, Same old.' at http://lxer.com/module/forums/t/26995/ has many comments regarding this already, with much enlightening discussion of the specific concept of "patent incumbered" software (see thread for more discourse) The so-called Reverse Catch22 from all of this for any possible "Microvell" is that Microsoft can always win. It wins whether or not Novell remains successful or not from its partnership/IP-Patent "encumbrances" with MS. What are the two extreme cases that illustrate this? A. Novell is wildly successful even in spite of Schestowitz's and others' Boycott Novell efforts. Novell continues to do all those "bad things" (tm) Schestowitz and supporters claim, and yet STILL Microsoft can glean to its advantage all the great F/OSS efforts of Novell, its Mono project, the other impending projects discussed at Brainshare, ... etcetera. Microsoft may indeed be able to discover further "patent encumbered" code it finds in Novell's holdings in order to leverage another IP Patent Deal with Novell or else possibly even mandate (maybe insert) further Microsoft-Novell/"Microvell" stipulations. When Novell wins, the eventual outcome is that Microsoft wins along with it. B. Novell begins to lose ground in the marketplace and is unsuccessful. Through its for-profit business model. Novell could be attacked, or more likely overwhelmed/outflanked by Microsoft. It could enact more and more "bad things" to grasp at staying competitive even against the desires of its key developers. Management at Novell could change entirely and key developers could jump ship (reminiscent of Yahoo at this point in time?) Through its being intrinsically based upon F/OSS, Novell could also be subject to more and more repercussions from its perceived disregard for GPLv3 and certain parts of the F/OSS Community. Included in such repercussions are developer disappointment over its original IP Patent Deal with MS. Should Schestowitz's Boycott Novell wishes be fulfilled, then Microsoft wins enormously. MS wins shared code it has with Novell and through various joint projects such as Mono, it wins shared or non-shared corporate and foreign governments' customers, .... and possibly MS wins a vast patent portfolio including the VERY UNIX TRADEMARK FROM NOVELL'S KEY LAWSUIT WITH SCO!!! Again, should Novell lose, the eventual outcome is that Microsoft still wins out. Whatever happens to Novell in the future -- A: Success or B: Failure -- Microsoft undoubtedly REMAINS successful vis a vis its interactions with Novell. This is a Reverse Catch22 for MS in that there is little difference in final outcome whether Novell is Embraced or is instead Extinguished. (BTW and somewhat tangentially, Miguel de Icaza's blog site is http://tirania.org/blog/ ) |
| tracyanne Mar 24, 2008 9:36 PM EDT |
Quoting:- GNU/Linux is to remain "free as in beer" GNU/Linus has never been specifically "free as in free beer" (no cost) it has always been Free as in fredom. The fact that so much of FOSS can actually be obtained at no cost does not mean that it should be, has to be, or even that it's a desirable situation necessarily - sometimes people need to eat. |
| Sander_Marechal Mar 24, 2008 10:50 PM EDT |
vainrveenr: Scenario B is never going to happen. Remember, all that happened is that MS and Novell signed an agreement. It's not like MS bought Novell. If Novell does bad then it does not mean it's assets go to MS. If MS wants the Novell assets then it should simply buy Novell. IBM will never let that happen. And luckily for us IBM has way more money than MS (who are heading for bankruptcy pretty fast, especially if they buy Yahoo). |
| tracyanne Mar 24, 2008 11:09 PM EDT |
Quoting:MS (who are heading for bankruptcy pretty fast, especially if they buy Yahoo). I wouldn't count those chooks before they've hatched. I think we'll be seeing Microsoft around for quite a while yet, Yahoo purchase or no Yahoo purchase. |
| Sander_Marechal Mar 24, 2008 11:27 PM EDT |
Oh I'm sure that they will be around for a long time. They have plenty of assets they can sell to get fresh cache, and with umpteen billion profit per year there are plenty of institutions that would loan money to MS. That still doesn't take away the fact that MS's stock price has been falling pretty much all of 2008 and that their estimated 17 Billion in the bank isn't enough to buy Yahoo. If MS buys Yahoo then it will be in debt. And being in debt is usually the first sign of the beginning of the end. |
| dinotrac Mar 25, 2008 3:51 AM EDT |
Tracyanne - You must separate the advertising from the facts. Linux definitely is free as in freedom -- at least the freedom defined by the GPL, which is not a bad defintion. The fact is, however, GPL software is also free as in beer, and the GPL enforces that fact. No, it doesn't forbid charging for software, but it guarantees downstream distribution of source and that, my friend down-under, guarantees free as in beer. You cannot make money from Linux itself. You must add a value of your own. That might be service, that might be pressing CDs and printing up useful manuals, it might be developing a special-purpose distribution -- who knows. |
| Bob_Robertson Mar 25, 2008 4:08 AM EDT |
> You cannot make money from Linux itself. You must add a value of your own. I recently commented to someone at Mises.org who was writing about "Software" but really meant "Microsoft Windows", that noting how many people make a living writing anti-virus software for Windows is merely restating the "Broken Windows Fallacy". Providing a needed service is what makes money. If the need is to guard Microsoft's abortive crap called "Windows" from attack, then so be it. But what if that need is not as great? Then all that talent and innovation will be turned to other needs. One of the most obvious needs is the same need that employed Dino in his mainframe days (and me but in networking): Customization. No two businesses are alike. No two projects. F/OSS lends itself to customization far more than closed, proprietary crap. For instance, simple localization for language. Does MS-Office2007 come in Hebrew? No, but OpenOffice.org does, because someone who wanted it made it happen. Personal service always demands a premium. |
| flufferbeer Mar 25, 2008 7:50 AM EDT |
@vainrveenr
If you'd consider this, the middle road seems to me the most likely here, rather than the xtremes of A and B you write here. Novell should remain financially somewhere In the Black rather than becoming wildly successful or In the Red. I'd generally agree with tracyanne and Sander_Marichal regarding the M$ Cartel. The Redmond Empire'll eventually gets weathered down until it's eventually forced to split apart and/or somehow adapt its methodologiess somewhere way down the road; this none too soon for projects and companies who're still been targeted by M$! @Sander_Marichal I'd disagree with you on the point of "If MS buys Yahoo then it will be in debt" We all know that M$ has been attributed as being the modern day equivalent of the Borg villains of Star Trek fame. The Borg Collective's takeover announcements are "Prepare to be assimilated. We will add your biological and technological distinctives to our own. You will adapt to service us. Resistance is futile." First off, M$'s purchase of Yahoo is not yet a done deal at the current asking price. (BTW, resistance by the Yahoo management has _already_ been helpful in pushing off at least for awhile M$'s successful takeover bid.) Secondly, M$ probably has at least one way at its disposal to make certain that it doesn't fall into debt, even if its preparations to acquire and assimilate Yahoo cost it a pretty penny. ------ In general, though, the comparison of Micro$haft to the Borg Collective is right on! ------ |
| Sander_Marechal Mar 25, 2008 8:02 AM EDT |
flufferbeer: Care to explain where Microsoft will get the money then? Sell their Office division perhaps? [grin] MS bid 44.5 billion for Yahoo. 50% cash and 50% stock. MS stock has dropped from 32.60 to about 29.17 meaning that the 50% stock is now only worth about 20 billion. That means it needs to finance abour 24,5 billion in cash for it's Yahoo bid. Last estimate is that MS has about 17 billion in cash reserves. That was before the record 1 billion EU fine. So 17 - 1 (fine) - 22.5 (yahoo) = -6.5. MS is about 6.5 billion dollars short of buying Yahoo at it's standing offer. And as you indicated already, Yahoo says it's not enough. It wants more. Where is MS going to get that kind of cash on a short notice? It'll have to get in debt. I doubt very much that MS can quickly liquidize 6.5-10 billion dollar or more in assets in such a short term. |
| dinotrac Mar 25, 2008 8:31 AM EDT |
Careful, Sander -- You're veering into dangerous territory. It is not politically correct to accept that there are limits to Microsoft's power. |
| Sander_Marechal Mar 25, 2008 8:40 AM EDT |
Hehehehe :-) |
| vainrveenr Mar 25, 2008 8:41 AM EDT |
@S_M
"Where is MS going to get that kind of cash on a short notice? It'll have to get in debt. I doubt very much that MS can quickly liquidize 6.5-10 billion dollar or more in assets in such a short term." Im not good enough to play detailed mental tricks with your questions. Suffice it to say that M$ will somehow figure out a way to withdraw from its original offer, possibly re-offer a much much lower bid somewhere down the line, or somehow readjust its assets over time (certainly not on short notice!) to finance its bid if it still wants the great Y! I wrote "Secondly, M$ probably has at least one way at its disposal to make certain that it doesn't fall into debt, even if its preparations to acquire and assimilate Yahoo cost it a pretty penny." And avoid debt, it will certainly try (I do believe) Well, M$ could just wait until its offer for Yahoo becomes past history or if Yahoo somehow falls apart. The waiting game then backfires on Yahoo and help to keep M$ afloat -- sortof like what vainrveenr writes above in B although this remains most unlikely at the extreme. Again, cannot help you with your more detailed questions on Micro$'s true finances. |
| Sander_Marechal Mar 25, 2008 8:46 AM EDT |
I think that the problem with that theory is that Yahoo ain't doing all that bad. It's the #1 visited website in the world and in the US on search about equal with Google (Google pwns Yahoo in the rest of the world though). |
| dinotrac Mar 25, 2008 8:54 AM EDT |
SM -- I'm going to have to report you now. Resorting to facts and logic twice in the same thread to support a theory of non-falling skies. Keep that up and we'll send you to a rice table (sorry -- don't know the Dutch spelling) and make you go all the way through without a beverage. |
| Sander_Marechal Mar 25, 2008 9:38 AM EDT |
That ain't no punishments. That's a reward! Make sure to bring extra sambal (oh the joys of an asbestos gullet :-) |
| dinotrac Mar 25, 2008 10:34 AM EDT |
SM -- One of the HUGE disappointments when I came back to the states after my stint in Rotterdam, was my inability to find Indonesian restaurants back home. You really can't explain the joy of a good rice table. It must be experienced. |
| Bob_Robertson Mar 25, 2008 10:53 AM EDT |
In SJ, CA, I first had Etheopian. Nearly too hot (spicy) to eat, _wonderful_. Oh well. Nothing like that in North Carolina. Oh sure, if you like greasy deep-fried everything, it's a nice place for food. |
| vainrveenr Mar 25, 2008 11:01 AM EDT |
Quoting:Yahoo says it's not enough. It wants more.This mornings news from the Reuters' piece 'Citigroup says Microsoft likely to raise Yahoo offer' seems to confirm just that. From its link http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20080325/wr_nm/yahoo_research_cit... Quoting:Citigroup said it is likely Microsoft Corp will raise its $31-per-share offer for Yahoo Inc and upgraded Yahoo shares to "buy" from "hold." |
| dinotrac Mar 25, 2008 11:04 AM EDT |
Bob - Ah, Ethiopian. When my wife and I were dating down in Dallas, we used to frequent an Ethopian place -- let me see? What was it called? Might have been The Blue Nile or something like that. That's some spicy stuff. |
| Bob_Robertson Mar 25, 2008 1:31 PM EDT |
So anyone in/near San Jose, see if Red Sea is still in business. mmmm.... or La Fondu in Saratoga. There are some few things I really miss about California.. Food, mostly. Some people. I do NOT miss the politics. |
| Sander_Marechal Mar 25, 2008 2:14 PM EDT |
Quoting:One of the HUGE disappointments when I came back to the states after my stint in Rotterdam, was my inability to find Indonesian restaurants back home. I can understand you'd miss that. But in reverse, I have been unable to find the classical geek food "Laser chicken" and "Chernobyl chicken" anywhere here in The Netherlands. Quoting:This mornings news from the Reuters' piece 'Citigroup says Microsoft likely to raise Yahoo offer' seems to confirm just that. Okay. Reworking my numbers from above: That means the final bid comes out at 46.6 billion. If they split this again 50-50 between shares and cash (as their last offer) then it would pay Yahoo roughly 800 million shares of MS stock at 29.17 (23.3 billion dollar) which is a lot more than the 680 million shares from the last offer, and 23.3 billion in cash. The have 16 billion (17 billion estimate minus 1 billion EU fine) so they come up 7.3 billion dollar short. |
Posting in this forum is limited to members of the group: [ForumMods, SITEADMINS, MEMBERS.]
Becoming a member of LXer is easy and free. Join Us!