Re: Is this going to be true ?

[Herman Oosthuysen <Herman@WirelessNetworksInc.com>]

MS once described the GPL as a 'cancer'.  One of the 'features' of 
cancer is that it grows fast and can't be stopped easily, so I suppose 
they were correct...

MS history shows that they did and does support various flavours of 
*nix.  So, it is not beneath them to release apps for Linux too one day 
and it would be a good thing if they do.  Competition is always good. It 
inpires people to do better.

Joseph D. Wagner wrote:
>>I am just curious if someone has an opinion for the
>>following link?
>>
>>Research Firm: Microsoft Will Use Linux by 2004:
>>[trim]
> 
> 
> Over Bill Gates' dead body.  The Microsoft Corporation (and by that, I mean
> the people running it: Chairman of the Board, CEO, CIO, CFO, Board of
> Directors, most of the stockholders, etc.) is of the genuine belief that
> Microsoft Windows is the operating system of the future.  (Whether you
> believe it or not is a separate topic.)  Developing products for the Linux
> platform is both 1) an admission that this belief was wrong, and 2) an
> admission that their own current version of Microsoft Windows is somehow
> shoddy, not-up-to-par, insufficient, or even on an equal footing with Linux.
> The Microsoft Corporation will never admit either of those two things.
> After all, it's the MICROSOFT CORPORATION.  If they didn't believe these
> things, they would go somewhere else.
> 
> The following scenarios are far more likely.
> 
> 1) Future development of the Windows operating system or some of its
> components will be *BSD based.  The Microsoft Corporation will never touch
> Linux.  Period.  The lawyers simply wouldn't allow it.  The lawyers think of
> GNU GPL as an infectious disease, and so anything Linux is out of the
> question.  The BSD license is far more favorable to proprietary development,
> since it allows you to close off the source.  Hence, assimilating a *BSD
> structure, component, or piece of code is far more likely.
> 
> In fact, Microsoft Windows 2000/XP already did that with Kerberos.
> 
> 2) Lower prices for Microsoft Licensing or more broadly interpreted
> licensing.  It may be that to better compete with Linux that Microsoft
> lowers the prices of some of its Microsoft products.
> 
> One thing Microsoft has already done in this regard is to change the
> licensing on Terminal Server.  On Windows NT 4.0, each copy of Windows NT
> Workstation needed a Client Access License and a Terminal Server Client
> Access License to connect to a server and a server's Terminal Server,
> respectively.  Now, with Windows 2000 and XP Pro, a Terminal Server Client
> Access License is included with either a regular Client Access License or a
> Windows 2000 or XP Pro operating system license (I forget which).
> 
> 3) Develop kits, wizards, and other software to help people convert from
> Linux to Windows.  Microsoft already has Unix for Windows Services (or
> something like that with a similar name).  It's purpose is to help people
> convert from SCO UNIX to Windows.  I see no reason that Microsoft can't
> develop a similar such kit for, say, Red Hat Linux.  (Sure, it would be one
> heck-of-a-kit and very complicated, but I can see it).
> 
> *Sigh*  Yet, another topic for the linux-politics list.  There is no such
> list, BTW, but this email highlights the need for one.
> 
> Joseph Wagner
> 
> -
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/
>