08.20.07
Mindmap: Microsoft Deals and Partnership as Proxies in a Software Battle
How Microsoft uses its partners to address its worries
In the following image, lines along with the letters represent companies that Microsoft uses in order to fight the threats which these lines link to.
A = Apple
C = Corel
F = Fuji Xerox
Cx = Citrix
L = Linspire
N = Novell
S = Samsung
T = TurboLinux
X = Xandros
This was put together rather quickly, so any corrections and additions would be very welcome.
Highlight: Novell was the first to acknowledge that Microsoft FUD tactics had substance. Novell then used anti-Linux FUD to market itself. 
Highlight: Xandros let Microsoft make patent claims and brag about (paid-for) OOXML support. 
Highlight: Linspire's CEO not only fell into Microsoft arms, but he also assisted the company's attack on GNU/Linux. 
Highlight: Microsoft craves pseudo (proprietary) standards and gets its way using proxies and influence which it buys. 
Highlight: The invasion into the open source world is intended to leave Linux companies neglected, due to financial incentives from Microsoft. 
Analysis: Xen, an open source hypervisor, possibly fell victim to Microsoft's aggressive (and stealthy) acquisition-by-proxy strategy.
gpl1 said,
August 20, 2007 at 3:29 am
Intriguing! That sums up a lot of the strategy, doesn’t it? Good work.
Roy Schestowitz said,
August 20, 2007 at 3:33 am
Thanks. I missed a few (realised it moments later), but it was really just a quick minddump spewed onto the GIMP.
This was inspired by software wars, but here you have Microsoft using companies (or “sockpuppets”) instead of producing better software to counter threat. It’s a case of outmuscling the rivals instead of showing one’s own muscle.
emaname said,
August 31, 2007 at 11:57 am
Excellent job, Roy. I’ll make use of it. I believe that another reference that should be created is a ‘credibility page.’ When some promotes a product/service/policy/strategy of m$ at the cost of their own credibility, they should make the list. eg, various research groups have done reports for m$ that were clearly skewed. Add ‘em to the list with a brief abstract about how they’ve distorted the facts to serve Redmond’s purposes. I think this would add to the whole boycott effort/influence. If it becomes a high-profile page, people might think twice to selling out to the Borg.
Thanks again for the mindmap.
paul
Roy Schestowitz said,
August 31, 2007 at 3:55 pm
Paul,
Can you maybe assist or become a maintainer of a static page? I agree, it would be an effective one to have just like Groklaw’s Microsoft Litigation, for example.