11.28.07
Turbolinux Kisses Microsoft in Public
In what seems like a promotional press release for Microsoft, Turbolinux talks about something which is called “Interop Vendor Alliance”. Remember WSPP and MCPP [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7]? The release from Turbolinux itself states:
“Microsoft is pleased that Turbolinux has joined the Interop Vendor Alliance,” said Sam Rosenbalm, Interop Vendor Alliance manager, Microsoft Corporation. “We are very excited about collaborating with Turbolinux to build a bridge between open source and commercial technologies that benefits the entire IT ecosystem.”
They are very determined to make it look like mutual love (maybe just an unhappy married couple that keeps up appearance). It’s part of an attempt to create an exclusionary corporate club of Linuxes that are ‘permitted’ to merely communicate with peers.
Having witnessed Microsoft tying and bending companies’ arms when these companies issue their own press releases (sometimes the press releases are part of the contract), this seems rather disturbing. More information about this will come shortly. █
Image from Wikimedia
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.
SubSonica said,
November 28, 2007 at 8:55 am
Also mind the fallacious distinction introduced here:
“bridge between open source and commercial technologies”
There is no need to such a “bridge” since open source can be perfectly commercial. They keep insisting in their view of a world in which only proprietary software was profitable, and they try to project that view in every marketing PR move they make, while at the same time kind of dismissing the viability of “open source” (and mind this: they ALWAYS refuse talk about FREE(dom) software) as “business ready” as if open source needed some kind of proprietary clutches (what they call “bridge”) in order to be allowed by them to compete in the software market (which they view as their private backyard -as stated by Microsoft execs in disclosed Iowa memos-)
I really can not grasp how linux distributors cave to such marketing exercises
SubSonica said,
November 28, 2007 at 9:04 am
FTR.:
http://blogs.msdn.com/jasonmatusow/archive/2006/11/15/thank-you-for-the-feedback.aspx#1115720
IMHO: Jason Matusow’s entire blog is a phenomenal exercise of spin, disinformation and intoxication contributing to create a mindset farvourable for Microsoft campaign at proprietarizing and eeeing FOSS.
SubSonica said,
November 28, 2007 at 9:17 am
Also I forgot to mention something:
“IMHO: Jason Matusow’s entire blog is a phenomenal exercise of spin, disinformation and intoxication”
…and CYNISM.
The comment I wanted referred to in the Matusow blog (comment anchors seem not to work in MSDNs blog):
# D Patrick said:
commercial proprietary
oh.. and one more thing;
I see in recent talks, that Microsoft executives have given, the language used is “commercial vs. open source” software. This is a clever bit of mind manipulation, suggesting that OSS cannot be commercial. Bill Gates went to far as to say that the intentions of FOSS developers was to ensure that nobody could make money with it, but that’s completely untrue. Just ask IBM, or RedHat, or even Novell, not to mention the legion of consultants who use FOSS daily.
The accurate comparison is “proprietary” vs. “open source” and to suggest otherwise is deceptive, manipulative and underhanded. I encourage anyone who see this doublespeak to correct it every time.
Anonymous said,
November 28, 2007 at 10:48 am
Sounds like you never heard of Interop Vendor Alliance before. Microsoft is there member, also Novell and Linspire. So it must be a real evil organization, right?
Looking forward to your “disclosures”.
Roy Schestowitz said,
November 28, 2007 at 1:49 pm
I wrote at least two blog posts here covering Jason Matusow lies. The man is a snake.
Mind you, I’m fairly certain that Linspire and Xandros got financially compensated for this charade, just like Novell. They are private companies though, so disclosure is not needed, if I understand this correctly (Groklaw). All that anti-FOSS pitch is something they’ll happily accept if the spouse brings home the bacon. In Linspire’s case, you saw the CEO (Carmony) even joining the FUD-spitting act.
The “communism” stereotype from several years ago was part of this. There’s a lot more to be said about misleading, self-serving use of terminology.