01.16.08
Stirring Things Up from the Inside (Or the ‘Civil War’ Strategy)
To say that Microsoft tries to turn people against one another is not a bold statement. This was done before. Here is one example:
Andy Tanenbaum - Linus Torvalds
Among various examples that are provided here, you will find that Microsoft tried to incite Andy Tanenbaum, creator of MINIX, against Linus Torvalds, who created the derivative we know as Linux. Microsoft wanted to see a civil wars in the courts. It wanted two seemingly friendly parties to fight and destroy one another.
Linus Torvalds - Richard Stallman
There is no evidence which shows that Microsoft is involved here, but there are clearly some tensions between the FSF and Linus Torvalds. The mainstream media seems to be interested in adding wood to the fire before it dies out. Drama drama drama! As you may have noticed, many newspapers talk loudly about the fact that Torvalds rejects GPLv3. Well, February 2007 called and it wants its news back. Why do journalists keep kicking this dead horse? Unsurprisingly, this includes Peter Galli, whose Microsoft FUD had him lose credibility. How much more GPLv3 FUD will one see?
Linus likes GPLv2 better. He puts emphasis on preference, not dislike. Nothing has changed. Over 1,000 projects have decided to move to GPLv3 so far. Some people still try to create ‘civil wars’ between Linus and Richard Stallman, especially by bringing up the GPLv3 story up again.
Theo de Raadt - Linus Torvalds and Richard Stallman
There are reports we’ve been receiving by E-mail that Richard Stallman is under constant attacks. There is also recent evidence that shows Theo de Raadt refuting or attacking people from the ‘GPL world’. One source, which you may believe or not, says that Microsoft might be using Theo de Raadt. This is just a rumour and speculation though. The former (about Stallman) is factual.
SCO - Linux
What really can one add? It was mentioned so many times before, including here. The financial relationships between SCO and Microsoft seem compelling. SCO was driven into bankruptcy and clouds of uncertainty loomed over Linux for years. Therein lies the value of a dog-eat-dog ‘civil war’. Who would be the person (or party) that benefits the most?
Sun - Linux
There is nothing but speculation and a hint from Jonathan Schwartz, but the possibility of Microsoft offering money for Sun to sue Linux is interesting. See what Jonathan Schwartz had to say.
IBM/Apple/Google
“In the case of Google, there’s no suspicion. It’s a fact. Microsoft openly encourages publishers to sue Google.”See this post which covers Apple and also see this one. There’s suspicion that Microsoft is using proxies to attack IBM and Apple in Europe. In the case of Google, there’s no suspicion. It’s a fact. Microsoft openly encourages publishers to sue Google.
Linspire - Linux
Remember how Linspire’s CEO, Kevin Carmony, actually attacked Linux vendors who didn't join hands with Microsoft? This includes Ubuntu, whose work Kevin’s company is essentially mooching (repackaging and putting a price tag on).
Novell - Linux
Did you know that Novell uses Microsoft FUD to market itself?
Acacia and Intellectual Ventures - Linux
Intellectual Ventures seems to have a little quiet vendetta against Linux and Acacia has already attacked Linux (Red Hat and Novell). Acacia has links with BayStar, as well as former Microsoft employees. The latter actually applies to Intellectual Ventures too, so this is worth keeping an eye on.
Bruce Byfield
Someone has been faking messages from me in order to anger Bruce Byfield, apparently. This is not the first time that pseudonymous people try to incite crowds in this way. It happens every day. Below is an example from yesterday.
Mary Lou Jepsen/OLPCNews
Here is another new example of attempts to make wars. Almost all the posters in this thread are believed to be Microsoft shills taking turns. They have been doing this for many years (going as far back as the OS/2 days). It’s appalling. And here’s another new quote for you:
“…The issue was on the sales side, and the disparagement we were still getting from Intel. Peru was one really extreme example. Oscar Becerra Tresierra, the vice minister of education, said to me that Intel was coming to him almost every day and saying, “Look, we are on the OLPC’s board, and we know that the laptop will never work.””
OpenDocument Foundation
Let’s just leave this one hanging, for one’s wild imagination. Remember Microsoft’s supportive letters from dead people? Or Microsoft’s fake confessions, namely:
Then in 2002, Microsoft’s Web site featured a testimonial called “Confessions of a Mac to PC Convert,” a first-person account by an attractive brunette “freelance writer” about how she had fallen in love with Windows XP.
Unfortunately, a Slashdot member discovered that the identical photo was available for rent from the stock-photo libraries of GettyImages.com. Sure enough: Microsoft had hired a PR firm to write the testimonial. The “switcher” did not actually exist.
Nice job, Microsoft. █
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.
Sam Hiser said,
January 16, 2008 at 9:55 am
Roy-
Sorry, that last section is a non-sequitur. What were you going to say about the Foundation that’s meaningful?
Roy Schestowitz said,
January 16, 2008 at 10:11 am
Sam,
It’s not me, but some people have suspected that there are interests involved which are beyond what one might expect. I very much doubt this having been in close touch with you, Marbux and Gary. I still fail to explain some of your actions and I’m not alone in this. Frankly, I also worry that you are trying to push an agenda onto journalists again, especially at this very crucial time. I’ve seen that once before and I’m concerned. There’s no place for “theatre” here. These are hugely important decisions which even the European Commission has recently recognised and is due to acknowledge.
Have you had a chance to review these comments from Google’s Rasmussen? I’ll quote a fragment:
Standing out from the crowd is great, Sam, but this isn’t the time for a stage act. Given that it’s either OOXML of ODF (CDF is out of the questions and I’ve verified/checked again to dismiss Marbux’s claims), so which side are you going to stick to?
I truly hope you guys are not about to pull another stunt.