02.01.08
More on (and of) Bill Gates’ Donations Against GNU/Linux
The crusade carries on…
Consider this an update to the previous comprehensive post that contained heaps of relevant citations and cross-references. If you have not read it yet, perhaps you should. It’s self-contained in the sense that backing material is available for the claims to be seen as credible.
Glyn Moody was made aware of the issue at hand. It seems as though everyone is finally beginning to wake up. Here is the concluding paragraph from the good article from Glyn:
And so, paradoxically, the more the Bad Bill becomes the Good Bill, the more long-term harm he will do in the world of computing by spreading the Windows habit to those least able to afford it, with knock-on damage to countries’ balance of payments and the rest. Meanwhile, the increasingly-confused free software community will find that the more it tries to attack the Good Bill for doing harm in this way, it, rather than Bill, will be portrayed as bad by the growing global band of Good Bill admirers, for daring to question such manifest and munificent philanthropy.
It is a paradox indeed. It is an interesting situation because the Foundation serves as a moral shield. Just a refresher (in case you have not followed through):
“[Microsoft] are willing to lose money for years and years just to make sure that you don’t make any money, either.”
“They’ll get sort of addicted, and then we’ll somehow figure out how to collect sometime in the next decade.”
“Bill Gates looks at everything as something that should be his. He acts in any way he can to make it his. It can be an idea, market share, or a contract. There is not an ounce of conscientiousness or compassion in him. The notion of fairness means nothing to him. The only thing he understands is leverage.”
–Philippe Kahn
Meanwhile, in Holland, there are more signs of misconduct. Back in December we wrote quite a lot about the company’s new policies that favour open source software. Posts from December which touch on that include:
- Quick Mention: Norway Favours OpenDocument Format in Government (Updated)
- Convicted Monopolist Reportedly Threatens to Sue to Save Its Monopoly (Updated)
- Signs That Your 'Open Standard' is Actually Proprietary
- Microsoft's Assimilate-to-Destroy Tactic (Everything for OOXML)
- Microsoft Sends Paid Army to Fight OpenDocument Format in Europe
Now, mind the following update from Hans Kwint:
[ My personal opinions are between () parentheses. If you like to read a rather unbiased article, skip the bits between brackets and you should be fine - hkwint ]
[…]
Yesterday Webwereld.nl (a Dutch IT-site called “Webworld”) revealed it laid its hands on a ‘non-public’ document which describes a non-public tender for new software for 3k to 21k desktops for the financial department of the Dutch government. It seems the tender favours Microsoft and other closed software over other solutions leaving little chance for open source software. That’s because the tender asks for support for several closed / proprietary platforms like Active Directory to manage logins and firewalls, and (the patent encumbered) .NET. After protest from society and politicians, the Dutch Minister of Finance / Vice Prime Minister, Mr. W. Bos answered the Dutch government will switch to open standards and open source software in 2012, but at the moment this is not a viable option (not viable since they are locked in rather badly it seems).
[…]
BTW: To make things worse, the Dutch Competition Authority NMa is also one of the institutions which are part of the 3k to 21k desk/laptops mentioned, so this tender is also on behalf of them. That’s the very same NMa which refused several consecutive years to research the possible abuse of a dominant market position by Microsoft when it comes to the deks/laptop market although it asked for input from the community and several community groups together with the deputy minister of finance asked them to do research this issue!
Do you see what is happening here? █
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.