The Halloween Document Microsoft has confirmed that this internal document, which was leaked to Eric Raymond, is authentic. It is the Microsoft strategy to deal with Linux and other free software platforms, referred to as "Open Source Software" or OSS by the MS author. Eric Raymond has placed an annotated version of the document on the web at: http://www.tuxedo.org/~esr/halloween.html

From: Lenny Foner To: tami@gnu.org Cc: foner@media.mit.edu Subject: Microsoft admits VinodV memo is authentic Date: Mon, 2 Nov 1998 18:20:34 -0500 www.slashdot.org's lead story is currently: Microsoft admits VinodV memo is authentic ESR writes "The Wall Street Journal called me less than an hour ago to quiz me about the Halloween Document. I gave them the sound bites they were looking for. In the process I found out that they've already talked with Microsoft -- and Microsoft has officially admitted that the memorandum is genuine! This fact should become public knowledge no later than tomorrow evening (Nov 3) when the WSJ story runs. As you peruse your WSJ tomorrow, the distant noise you hear will be me -- laughing my butt off at the people who leapt to accuse me of having been hoaxed, or even of perpetrating the hoax myself." For those that can't wait, news.com is also confirming it. Thanks to David Fred for this link. ------- end -------

Thanks for posting the updated url!

Yes, thanks, TeknoSlut!

The how convenient department: Microsoft needs competitor and voila! Microsoft Responds to Internal Memo Regarding the Open Source Model and Linux Posted: November 5, 1998 On Monday, Nov. 2, Open Source obtained and posted an internal Microsoft memo on the open source model and the Linux operating system. Since that time, part 2 of the document has also been posted. These memos, written by engineer Vinod Valloppillil, were originally distributed within Microsoft on Aug. 11, 1998, and were intended to stimulate internal discussion on the open source model and the operating system industry. The practice of researching and assessing competitors is standard procedure at the company; one which our shareholders and customers would expect. It is important to note that these memos represent an engineer's individual assessment of the market at one point in time. These memos are not an official statement by Microsoft on the issue of open source software or the Linux model. The existence of these documents demonstrates the vigorous competition that exists in the operating system industry. Microsoft does see Linux as one of many competitors in the lower-performance end of the general purpose server industry and the small to medium-size ISP industry. Microsoft also recognizes and has identified several challenges inherent to this particular business model (many which are outlined in part one and part 2 of these memos.) Furthermore, Microsoft has an obligation to its customers, business partners and stakeholders to monitor competition, one part of which is encouraging active interest by knowledgeable engineers and active discussion of the issues. Linux and the Open Software Source Model - A Question and Answer Session With Ed Muth Enterprise Marketing Group Manager, Microsoft Corp. Catalyst: Internal Microsoft memos in the press regarding the open source model and Linux in particular. Q: Are the Halloween documents posted on Open Source genuine? A: Although Microsoft has not attempted to perform a line-for-line review of the posted documents, they do appear to be confidential Microsoft documents with annotation, sent internally to select staff and management on Aug. 11, 1998. Q: What was the purpose of creating these documents? A: It is standard practice at Microsoft to research, write about, and assess all competitors, from both a business model and technical perspective. We would be doing a disservice to our shareholders and customers if we were not monitoring and assessing market conditions and competitive offerings. Accordingly, such assessments of technical, business, and competitive issues are a routine practice across all industries and types of companies. Honesty and creative ideas in such documents are critical to effective communication and the free flow of ideas. It is always unfortunate when a company�s confidentiality is compromised, as it was in this case by the unauthorized or unintentional release of this document. Q: Is this an official Microsoft response to the open source model and Linux in particular? A: No. These documents do not represent an official Microsoft position or road map. They are technical analyses written by a staff engineer that represent the thoughts of one individual at one point in time. They were intended to encourage an informed internal discussion of issues by marketing and engineering middle managers. Q: Who is Vinod Valloppillil and what is his role at Microsoft? A: Vinod is a staff engineer who, from time to time, is chartered with the responsibility of monitoring and analyzing market conditions and competitive offerings. His analyses are intended to spur internal discussion about industry trends and market dynamics. He is not an official company spokesperson. Q: How did these documents get leaked to the press? A: At this point we cannot confirm how the documents were distributed outside the company or who is responsible for the action. Q: Does Microsoft consider Linux a competitor? A: Yes. Linux is a competitor on the client and the server. My analysis is that Linux is a material competitor in the lower-performance end of the general purpose server industry and the small to medium-sized ISP industry. It is important to recognize that Linux, beyond competing with Microsoft, is also, and perhaps even more frequently, an alternative or competitor to other versions of UNIX. The operating system industry is characterized today by vigorous competition. This competition, of which Linux is only a part, exists at the technology level as well as in terms of business models, applications, channels and alliances. Q: The first document talked about extending standard protocols as a way to "deny OSS projects entry into the market." What does this mean? A: To better serve customers, Microsoft needs to innovate above standard protocols. By innovating above the base protocol, we are able to deliver advanced functionality to users. An example of this is adding transactional support for DTC over HTTP. This would be a value-add and would in no way break the standard or undermine the concept of standards, of which Microsoft is a significant supporter. Yet it would allow us to solve a class of problems in value chain integration for our Web-based customers that are not solved by any public standard today. Microsoft recognizes that customers are not served by implementations that are different without adding value; we therefore support standards as the foundation on which further innovation can be based. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Last Updated: Friday, November 06, 1998 � 1998 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved. Terms of Use.

From the Wall Street Journal... Activist Groups Want State To Abandon Microsoft Fare The geeks of Texas are launching yet another charge at Bill Gates. A handful of activist groups are calling on state officials to abandon software sold by Microsoft Corp. and other commercial vendors in favor of "open source" products -- software that can be installed and copied without charge, and repaired and modified by the user. The loose coalition includes the Dallas-based Open Records Project, which publishes public information on the Internet; Geek Garrison, a Dallas-based group whose members seek to use their technological prowess to solve social problems; and the Texas office of Public Citizen, a consumer-advocacy organization. Open-source software, argues the coalition, would slash costs for state agencies. And, adds Russell Fish of the Open Records Project, "it's a great way to torpedo the Microsoft monopoly." The group's goal is a legislative resolution encouraging agencies to consider open-source software. Well-known examples of open-source software include Netscape Communications Corp.'s Navigator Web browser and the Linux operating system. Most state agencies buy their own computer products, and no rules require any particular software brand or prohibit open-source products. But state computer officials caution that switching to new software could create training and other transition costs that wipe out any price savings. For some members of the coalition, the push for open-source software is only part of a broader assault on the Redmond, Wash.-based giant. Tom "Smitty'' Smith, director of Public Citizen's Austin-based Texas office, hopes that the effort will prod the state to join an existing multistate antitrust lawsuit against the company. "This is a small example of what the domination by Microsoft of the computer industry is costing taxpayers and consumers,'' Mr. Smith says. Asks a Microsoft spokesman, "Are they looking to hurt Microsoft or looking to help the state? It appears it's a way to get at Microsoft and not to help the state.'' --Michael Totty

Infotech Microsoft announces corporate strategy shift toward security PTI/AP Washington, January 17: Microsoft Chairman Bill Gates has announced to employees a major strategy shift across all its products, including its flagship Windows software, to emphasise security and privacy over new capabilities. In e-mail to employees obtained Wednesday by the Associated Press, Gates referred to the new philosophy as "trustworthy computing" and called it the "highest priority" to ensure computer users continue to venture across an increasingly Internet-connected world. Gates said the new emphasis was "more important than any other part of our work. If we don't do this, people simply won't be willing�or able�to take advantage of all the other great work we do." "When we face a choice between adding features and resolving security issues, we need to choose security," Gates continued. "Our products should emphasise security right out of the box." The dramatic change comes after the discovery of major security problems in Microsoft products, such as a flaw in the latest versions of Windows that allow hackers to seize control of a user's computer. Another problem allowed the Code Red viruses to cripple hundreds of thousands of computers running Microsoft products.

Microsoft: No licence, no Windows updates All Windows users will have to validate their copy of Windows as genuine before downloading any software or drivers from the Microsoft download site. From the middle of the year Microsoft will roll out a mandatory Windows validation process. The process is being piloted currently for Czech, Chinese and Norwegian versions of Windows. The decision to enforce validation will help Microsoft fight against counterfeit software and will also help IT departments and consumers to check that they have bought valid products. Invalid software licences has been a problem for users in the past, particularly when they have tried to obtain discounts on Microsoft volume licensing and ended up buying counterfeits rather than legitimate licence. This is what happened in 2002 to Clackmannanshire Council in Scotland. When the council needed to extend its MS Select desktop licences a supplier offered extra licences more cheaply than were available under the Select agreement. The deal turned sour when an audit, done in co-operation with Microsoft, revealed that the new licences were counterfeit. Through the validation process, users will be required to enter authentication details on the Microsoft website. According to Microsoft, users will be alerted if an invalidate licence is found. Unless authentication of the software is validated, the user will be unable to download software updates such as the latest releases of device driver software. For the time being, security patches will not be affected. Alex Hilton, anti-piracy manager at Microsoft, said, "If users do not succeed in validating the software, they will still have access to security patched." from http://www.computerweekly.com/articles/article.asp?liArticleID=136387&liArticleTypeID=1&liCategoryID=1&liChannelID=1&liFlavourID=1&sSearch=&nPage=1