EditorsAbout the SiteComes vs. MicrosoftUsing This Web SiteSite ArchivesCredibility IndexOOXMLOpenDocumentPatentsNovellNews DigestSite NewsRSS

02.11.09

Microsoft: Intel Ain’t Done Until Windows Can Run?

Posted in Dell, GNU/Linux, Hardware, HP, Microsoft, Novell, Servers, UNIX, Windows at 4:46 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Ken and Dennis (UNIX)

THIS is almost the last part in a series which has thus far included the posts:

  1. Bill Gates: “Where Are We on This Jihad?” (Against Linux at Intel)
  2. Microsoft on Intel’s Anti-Linux: “Please Keep Confidential. This is a Nightmare”
  3. Bill Gates on Linux@Intel: “This Huge Driver Group Scares Me.”
  4. Steve Ballmer: “We cannot let intel do chip design on Linux ever”
  5. Bill Gates et al Lean on Other Companies to Derail GNU/Linux as “Main Stream Operating System”

This time we look at Exhibit px06797 (2000) [PDF]. Therein, Bill Gates writes to top executives and other characters with copies to people like Steve Ballmer, Joachim Kempin, Paul Maritz, and Eric Rudder. Bill Neukom and Carl Stork, whom we saw in earlier parts of this series, are digitally present as well.

Gates writes regarding “Intel call — Paul Ottelini” and he consistently misspells the man’s surname (should be written “Otellini” in other exhibits too). The original message is marked “Privileged”, but a few responses shed light on it.

Microsoft’s Carl Stork replies to this entire group — Gates included — when he says:

> I don’t have the feeling that Intel is spending 80% of their Itanium energy on Windows. Neither on the technical/development side nor on the marketing side. They seem to be investing in the Monterey Unix project (this is the SCO/HP Unix), in Linux, in Novell. I don’t know what they are doing with ISVs directly, but in marketing I think they are being neutral/even. We can get more data if you want.

In addition, Dell seems to be blaming Microsoft software — not just Intel — for a considerable launch delay, but the main issue is perceptually low demand for Itanium.

Gates responds by expressing frustration with Intel, but more interestingly, he seems to be trying to alter a hardware release just in order for Windows to support Intel’s product at the same time as UNIX. In other words, Microsoft may be holding back a release that benefits GNU/Linux and UNIX just so that Microsoft is given enough time to catch up or match up.

Michael [Dell] said that Intel was pushing him to have a workstation out in October because Microsoft wants to have a vehicle for Windows which we aren’t getting from the other OEMs and since we don’t want HP-UX or others to ship first Michael should put his product out with us in October.

[...]

I am very frustrated about our mapping our what Intel is doing against us and coming up with a way to get intel to be more balanced. They are hurting themselves.

The full exhibit lies below, as plain text.


Appendix: Comes vs. Microsoft – exhibit px06797, as text


**********
From: Bill Gates
Sent: Monday, July 17, 2000 9:34 AM
To: Carl Stork; Mike Porter; Brian Valentine
Cc: Joachim Kempin; Paul Maritz; Eric Rudder; Richard Fade; Joe Williams
Subject: Itanium- DELL

Your data matches what I heard from Michael.

Michael said that Intel was pushing him to have a workstation out in October because Microsoft wants to have a vehicle for Windows which we aren’t getting from the other OEMs and since we don’t want HP-UX or others to ship first Michael should put his product out with us in October.

His view is that Itanium at this stage is low volume and his people are saying the earliest they should ship is January.

We should get some additional data from HP and others on this.

It sounds like having a developer release in October is the most we need to do.

We don’t want to be outmaneuvered by any form of UNIX in the PR related to Itanium. In fact our message should be that in the past Windows was super popular even though UNIX was higher end — now we are matching UNIX with high end capabilities as well as bringing our other strengths to the customer.

I am very frustrated about our mapping our what Intel is doing against us and coming up with a way to get intel to be more balanced. They are hurting themselves.

—–Original Message—–
From: Carl Stork

Sent: Wednesday, July 12, 2000 9:55 AM
To: Bill Gates; Neil Calvin (LCA); Mike Porter; Robert (Robbie) Bach; Brian Valentine; Bill Veghte; Bob McBreen
Cc: Kate Sako (LCA); Dan Crouse (LCA); Steve Ballmer; Joachim Kempin; Paul Maritz; Eric Rudder; Bill Neukom (LCA)
Subject: FW: Intel call – Paul Ottelini

With respect to point 3 – Itanium – Ottelini’s data is not the same as what we are seeing/hearing.

> The quality of the Itanium CPU itself and associated systems does not seem ready to support a commercial product launch. There are a lot of workarounds with big performance impacts, and because of all the workarounds significant parts of the chip are not being exercised (dispersal mode is disabled). With the latest stepping that we got we still cannot do this testing based on data from Jeff Havens yesterday. The engineers we work with at Intel seem to agree that they will need to do another stepping before production launch. This makes an October release date unrealistic, a release next year much more realistic. Perhaps this data has not yet been communicated to Otellini and other management.

> OEMs such as Dell and Compaq have told us that they are NOT eager to launch Itanium products this Fall. They do not see a big market opportunity, they think the hardware (and in fairness the software also) are not yet mature – meaning they will bear support costs, they don’t necessarily want to the distraction of the launch during their biggest selling season, they all think they will lose money (engineering costs not covered by low volumes.) They will offer Itanium products as soon as Intel gives the all-clear because they do not want to be viewed as behind the competition – most are doing little work, just rebadging the Intel design.

It is interesting that Dell tells Intel that MS is the reason – they may be looking for an easy excuse to give Intel. When we talked to Dell we were honest about the state of the software, but they did not make any request at all that we accelerate software availability – they told us that a March launch would be ideal from their point of view and that is what they would like us to target.

> With respect to Win64 availability, we should be able to make a developer release in the October timeframe. I

1

Plaintiff’s Exhibit
6797
Comes V. Microsoft

MS–CC-MDL 000000396192
HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL


don’t know exactly what you would call this, but it could be some a beta, it could be a developer release, it could an SDK, etc. I don’t think there is any chance you can call it an end user production release, there is no way that we can be ready for that. However we certainly could let OEMs ship the beta/developer release/SDK – we have a precedent last year where we let some OEMs ship a Windows 2000 beta.

> I don’t have the feeling that Intel is spending 80% of their Itanium energy on Windows. Neither on the technical/development side nor on the marketing side. They seem to be investing in the Monterey Unix project (this is the SCO/HP Unix), in Linux, in Novell. I don’t know what they are doing with ISVs directly, but in marketing I think they are being neutral/even. We can get more data if you want.

Bottom line, I don’t think you need to push Dell in any direction today, though it would be interesting to hear what Michael knows about it (he may not be informed on it as I don’t have the feeling it is a high priority at Dell.)

—–Original Message—–
From: Bill Gates
Sent: Tuesday, July 11, 2000 2:09 PM

To: Neil Calvin (LCA); Mike Porter; Robert (Robbie) Bach; Brian Valentine; Bill Veghte; Bob McBreen
Cc: Kate Sako (LCA); Dan Crouse (LCA); Steve Ballmer; Joachim Kempin; Paul Maritz; Eric Rudder; Bill Neukom (LCA); Carl Stork
Subject: Intel call — Paul Ottelini

Privileged

2

MS-CC-MDL 000000396193
HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL


Privileged

3

MS-CC-MDL 000000396194
HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL
**********

Thanks to Jose_X for help with this exhibit

Share this post: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Reddit
  • co.mments
  • DZone
  • email
  • Google Bookmarks
  • LinkedIn
  • NewsVine
  • Print
  • Technorati
  • TwitThis
  • Facebook

If you liked this post, consider subscribing to the RSS feed or join us now at the IRC channels.

Pages that cross-reference this one

What Else is New


  1. Links 23/4/2018: Second RC of Linux 4.17 and First RC of Mesa 18.1

    Links for the day



  2. The Good Work of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) and the Latest Attempts to Undermine It

    A week's roundup of news about PTAB, which is eliminating many bad (wrongly-granted) patents and is therefore becoming "enemy number one" to those who got accustomed to blackmailing real (productive) firms with their questionable patents



  3. District Courts' Patent Cases, Including the Eastern District of Texas (EDTX/TXED), in a Nutshell

    A roundup of patent cases in 'low courts' of the United States, where patents are being reasoned about or objected to while patent law firms make a lot of money



  4. The Federal Circuit's (CAFC) Decisions Are Being Twisted by Patent Propaganda Sites Which Merely Cherry-Pick Cases With Outcomes That Suit Them

    The Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) continues to reject the vast majority of software patents, citing Section 101 in many such cases, but the likes of Managing IP, Patently-O, IAM and Watchtroll only selectively cover such cases (instead they’re ‘pulling a Berkheimer’ or some similar name-dropping)



  5. Patents Roundup: Metaswitch, GENBAND, Susman, Cisco, Konami, High 5 Games, HTC, and Nintendo

    A look at existing legal actions, the application of 35 U.S.C. § 101, and questionable patents that are being pursued on software (algorithms or "software infrastructure")



  6. In Maxon v Funai the High 'Patent Court' (CAFC) Reaffirms Disdain for Software Patents, Which Are Nowadays Harder to Get and Then Defend

    With the wealth of decisions from the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) wherein software patents get discarded (Funai being the latest example), the public needs to ask itself whether patent law firms are honest when they make claims about resurgence of software patents by 'pulling a Berkheimer' or coming up with terms like “Berkheimer Effect”



  7. Today's European Patent Office Works for Patent Extremists and for Team UPC Rather Than for Europe or for Innovation

    The International Association for the Protection of Intellectual Property (AIPPI) and other patent maximalists who have nothing to do with Europe, helped by a malicious and rather clueless politician called Benoît Battistelli, are turning the EPO into a patent-printing machine rather than an examination office as envisioned by the EPC (founders) and member states



  8. The EPO is Dying and Those Who Have Killed It Are Becoming Very Rich in the Process

    Following the footsteps of Ron Hovsepian at Novell, Battistelli at the EPO (along with Team Battistelli) may mean the end of the EPO as we know it (or the end altogether); one manager and a cabal of confidants make themselves obscenely rich by basically sacrificing the very organisation they were entrusted to serve



  9. Short: Just Keep Repeating the Lie (“Quality”) Until People Might Believe It

    Battistelli’s patent-printing bureau (EPO without quality control) keeps lying about the quality of patents by repeating the word “quality” a lot of times, including no less than twice in the summary alone



  10. Shelston IP Keeps Pressuring IP Australia to Allow Software Patents and Harm Software Development

    Shelston IP wants exactly the opposite of what's good for Australia; it just wants what's good for itself, yet it habitually pretends to speak for a productive industry (nothing could be further from the truth)



  11. Is Andy Ramer's Departure the End of Cantor Fitzgerald's Patent Trolls-Feeding Operations and Ambitions?

    The managing director of the 'IP' group at Cantor Fitzgerald is leaving, but it does not yet mean that patent trolls will be starved/deprived access to patents



  12. EPO Hoards Billions of Euros (Taken From the Public), Decreases Quality to Get More Money, Reduces Payments to Staff

    The EPO continues to collect money from everyone, distributes bogus/dubious patents that usher patent trolls into Europe (to cost European businesses billions in the long run), and staff of the EPO faces more cuts while EPO management swims in cash and perks



  13. Short: Calling Battistelli's Town (Where He Works) “Force for Innovation” to Justify the Funneling of EPO Funds to It

    How the EPO‘s management ‘explained’ (or sought to rationalise) to staff its opaque decision to send a multi-million, one-day ceremony to Battistelli’s own theatre only weeks before he leaves



  14. Short: EPO Bribes the Media and Then Brags About the Paid-for Outcome to Staff

    The EPO‘s systematic corruption of the media at the expense of EPO stakeholders — not to mention hiring of lawyers to bully media which exposes EPO corruption — in the EPO’s own words (amended by us)



  15. Short: EPO's “Working Party for Quality” is to Quality What the “Democratic People's Republic of Korea” is to Democracy

    To maintain the perception (illusion) that the EPO still cares about patent quality — and in order to disseminate this lie to EPO staff — a puff piece with the above heading/photograph was distributed to thousands of examiners in glossy paper form



  16. Short: This Spring's Message From the EPO's President (Corrected)

    A corrected preface from the Liar in Chief, the EPO's notoriously crooked and dishonest President



  17. Short: Highly Misleading and Unscientific Graphics From the EPO for an Illusion of Growth

    A look at the brainwash that EPO management is distributing to staff and what's wrong with it



  18. Short: EPO Explains to Examiners Why They Should and Apparently Can Grant Software Patents (in Spite of EPC)

    Whether it calls it "CII" or "ICT" or "Industry 4.0" or "4IR", the EPO's management continues to grant software patents and attempts to justify this to itself (and to staff)



  19. Links 21/4/2018: Linux 4.9.95, FFmpeg 4.0, OpenBSD Foundation 2018 Fundraising Campaign

    Links for the day



  20. As USPTO Director, Andrei Iancu Gives Three Months for Public Comments on 35 U.S.C. § 101 (Software Patenting Impacted)

    Weeks after starting his job as head of the US patent office, to our regret but not to our surprise, Iancu asks whether to limit examiners' ability to reject abstract patent applications citing 35 U.S.C. § 101 (relates to Alice and Mayo)



  21. In Keith Raniere v Microsoft Both Sides Are Evil But for Different Reasons

    Billing for patent lawyers reveals an abusive strategy from Microsoft, which responded to abusive patent litigation (something which Microsoft too has done for well over a decade)



  22. Links 20/4/2018: Atom 1.26, MySQL 8.0

    Links for the day



  23. Links 19/4/2018: Mesa 17.3.9 and 18.0.1, Trisquel 8.0 LTS Flidas, Elections for openSUSE Board

    Links for the day



  24. The Patent Microcosm, Patent Trolls and Their Pressure Groups Incite a USPTO Director Against the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) and Section 101/Alice

    As one might expect, the patent extremists continue their witch-hunt and constant manipulation of USPTO officials, whom they hope to compel to become patent extremists themselves (otherwise those officials are defamed, typically until they're fired or decide to resign)



  25. Microsoft's Lobbying for FRAND Pays Off as Microsoft-Connected Patent Troll Conversant (Formerly MOSAID) Goes After Android OEMs in Europe

    The FRAND (or SEP) lobby seems to have caused a lot of monopolistic patent lawsuits; this mostly affects Linux-powered platforms such as Android, Tizen and webOS and there are new legal actions from Microsoft-connected patent trolls



  26. To Understand Why People Say That Lawyers are Liars Look No Further Than Misleading Promotion of Software Patents

    Some of the latest misleading claims from the patent microcosm, which is only interested in lots and lots of patents (its bread and butter is monopolies after all) irrespective of their merit, quality, and desirability



  27. When News About the EPO is Dominated by Sponsored 'Reports' and Press Releases Because Publishers Are Afraid of (or Bribed by) the EPO

    The lack of curiosity and genuine journalism in Europe may mean that serious abuses (if not corruption) will go unreported



  28. The Boards of Appeal at the European Patent Organisation (EPO) Complain That They Are Understaffed, Not Just Lacking the Independence They Depend on

    The Boards of Appeal have released a report and once again they openly complain that they're unable to do their job properly, i.e. patent quality cannot be assured



  29. Links 18/4/2018: New Fedora 27 ISOs, Nextcloud Wins German Government Contract

    Links for the day



  30. Guest Post: Responding to Your Recent Posting “The European Patent Office Will Never Hold Its Destroyers Accountable”

    In France, where Battistelli does not enjoy diplomatic immunity, he can be held accountable like his "padrone" recently was


CoPilotCo

RSS 64x64RSS Feed: subscribe to the RSS feed for regular updates

Home iconSite Wiki: You can improve this site by helping the extension of the site's content

Home iconSite Home: Background about the site and some key features in the front page

Chat iconIRC Channel: Come and chat with us in real time

CoPilotCo

Recent Posts