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

06.09.09

Important Precedence: IBM Threatens to Sue Microsoft Over Propaganda Site

Posted in Deception, FUD, GNU/Linux, IBM, Microsoft, Windows at 4:18 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

“Microsoft did sponsor the benchmark testing and the NT server was better tuned than the Linux one. Having said that, I must say that I still trust the Windows NT server would have outperformed the Linux one.”

Windows platform manager, Microsoft South Africa
Reference: Outrage at Microsoft’s independent, yet sponsored NT 4.0/Linux research

Summary: Another manufactured ‘benchmark’ from Microsoft gets the wrath of rivals

ABOUT A month ago, 18 companies sued the Swiss government for dealing with Microsoft behind closed doors and signing expensive (probably overpriced) deals by completely excluding competition [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10]. This set an important legal precedence and IBM may be setting another one right now. Sadly, as far as the news is concerned, this story is only covered by a Microsoft spinner from Ziff Davis (they work with Microsoft [1, 2, 3, 4]). The author does not even bother giving voice to anyone from IBM’s side, so it’s virtually ghostwritten by Microsoft employees. The gist of the story is this:

IBM lawyers have contacted Microsoft about the “Who Knew?” site, which claims that customers will save money and get better performance by running WebSphere on Windows Server 2008, instead of on IBM operating systems.

The dispute here must be over deliberate deception. Microsoft has never any qualms about misrepresentation of facts and faking of benchmarks. See quote at the very top. “Get the Facts”, “Linux Personas”, "It's better with Windows", “[Vendor] recommends Vista” and other paid-for messages (advertisements) are disguised as “facts” or endorsements, so this is not acceptable. GNU/Linux is not the only victim .

“Microsoft has never any qualms about misrepresentation of facts and faking of benchmarks.”Let’s take VMware for example. It was a long time ago that Microsoft commissioned the Yankee Group to attack VMware’s business [1, 2]. Yankee consequently pulled the report (VMware did not accept this libelous attack), but Microsoft still hosted its copies of the propaganda it had paid for. Microsoft later proceeded to creating anti-VMware Web site/s. In a similar vain, Microsoft is using ACT to create pro-software patents Web sites in Europe.

When will this end and why does Microsoft still wonder if circles in IT distrust it, to say the very least?

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

4 Comments

  1. Jose_X said,

    June 9, 2009 at 9:31 am

    Gravatar

    Bait and Switch
    *****

    Here is a simple recipe.

    Keep in mind this is a hypothetical exercise.

    We have two pieces of hardware: A (ours) and B (theirs).

    We have the corresponding platform software: for A (our platform sw) and for B (their platform sw).

    We have the product being tested on each (in this case, it’s their server software).

    The first step is to make sure we find an A so that it outperforms their B hardware. This is easy to do unless B is the fastest supercomputer on record. It isn’t, obviously, so we can definitely find an A that beats whatever B is. [Eg, a 4gighz x86 beats a 1gighz x86 from the same vendor.]

    Each platform software performs about the same as the other under ordinary circumstances (or maybe ours is a bit worse). This means we will optimize extra for the occasion. This is easy to do by removing security and other tests. We can keep special task/process related memory objects around preinitialized in anticipation. We can simplify and speed up our scheduling. We can give the special process high priority to the CPU and to the filesystem (bypassing security checks, etc). We put everything else, including the GUI, into slow low priority mode. We turn kernel dynamic lists into static lists. Etc. Really, it is possible to optimize well for the occasion if we know the system will only be used for a specific purpose (to win in some benchmark). Also, the platform software we chose for their side is their generic platform software if possible (eg, their regular platform software not optimized for this benchmark).

    So that is how we easily got the improved performance.

    However, we need to control further context in order to pull off the coop. What about the price, right? After all, a supercomputer outperforms a pocket calculator, but people don’t buy supercomputers to compute tax at the restaurant. The context in this case is that the supercomputer is a LOT MORE expensive. We need to get the price of our “supercomputer” down to a competitive level.

    Here is how we carry out this step. We work with the hardware partner. They develop an exclusive model that they will price near cost. We also give away our platform software at near cost (it’s a “special configuration” remember). Voila! We got our costs down because we and our partner have no intention to actually sell many of these models to actual customers.

    So we kick their buttocks, and customers flock to our product.

    Then…

    The hardware model runs out quickly and a very slightly differently named/numbered hardware model is put in its place at a higher price.

    Also, our platform software is changed back to normal, except that now, it actually doesn’t run their server software all that well in comparison to our own server software that competes with theirs (but which was not tested in the benchmark). It’s extremely easy to change platform software bits around so that one app that was favored is no longer favored and is actually handicapped. It’s also very difficult to catch this if third parties don’t have the source code. Also, for subtlety, this change in the platform can be achieved later on through one or more automatic online updates/patches.

    Of course, the price of the platform software also goes up eventually, if not initially. Maybe its price goes up at the one year renewal or else when they exceed an artificially low user count. Or perhaps the price is raised transparently through the bundled software/service package “deal” the customer actually ended up buying. There are many ways to guide them into these higher priced options.

    Profit.

    Recap: We found better hardware, tweaked only our platform software to game the benchmark, and artificially lowered the price on this model in order to win the benchmark price comparison test. Then we switched this system with a regular one, threw in some more items, and modified the platform software (over time) to disfavor their application that we favored for the benchmark. Through this bait and switch we won the contract, and later by controlling the platform software, we disgraced their product to upsell our product in its place. We had the slightly worse software perhaps yet won and pulled in much more money than what they were advertising as their price tag. A full sleigh of hand.

    This is dirty, absolutely. It’s deceptive. It’s anti-consumer and anti-competitive. It likely leverages monopolies later on in the upsell. It is perfectly within Microsoft’s capabilities to pull off. It would be consistent with Microsoft’s past behavior.

    Keep in mind, however, that this was only a hypothetical exercise.

    Roy Schestowitz Reply:

    Thanks, Jose. That is a very clear explanation. I hope the quote prepended to this post helps in establishing precedence that supports the conviction.

  2. Motoko-chan said,

    June 9, 2009 at 3:25 pm

    Gravatar

    I’m not really surprised. Microsoft has run some really unbalanced “benchmarks” in the past, then hid their test configurations in the fine print of their ads.

    One particular one that comes to my mind was from back in 2005 with Microsoft claiming their SQL Server was faster than Oracle 9i. The Windows machine ran four dual-core Opteron processors (eight cores) at 2.2 gHz and the Oracle machine ran four Itanium 2 processors (four cores) at 1.5 gHz.

    Hm, I wonder why Microsoft’s software was able to be twice as fast?

    Roy Schestowitz Reply:

    Can you find a link about this? Did Oracle take action?

    Oracle did an investigation of ACT.

What Else is New


  1. Patent Troll MPEG-LA Expands From Software Patents to Patents on Life While USPTO is Virtually Headless

    The travesty of software patents, such as patents on multimedia compression and playback, may soon be made worse as patents on genome are being aggregated by a notorious patent aggressor



  2. Lack of Independence of the Boards of Appeal at the European Patent Organisation (EPO) a Fatal Blow for the UPC

    Issues associated with the EPC, namely the lack of separation of powers at the EPO, may mean that the UPC is merely a zombie waiting to accept its permanent death



  3. [DE] STRASBOURG: Vertreter der Lufthansa wegen Korruption angeklagt

    Laut manche internationale Quellen wurde Željko Topić gerade wegen korruptiven und kriminellen Neigungen, mit welchen er von Natur begabt ist und mit welchen er den internationalen Korporationen beim Schutz von zwielichtigen Patenten in der Republik Kroatien geholfen hat, eigentlich belohnt mit der Arbeitsstelle in EPO in München, obwohl er laut seine Kenntnisse und seine Mentalität dorthin nicht gehört. Dafür spricht auch die Angabe, daß er als Person mit Komplexen neulich seinen Wohnsitz in Zagreb geändert hat.



  4. Links 21/7/2017: New Wine, Ubuntu EoL

    Links for the day



  5. The Bizarre World of US Patents and Ongoing Pursuit/Granting of Software Patents in Spite of Section 101

    A survey of recent patents that are either far too trivial, pertain purely to software, promote surveillance, or are pursued purely for vanity (when a court is likely to deem these invalid anyway)



  6. Battistelli's EPO Abuses May Soon Lead to the Death of the UPC and Return of the Old Order ('EPO Glory')

    Having severely damaged the EPO, in a selfish effort to make Europe attractive to patent trolls and bullies, Team Battistelli gradually goes away along with the UPC



  7. Links 20/7/2017: Qt Creator 4.4 Beta, Libgcrypt 1.8.0

    Links for the day



  8. Microsoft is Googlebombing “Linux” This Week in Order to Sell Proprietary Software That Does Not Run on GNU/Linux (and While Blackmailing OEMs Over Linux)

    A reminder of the fact that Microsoft very much hates GNU/Linux, lobbies against it (e.g. in Munich), blackmails companies that distribute it (using software patents) and shares all data stored by its software through back doors (for access by the NSA and other Western spy agencies)



  9. PTAB Persists and AIA Dominates in Spite of Smears and Bullying From Patent Extremists Including Watchtroll

    The America Invents Act (AIA) and the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) maintain and gain prominence in spite of nefarious tactics of attack sites such as Watchtroll



  10. Patent Reform in the United States is Led by the Supreme Court, Not Industrial Lobbies

    Although lobbying by large corporations has served to change the patent landscape in the US, a lot of the big changes become possible because Justices with no vested interests (in patents and patent lawsuits) overturn decisions from the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit



  11. Unified Patent Court (UPC): A Conspiracy of Lies and Silence

    The impasse which makes impossible any progress on the Unified Patent Court (UPC) is simply being ignored -- as if it never happened -- by Team UPC



  12. The British Government May be Pulling Out of the UPC Fantasy, Team UPC in Panic or Denial About It

    The latest news about the UPC -- news that Team UPC conveniently ignores -- is that the British government "withdrew motion on Unified Patent Court with no notice"



  13. Links 19/7/2017: MPV 0.26, Netrunner Rolling 2017.07

    Links for the day



  14. Links 18/7/2017: Sparky 5.0, Krita 3.2 Beta, Mageia 6, Slackware Turns 24

    Links for the day



  15. New Paper Explains Why UPC Ratification Efforts Have Been Just About as Corrupt as EPO Under Battistelli

    Yesterday, Dr. Ingve Björn Stjerna revealed serious Constitutional issues with the campaign for the Unified Patent Court, which resembles an aggressive Battistelli-esque coup, not a democratic process by any stretch of imagination



  16. Anti-Patent Trolls Reform in the US Evolves Nicely and Rogue Judges Get Named, Shamed

    A quick look at today's coverage regarding the battle against patent trolls in the US, as well as the patent microcosm's war on the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB)



  17. Software Patents Lobbying at IAM Strives to Reinforce the Positions of Patent Maximalists

    The latest push for software patents in the software powerhouse which is India and rants about the EPO's admission about overpatenting, only after pressure from the European Commission



  18. UPC Puff Piece in the Scottish Media is Just an Advertisement by Marks & Clerk

    Advertising in the form of an 'article' (complete with self-serving bias and falsehoods) in The Scotsman today, courtesy of Team UPC



  19. From East to West and Even Down South at the Eastern District of Texas Patent Trolls Are Losing Everything

    Patent trolls that are accustomed to friendly judges, typically in the Eastern District of Texas, will be circling down the drain if the trend of "fee award" (to the vindicated defendant) continues



  20. Those Who Endlessly Attacked Michelle Lee Now Attack Supporters of PTAB, Not Just PTAB

    Watchtroll, which combats patent progress by character assassination of instrumental figures, continues in its warpath today



  21. In the Face of Malicious Lobbying, High Tech Inventors Alliance (HTIA) and Computer and Communications Industry Association (CCIA) Protect PTAB

    A new push by the patent microcosm to eliminate PTAB and marginalise Section 101 (which helps suppress software patents) is quickly met with opposition from concerned politicians and groups that represent actual technology companies



  22. Weakening of Patents Assigned to Google and Another New Patent Lawsuit Against Uber

    Project Loon patent canceled, Google's lawsuit against Uber gets 'diluted' by 75%, and Uber faces a new lawsuit in the Eastern District of Texas (capital of patent trolls)



  23. After the 'Fall' of Texas, Patent Trolls Struggle and Some Are on the Retreat

    Things are getting out of hand for patent trolls, which find themselves on the defensive (from challenges to all their patents) and try to escape the cases they started in order to dodge paying fees (to no avail)



  24. Immersion, FitBit, Jawbone, and Creative Chose to be a Pile of Patents Rather Than Real Companies

    FitBit is the latest company to be slapped by Immersion (having already driven Jawbone out of business) and there's news about Creative, which uses old patents to shake down Apple and Android OEMs



  25. Debate About Software Patentability in India Still Dominated by Patent Lawyers Rather Than Software Developers

    The warped debate in English-speaking media gives the impression that India should open the door to software patents even though it's perfectly clear that such patents would harm India's interests



  26. Links 16/7/2017: Mesa 17.1.5, FreeBSD 11.1 RC3

    Links for the day



  27. Serious Factual Errors in UPC Coverage at Science|Business and Lack of Coverage in the General Media

    With much of the British media already paid by the EPO to produce UPC puff pieces, we continue to see poor coverage on the topic (if any at all)



  28. Guest Post: Is Germany's UPC Ratification Postponement Related to Problems at the  EPO?

    A question currently being asked by some people watching UPC developments in Germany: "Is Germany's UPC ratification postponement related to problems at the EPO?"



  29. Amazon is Stockpiling Terrible Patents and Using These for Competitive Advantage

    Demonstrating the real purpose of patent hoards, Amazon too 'pulls a Microsoft' and shields its dominance by an atmosphere of sheer fear



  30. Microsoft-Owned LinkedIn is Ramping Up Software Patents Pursuits, Maybe Lawsuits

    A quick look at some of the patterns and priorities when it comes to Microsoft's patent strategy, which typically involves coercion, extortion and sometimes (when coercion or extortion fail) litigation


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