THANKS to generous help from our reader wallclimber, we finally have a text version of valuable antitrust exhibits. She has more coming. Today's exclusive leak is Exhibit px08604 (2002) [PDF], which shows Microsoft discussing the threat from GNU/Linux on the desktop and addressing this threat using FUD. This whole exhibit may as well be known as "Microsoft's Linux FUD presentation."
"I hope to see continued work on interoperability and integration between the various Linux desktop components Mozilla, OpenOffice, GNOME, and KDE Unifying the MIME subsystem is one task that Red Hat can't take on alone, but we are actively working with community developers to find a solution..." -Red Hat Corp Developer
* WindowsXP has 35+% lower TCO than Linux (using Gartner model. In study of 2 Finnish city governments)
From: Pat Fox Sent: Friday, November 08, 2002 4:16 PM To: Bill Veghte; Brian Valentine; Peter Houston; Michele Freed Cc: Rogers Weed Subject: I a little concerned - Research Board desktop content
Importance: High
Per the meeting yesterday, I've worked up a couple of slides for the desktop that are fairly hard hitting. (attached).
My concern: on the desktop side, we've been operating at about DefCon 2 (to use a politically incorrect, national defense analogy) because we don't think customers or partners and the overall business situation yet calls for a more public or proactive comparison on the desktop. I think the RB could implicitly push us up to DefCon 4 and I want to make sure we've considered the implications.
My assumption: * the RB will use the slides in their analysis * the content will become public at some point * we will need to publicize the studies that underly the content - the eTesting Labs studies, etc. Much of the content is available today for field/reactive use only. We'll need the web sites, etc to organize and explain this in a way that isn't alienating to customers and partners. * we need to explain why we're being so public and proactive at this time.
My concern is that we're not ready to do the above yet, both operationally (ie the web sites, the PR plans), nor have we said the customer environment is ready for this.
Options: 1. refute my assumptions (please!) 2. continue POR and get ready to react as quickly as possible - we have a month before the actual RB visits and when this would likely become public 3. water down the desktop content and risk that the RB won't fully consider all the issues.
Net is, we have more to lose on the desktop and I want to make sure we've thought through the issues.
Thx, Pat
Plaintiff's Exhibit 8604 Comes vs Microsoft
HS-CC-Sun 00000:1.220094 HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL
(Contents of "RB InfoWorker Desktop PF.ppt" attachment - as text)
Information Worker Desktop Comparing Windows XP and Office XP to Linux and StarOffice
Windows XP and Office XP Most Productive, Integrated Desktop * Tight integration, comprehensively tested * Best user experience, best productivity - Office XP users had higher task completion rate vs StarOffice users - 93% vs 80% - Office XP users completed tasks in 1/3 time - MS enables a consistent UI across work PCs, laptops, home PCs, PDAs, Tablet PCs, and SmartPhones * Most integrated and comprehensive platform - Enables powerful and productive user experiences - Ex: Tablet PC w/ pen input, Ink data types, zero config wireless, range of hw offerings and configurations - Ex: Office XP Smart Tags enable rich analysis and integration with backend/LOB applications - Ex: Windows XP unicode support enables easier international collaboration - Ex: Windows Media 9 series and Media Center PCs Superior online learning, digital media * Windows and Office enable greater end user productivity, which returns greater business value to the organization
Linux and StarOffice Lower Productivity Components * Independently developed components * Inconsistent user interface across system components
"I hope to see continued work on interoperability and integration between the various Linux desktop components Mozilla, OpenOffice, GNOME, and KDE Unifying the MIME subsystem is one task that Red Hat can't take on alone, but we are actively working with community developers to find a solution..." -Red Hat Corp Developer
* Users take longer to complete tasks * Users are less successful in completing common tasks * Requires heavy customization & manual integration * Required significant end user retraining * Requires duplicate or significantly more costly helpdesk infrastructure * Lower overall business value
Windows XP and Office XP offer richer, more integrated experiences http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/tabletpc/default.asp http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/mediacenter/evaluation/tours/default.asp http://www.microsoft.com/mobile/pocketpc/default.asp http://www.microsoft.com/mobile/smartphone/default.asp
Interview: Havoc Pennington Systems Developer, Desktop/UI Tech Lead at RedHat http://www.redhat.com/advise/ask.html "Q: What advances in Linux desktop technology can we expect to see in future releases? A: Printing and multimedia are big areas that we want to tackle. And we want to be looking at improving the security and manageability of Linux desktops -- meeting the needs of administrators who are looking after a few hundred (or a few thousand) client workstations.
I hope to see continued work on interoperability and integration between the various Linux desktop components. Mozilla, OpenOffice, GNOME, and KDE Unifying the MIME subsystem is one task that Red Hat can't take on alone, but we are actively working with community developers to find a solution. There should be one place to configure the applications and plugins for a given file type."
Microsoft Confidential 1
MS-CC-Sun 000001220095 HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL
10/2/2003
Information Worker Desktop (cont'd) Comparing Windows XP and Office XP to Linux and StarOffice
Windows XP and Office XP Lower Total Cost, Better Overall Value * WinXP IT deployment time is 57% less than Linux (eTesting Labs study) * WinXP IT deployment success rate was 95% vs 65% for Linux (eTesting Labs study) * Documant sharing was much more successful with OfficeXP vs StarOffice with <1% of documents having errors with Office and >35% having errors with StarOffice (eTesting Labs study) * WindowsXP has 35+% lower TCO than Linux (using Gartner model. In study of 2 Finnish city governments) *Windows XP and Office XP have well-documented features for people with disabilities - Voluntary Product Accessibility Templates available on www.microsoft.com/enable/, meets US Govt Section 508 standards - Many applications and Assistive Technology addons available for people with disabilities
* Windows and Office result in lower deployment and operational costs and consequently lower TCO
Linux and StarOffice Potentially lower acquisition cost, but higher total costs * Higher Total Cost of Ownership * Higher deployment costs * Higher ongoing management costs *Poor document conversion capabilities * Significantly weaker capabilities for people with disabilities
* Linux and StarOffice result in higher Total Cost of Ownership
Better support for people with disabilities Meet US Govt Section 508 -- VPATs (Voluntary Product Accessibility Template) for MS Prods: http://www.microsoft.com/usa/government/section508.asp www.rhat.com - NO VPATs available
Industry Analyst Discussion of Linux/StarOffice on the desktop: - Licensing cost< 1/3 of total cost when implementing new productivity software - There are significant unforeseen doc conversion and training costs when moving to StarOffice from Office - Significant costs due to IT labor and lost productivity
Ecosystem benefits around Windows and Office are significant. Assume they will be discussed in other section of presentation.
Microsoft Confidential 2
MS-CC-Sun 000001220096 HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL