Bonum Certa Men Certa

Comes Antitrust: Microsoft's Attack Plan on GNU/Linux and Today's Lessons

Summary: Beyond the Halloween Documents (Comes vs Microsoft exhibits)

TODAY's Comes vs Microsoft post is a particularly long one, so we attempted to shorten it so as to keep the signal high and leave the details aside for separate inspection by those who are curious and have more time to spare.

“The authenticity of them was confirmed when the Comes vs Microsoft case produced exhibits for the broad public to access.”Many regulars are probably aware of the Halloween Documents. Eric Raymond (ESR) has a complete mirror of the text with commentary, so we will not replicate the documents, which have already been out there for years. The authenticity of them was confirmed when the Comes vs Microsoft case produced exhibits for the broad public to access.

Interestingly enough, Bill Gates said about these reports (Halloween documents): “The two documents in here from Vinod are the ones I want the board to see.” He was referring to Halloween Documents I and II. Here is Halloween Document I as text and as PDF. Here is Halloween Document II as text and as PDF.

Background



The documents which Gates referred to are already in ESR's Web site (as plain text), so there is no point repeating the process of posting them publicly. However, to highlight some particular bits from them, here are some portions from the above. Microsoft explains that:

OSS is a concern to Microsoft for several reasons:

1. OSS projects have achieved “commercial quality” 2. OSS projects have become large-scale & complex 3. OSS has a unique development process with unique strengths/weakness


Microsoft later adds that "to understand how to compete against OSS, we must target a process rather than a company."

Then come the issues of APIs, e.g.:

Linux and other OSS advocates are making a progressively more credible argument that OSS software is at least as robust – if not more – than commercial alternatives. [...] [E]vangelization of API’s in a closed source model basically defaults to trust, OSS API evangelization lets the developer make up his own mind.


The strategy in general:

Beating Linux In addition to the attacking the general weakness of OSS projects (e.g. Integrative / Architectual costs), some specific attacks on Linux are:

* Beat UNIX * All the standard product issues for NT vs. Sun apply to Linux * Fold extended functionality into commodity protocols / services and create new protocols * Linux’s homebase is currently commodity network and server infrastructure. By folding extended functionality (e.g. Storage+ in file systems, DAV/POD for networking) into today’s commodity services, we raise the bar & change the rules of the game.


That was about 10 years ago. As we noted before, Bill Gates once wrote: "What we are trying to do is use our server control to do new protocols and lock out Sun and Oracle specifically.”

How can Microsoft capture some of the rabid developer mindshare being focused on OSS products?

Some initial ideas include:

* Provide more extensibility – The Linux “enthusiast developer” loves writing to / understanding undocumented API’s and internals. Documenting / publishing some internal API’s as “unsupported” may be a means of generating external innovations that leverage our system investments.


It says "Documenting / publishing some internal API’s as “unsupported”..."

Does that sound familiar? As we shall show later, Microsoft also speaks frankly about "undocumentation".

Here is embrace & extend in action:

OSS projects have been able to gain a foothold in many server applications because of the wide utility of highly commoditized, simple protocols. By extending these protocols and developing new protocols, we can deny OSS projects entry into the market.


From Halloween Document II we pull the following (thanks to Jason):

The Linux community is very willing to copy features from other OS’s if it will serve their needs. Consequently, there is the very real long term threat that as MS expends the development dollars to create a bevy of new features in NT, Linux will simply cherry pick the best features and incorporate them into their codebase. The effect of patents and copyright in combatting Linux remains to be investigated.


Later came the SCO lawsuit, the Novell deal, and patent racketeering which carries on to this date.

New Material



Today's main exhibit ties the above documents together and we believe that there is no copy of it anywhere else (as text), so Wallclimber kindly contributed her time to process the text, which we then analysed. Wallclimber says that this "strategy" document outlines exactly what they've done to Novell. "I especially got a kick out of the "fatal flaws"," she added. Here is the original exhibit (PX08175, 1999) [PDF] and several points of interest that are extracted from the full text, which can be found at the bottom.

This short document is titled "Our Linux Strategy" and it was authored by Vinod Valloppillil.

Watch number 1 and number 2 in the list, then think about the loadable module [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7], which added Microsoft hooks to Linux (hypercalls).

1. Embrace Linux: MS APIs / Linux kernel -- release an MS version of Linux and/or release key MSFT platform technologies on Linux (e.g. parts of Win32, app server, etc.)

Pros: Ride the wave & try to evangelize Win32 Cons: Dramatically evangelizes Linux & may risk MSFT IP due to GPL license issues Fatal Flaw: - Impossible to make this revenue neutral with Windows biz. - Doesn’t protect the "crown jewel" IP from being targeted at a later date

2. Embrace Linux: Linux APIs / MS Kernel -- try to get Linux API’s on Windows -- get more hardcore about POSIX subsystem on NT to capture Linux app base

Pros: Capture some of the Linux dev mindshare by making it easy to bring Linux apps to NT Cons: Hurts Win32 evangelization Fatal Flaw: - There are no Linux apps that we covet.


Also think about Mono, Moonlight, and OOXML.

Prior to that, Valloppillil states:

This document discusses both our strategy and our plans for competing with Linux. To understand the strategy it is important to remember the following: - Linux isn’t most importantly a product/feature; it’s a philosophy change - Linux has no new specific features to co-opt - Unlike the NC: the NC touted TCO benefits, and thus we introduced ZAK/ZAW - Unlike the Internet: the Internet was loaded with technology changes, and thus we invested in browser technologies and reexamined all our existing products

The core strategic thrust of Linux is NOT an attack against some product/feature weakness of Microsoft. It’s an attack at the base of the commercial software industry - Intellectual Property.

Previous threats to Microsoft (the NC, Java, etc.) have been about replacing Microsoft’s IP with another company’s IP that claimed some new benefit (e.g. TCO). What differentiates Linux is that OSS attempts to extricate Intellectual Property all together.


Learn from what Microsoft did to NetPC (NC) and to Java. Watch what else Microsoft put forth as an option:

Cons: ISVs getting hooked on undocumented API’s, support costs, etc.


So, "undocumented API’s" are an option, eh? Microsoft admits their existence.

Watch what Microsoft thought about Wine back when it was a lot less mature and capable:

- Microsoft is an IP company. Like the rest of the software industry, >90% of our IP valuation stems from Trade Secrecy of the source code. Open Source is mutually exclusive with Trade Secrecy. This plan would instantly make the various Win32 clones (e.g. http//www winehq.com) an order of magnitude more capable.


More compelling stuff from Microsoft:

2. Innovating, Creating New IP

(Re-)recognize that we are an IP company and that in our networked world, functionality delivered via protocols is steadily replacing functionality which was once delivered via APIs Thus, innovation must occur both internal to our products, but also between computers.

Windows clients must always be able to communicate with Linux servers (and vice-versa). However, there MUST be additional value created when a Windows machine is touching another Windows machine. NOT doing this is akin to giving away the Win32 APIs. Every group defining protocols needs to remember this.


Also:

We must innovate and keep our great advancements to ourselves. The fine balance between protecting/financing our innovations and interoperability will get more difficult overtime But, it is relatively easy today.


Notice the following:

4. Compete with Linux Head-On BED marketing is currently making the transition towards engaging Linux as a tier-1 competitor in the server & client markets. There are still some decisions to be made here (and headcounts to fill) to ensure that on a tactical basis, NT out markets Linux Some of the core deliverables include white papers, benchmarks, etc. More peripheral questions / issues include reclaiming retail shelf-space from Linux, etc We need engagement throughout the company (e g, retail) on this. Finally, getting the word out on NT’s architectural advantages over Linux is an imperative.


Then it says:

Open Source development is the greatest cloning machine of all time. Consequently, we must recognize that "Trade Secrecy" of source code will provide increasingly minimal protection over time and that aggressive patent procurement is our only investment defense. Additionally, strong patent procurement is a key enabler which allows us to publish more of our source code to leverage evangelization benefits (the patent application process is, in a manner of speaking, a form of source publication)

Initiatives (NOT discussed further in this paper) are underway to understand the options in this space.


“The following are all underway,” eh? What would that be? Those lawsuits Jim Allchin spoke about [1, 2]?

“The two [Halloween] documents in here from Vinod are the ones I want the board to see.”
      --Bill Gates
It is worth remembering that all these documents are spread with Bill Gates' oversight and endorsement, just like the AstroTurfing which he loves. At the time, when these documents leaked, Microsoft tried to portray the AstroTurf as an act it had nothing to do with; a lead participant, James Plamondon, insistingly denied this, saying that Bill Gates was a supporter of the tactics all along. His colleague Marshall Goldberg confirmed this in an internal presentation.

Likewise, when it comes to the Halloween Documents, Microsoft tried to dismiss this as “an engineer’s individual assessment of the market at one point in time.” The exhibits clearly show Bill Gates distributing this material quite enthusiastically to chief people at Microsoft. It means that Microsoft simply lied to save face.

At the end of the document we find out what's already "underway" at Microsoft:

The following are all underway:

1. Ramp-up / staff Linux competitive marketing efforts. 2. Ramp-up source licensing initiatives. DRG/MSDN is the owner for the umbrella but all component teams must begin evaluating what codebases would benefit the platform if they were evangelized via less restrictive licensing. 3. More proactively & aggressive secure patent rights to MSFT innovations that will be significant to the OSS fight. Development teams must shift mindsets from source code secrecy towards patents as the primary means of securing our key innovations. 4 [on-going] Create new IP in base scenarios - file sharing, management, etc.


"Ramp-up / staff Linux competitive marketing efforts" sounds like potential reference to more AstroTurfing, which is a reality. The remainder has a lot to do with patents, which we now know are used against GNU/Linux. The document as a whole is worth reading, assuming one has the patience. It's properly formatted below.




Appendix: Comes vs. Microsoft - exhibit PX08175, as text










Microsoft Confidential

Our Linux Strategy VinodV 5/19/99

Microsoft Confidential; ۩ 1999, All Rights Reserved Do Not Forward without Approval from Author.

Introduction This document discusses both our strategy and our plans for competing with Linux. To understand the strategy it is important to remember the following: - Linux isn’t most importantly a product/feature; it’s a philosophy change - Linux has no new specific features to co-opt - Unlike the NC: the NC touted TCO benefits, and thus we introduced ZAK/ZAW - Unlike the Internet: the Internet was loaded with technology changes, and thus we invested in browser technologies and reexamined all our existing products

The core strategic thrust of Linux is NOT an attack against some product/feature weakness of Microsoft. It’s an attack at the base of the commercial software industry - Intellectual Property.

Previous threats to Microsoft (the NC, Java, etc.) have been about replacing Microsoft’s IP with another company’s IP that claimed some new benefit (e.g. TCO). What differentiates Linux is that OSS attempts to extricate Intellectual Property all together.

Since many people have proposed how to deal with Linux, we thought it might be helpful as a thought exercise to quickly examine some of the alternative strategies we could consider. For each we include the "fatal flaws" that make them untenable.

1. Embrace Linux: MS APIs / Linux kernel -- release an MS version of Linux and/or release key MSFT platform technologies on Linux (e.g. parts of Win32, app server, etc.)

Pros: Ride the wave & try to evangelize Win32 Cons: Dramatically evangelizes Linux & may risk MSFT IP due to GPL license issues Fatal Flaw: - Impossible to make this revenue neutral with Windows biz. - Doesn’t protect the "crown jewel" IP from being targeted at a later date

2. Embrace Linux: Linux APIs / MS Kernel -- try to get Linux API’s on Windows -- get more hardcore about POSIX subsystem on NT to capture Linux app base

Pros: Capture some of the Linux dev mindshare by making it easy to bring Linux apps to NT Cons: Hurts Win32 evangelization Fatal Flaw: - There are no Linux apps that we covet.

3. Embrace Open Source: Publish NT Source -- release NT source code under a license similar to Sun’s community source license

Pros: Try to capture Linux’s evangelization benefits by publishing NT source Cons: ISVs getting hooked on undocumented API’s, support costs, etc. Fatal Flaw: - Microsoft is an IP company. Like the rest of the software industry, >90% of our IP valuation stems from Trade Secrecy of the source code. Open Source is mutually exclusive with Trade Secrecy. This plan would instantly make the various Win32 clones (e.g. http//www winehq.com) an order of magnitude more capable.

4. Lower the price of Windows -- release older / stripped versions of the OS for at lower price

Pros: Try to capture people who use Linux due to price sensitivity

Page 1

Plaintiff’s Exhibit 8175 Comes V. Microsoft

MS-CC-MDL 000000202974 HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL




Microsoft Confidential

Cons: Building new versions of windows. Long-term support headaches Cannibalization of the "real" windows? Fatal Flaw: - Assumes that price is the primary motivator for Linux usage. This has not been borne out in reality.

What are the core strategies that we are going to pursue?

1. Fix our Sins

Linux’s most immediate contribution is highlighting our sins in some key market segments. There are already (large) investments in the company spun up to deal with our most pressing concerns such as reliability; remote admin; etc so we won’t spend further time describing them here. It is critical that we make progress in these areas

Currently, Linux gains horsepower due to VASTLY exaggerated negative claims about our abilities and corresponding VASTLY under reported positive claims about our innovative work. We must reverse the "conventional wisdom" that UNIX is technically superior to NT which is the foundation for Linux marketing. In most ways, NT is superior & the technical message needs to get out.

2. Innovating, Creating New IP

(Re-)recognize that we are an IP company and that in our networked world, functionality delivered via protocols is steadily replacing functionality which was once delivered via APIs Thus, innovation must occur both internal to our products, but also between computers.

Windows clients must always be able to communicate with Linux servers (and vice-versa). However, there MUST be additional value created when a Windows machine is touching another Windows machine. NOT doing this is akin to giving away the Win32 APIs. Every group defining protocols needs to remember this. Some core initiatives that are excellent demonstrations of this are:

Management - Deep, rich WMI instrumentation is an area where Windows and Win32 apps must excel. In addition to IP boundaries, Linux’s development methodology makes this difficult for Linux to provide leadership in breadth & uniformity of coverage/implementation.

Storage -- Rich, structured, remotable, queriable storage dramatically raises the bar versus today’s basic file system functionality. The benefits to client application vendors & server vendors are numerous and well detailed in other presentations.

These areas demonstrate functionality that IT managers -- once they’ve tasted it -- will (hopefully) find compelling enough to mandate across as many systems within their computing universes as possible. Letting our protocols become commoditized is a recipe for failure. We must innovate and keep our great advancements to ourselves. The fine balance between protecting/financing our innovations and interoperability will get more difficult overtime But, it is relatively easy today.

Outside of protocols we need advancements throughout the system. Advances in file formats (e.g., the disk structure), technology such as security, etc. are areas that are critical for us to innovate. We need to accelerate patenting every invention

3. Form Factor Proliferation This is a well-discussed area. Obviously PC’s will not be the exclusive center of computing in the near future and this addition to the OS requirements list provides the opening for low innovation competitors such as Linux in. We need to spread our technology everywhere And where we don’t have our OS present, we need to ensure the protocols are not IP latent and in fact open for us to use.

Page 2

MS-CC-MDL 000000202975 HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL




Microsoft Confidential

4. Compete with Linux Head-On BED marketing is currently making the transition towards engaging Linux as a tier-1 competitor in the server & client markets. There are still some decisions to be made here (and headcounts to fill) to ensure that on a tactical basis, NT out markets Linux Some of the core deliverables include white papers, benchmarks, etc. More peripheral questions / issues include reclaiming retail shelf-space from Linux, etc We need engagement throughout the company (e g, retail) on this. Finally, getting the word out on NT’s architectural advantages over Linux is an imperative.

5. Getting Credit for the Openness and Availability of our Sources One of the key lessons learned from the Linux OS is the power of the Open Source model with respect to creating passionate, technically savvy development communities around a body of code. Reclaiming the hobbyist developer / "scratch an itch" developer communities is paramount for us (they were the original "long hairs" who introduced the PC to corporate America). While we may never be able to fully detract from Linux’s energy in this space, it is very important for us to focus our TREMENDOUS developer relations assets into this new "channel." JimAll presented a plan at the 3yr review that involved a 2-pronged attack on this channel:

a. Depth Licensing -- Ramping up full, formal source code licenses to ISVs/IHVs/Corps etc. by at least a factor of 10 vs. today’s efforts.

b. Breadth Licensing -- Reorganizing & creating new widely licensed, derivable, redistributable source code bases hosted on web sites targeting specific Win32 developer niche’s (e.g., ResKit level functionality).

6. Securing our Current & Future IP Once again, the core of the Linux phenomena -- and the #1 reason it tries to claim the "glow of inevitability" -- is it’s aversion to Intellectual Property (IP). Obviously, in terms of economic effects, IP is on par with motherhood & apple pie in its role in the world economy.

The belief that the "Open Source" pie will eventually gobble up ingredients from all the other pies is more dangerous to us & the software industry than the current Linux product

Open Source development is the greatest cloning machine of all time. Consequently, we must recognize that "Trade Secrecy" of source code will provide increasingly minimal protection over time and that aggressive patent procurement is our only investment defense. Additionally, strong patent procurement is a key enabler which allows us to publish more of our source code to leverage evangelization benefits (the patent application process is, in a manner of speaking, a form of source publication)

Initiatives (NOT discussed further in this paper) are underway to understand the options in this space.

Immediate Next Steps:

The following are all underway:

1. Ramp-up / staff Linux competitive marketing efforts. 2. Ramp-up source licensing initiatives. DRG/MSDN is the owner for the umbrella but all component teams must begin evaluating what codebases would benefit the platform if they were evangelized via less restrictive licensing. 3. More proactively & aggressive secure patent rights to MSFT innovations that will be significant to the OSS fight. Development teams must shift mindsets from source code secrecy towards patents as the primary means of securing our key innovations. 4 [on-going] Create new IP in base scenarios - file sharing, management, etc.

Please direct any questions / discussion to VinodV

Page 3

MS-CC-MDL 000000202976 HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL



Credit: wallclimber

Comments

Recent Techrights' Posts

Sloppy Reporting About Slop, or How The Register MS Lowers Its Standards
Maybe the management isn't even aware of this
IBM's Strategy: Cull 'Expensive' Workers, Replace Them With Cheaper Ones
So far we saw not even one rebuttal or challenge to the claim of Red Hat layoffs scheduled for tomorrow
The Goal of Coopetition Assumes You're Friends
it will never work with Microsoft
Seductive Mirage or Allure of Complex, Proprietary Coffee Machines (or Similar White Elephants)
Software is a lot like those things
 
Links 10/08/2025: Webrings, “AI Sunglasses” and “AI Eyeglasses”, US Administration Intensifies Attacks on Science and Research
Links for the day
Sometimes Newer is Worse
We generally need to reject this dumb notion that "old" means bad
The Code Used to Make Techrights Fits on a Seventh of a Floppy Disk (or 100KB When Compressed)
For the sake of comparison I've just downloaded the latest version of WordPress. The ZIP file is 27.2MB in size, or ~27,200KB.
What They Tell Young Programmers
Coding in 2025
Simpler is Better When Simple is Enough
Over-complicating things to "sell" new versions is so 1990s
Links 10/08/2025: From Social Control Media to Prison, New Examples of Windows TCO
Links for the day
If You Attack Somebody Too Much You Legitimise and Strengthen That Somebody
at the end those attacks add up to a "martyr" status
The Man Who Helped Microsoft Kill Linux is Trying to Delay Our Lawsuits Against Him
By conservative estimates, and based on court documents submitted by them, they're prepared to spend over a million dollars on lawyers, fighting against me and my wife
Gemini Links 10/08/2025: Gen Con 2025 and Framework Laptop
Links for the day
Over at Tux Machines...
GNU/Linux news for the past day
IRC Proceedings: Saturday, August 09, 2025
IRC logs for Saturday, August 09, 2025
The Register MS (Microsoft) or The Register AI (Slop)?
What a slopfest!
Is Red Hat About to Give the Boot to GNOME People Who Helped Microsoft 'Secure' (Monopolised) Boot?
It was always a dumb idea to play along with Microsoft's hardware mischief
Sales of Windows on PCs (Windows Licences) Go Down
Microsoft has a big problem in its hands
The Hype That Microsoft and The Register MS (Among Others) Promote Helps Stage DDoS Attacks on Free Software Sites
Microsoft is, to put it bluntly, pure evil
Links 09/08/2025: Putin Allegedly to Visit Alaska (Which He Deems Part of Russia), Mike Tyson Sued for Copyright Infringement
Links for the day
Slopwatch: Linux Journal, LinuxSecurity, and Google News With Its Slopfarms of Choice
SEO spam, made with LLMs
Follow the Money: The Register MS Gets Paid to Promote "Hey Hi" Ponzi Scheme/Hype, Some Fake 'Articles' Might Be Composed by LLMs Already
paid to promote slop
Gemini Links 09/08/2025: Rethinking Aliases and Posting on Gopher vs. the Web
Links for the day
Links 09/08/2025: Apollo 13 Astronaut Jim Lovell Dies, Slop Future Bleak
Links for the day
After Shutting Down Studios, Divisions, Applications (e.g. Skype) Microsoft is Also Shutting Down 'Apps'
Cuts all around as layoffs persist this month, Microsoft tries to get many people to resign, and debt skyrockets
Most of Geminispace Can Probably Fit on a CD-ROM or a DVD (the Textual Part)
If one excludes very large capsules and ones that contain non-textual contenty
Eventually UEFI 'Secure Boot' Will be Dropped (Users Will Demand Its Removal and Boycott Its Pushers)
we expect OEMs will just listen to users
The Register MS: We Know Slop is a Bubble and Mindless Hype, But We Get Paid to Participate
Call out the culprits
Hate Mail From Anonymous Cowards
if this persists, we'll need to escalate
There Are Probably Over a Million Pages in Geminispace
there are two many limitations which merit a mention when it comes to assessing magnitude
Informal Open Letter to the Lawyer of the Microsofters (on Who's Funding the SLAPPs Against Techrights)
Whenever I ask about the funding they try to change the subject and act all aggressive
Microsoft Lunduke is Just Provoking People for Provocation's Sake
Be forewarned and remember where this guy came from: Microsoft
Besieged by Plagiarists Who Play With LLMs and Image Fusions
We really need to exercise or use our collective voice to oppose Serial Sloppers
Over at Tux Machines...
GNU/Linux news for the past day
IRC Proceedings: Friday, August 08, 2025
IRC logs for Friday, August 08, 2025
Gemini Links 09/08/2025: Water Painting and Political Violence
Links for the day
Slopwatch: LLM Sloppers in Google News, LinuxSecurity, and More
they also perpetuate some falsehoods as the LLMs lack any comprehension
Links 08/08/2025: China King of Plastics and US Dictator Plans to Meet Russian Dictator
Links for the day
Gemini Links 08/08/2025: Cracking a Family Member's Password and Overdose of Slop
Links for the day
Red Hat's Latest Talent Hunt, Day Ahead of Mass Layoffs, is Yet Another Microsoft Executive
Red Hat will apparently commence mass layoffs early this coming Monday
Links 08/08/2025: "Quit Facebook" and High Cost of Microsoft/Windows Shown Again ("BlackSuit")
Links for the day
Good Morning, Readers of The Register MS
Things The Register MS could (but does not) cover this morning
Why Gemini Protocol Has a Bright Future
Maybe Gemini Protocol's promise becomes more appealing as the Web turns to slop and bloat
It's a Lot Easier to Participate in the Unethical System Than to Oppose Injustices in It
Going after powerful and high-budget interests is never easy
Microsofters Filed Two SLAPPs Against Us, Now They Cannot Keep Up With Judges' Orders
For over 4 months already their facilitator in London has been under investigation by British authorities because of what's being done to my wife and I
Censorship Regarding Red Hat Layoffs
Talk about this? They'd rather not.
Struggling to Cut Costs, Microsoft Continues Shutting Down and Cancelling Stuff This Month
There are August layoffs at Microsoft
Over at Tux Machines...
GNU/Linux news for the past day
IRC Proceedings: Thursday, August 07, 2025
IRC logs for Thursday, August 07, 2025
Fake 'Linux' Articles, Written by Bots to Take Traffic Away From Real Articles
LLM slop helps replace information with junk or misinformation
When Google's Googlebombing of "Gemini" Was Not Enough; They Now Also Googlebomb "Gemini Space"?
We know GAFAM not only worries about Gemini Protocol but also attempts to 'infiltrate' Geminispace
The Register MS Promotes Microsoft Slop, Assumes All Readers Use Microsoft Windows
Microsoft really dominates the site
Gemini Links 08/08/2025: KDE/Qt Development and What's Missing From "Retro"
Links for the day