03.23.10
Microsoft Proxy Attack on GNU/Linux Continues With TurboHercules
Summary: Microsoft partners continue to attack GNU/Linux (on IBM mainframes) for its dominance that poses a threat to Windows Server
LAST WEEK we showed that Microsoft was coordinating a proxy attack on IBM’s mainframes, which run GNU/Linux (mostly SUSE but also Red Hat). The campaign is ironically called “OpenMainframe.org” as though Windows is open and non-profit. This proxy attack is not something new and we have already gathered evidence about it in posts such as:
- Microsoft ‘Pulls a SCO’ in India (Against GNU/Linux)
- Neon Challenges IBM’s GNU/Linux Mainframes, EU Challenges IE Bundling, and Microsoft Helps Push Mono and Moonlight Into GNU/Linux
- Groklaw Suspects Microsoft May be Behind Neon’s Attack on GNU/Linux in Mainframes
- Has Microsoft Just Invested in Another Lawsuit Against IBM?
- Microsoft Pays Professor to Write a Paper Against IBM’s GNU/Linux-Powered Mainframes
- Microsoft Innovation is Lawsuits by Proxy
- T3 Receives Millions from “Unnamed Entity” After Microsoft Investment, to Attack GNU/Linux on Mainframes
- What People Say About Microsoft’s Alleged Anti-Linux Lawsuit (via T3)
- The Microsoft Lobby and Heavy Investments Put IBM in Antitrust Probe
- T3 is Partly Owned by Microsoft Now
Microsoft is just SCOing IBM like it's SCOing Google and even admits doing this.
According to the following new press release from France, some rather obscure company called TurboHercules pulls an antitrust motion against IBM. Watch TurboHercules’ connections:
IBM said TurboHercules was a member of organisations funded by rivals such as Microsoft Corp (MSFT.O) “to attack the mainframe”, which is IBM’s main business.
TurboHercules, a privately-held company set up in 2009, is a member of a non-profit trade group called the Computer and Communications Industry Association (CCIA), which counts Microsoft and Oracle Corp (ORCL.O) as members, but not IBM.
But wait. Microsoft paid millions of dollars to CCIA. We explained this before (see the posts above). Here it is again:
“Having yet another complaint in Europe — by an open-source company, no less — points to a systemic pattern of behavior by IBM directed at anyone who threatens its mainframe monopoly,” said Erika Mann, CCIA’s executive vice president and head of its European office in Brussels.
Who paid your agency, Erika? Remember that company from Redmond?
Either way, a lot of press coverage omitted these crucial details [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8], which are so simple to conveniently ignore. Mainframes continue to replace Wintel servers (Windows on x86) in some places, so Microsoft needs to do to IBM what it openly admitted doing to Google. It requires tremendous discipline to be unable to see it. █
“On the same day that CA blasted SCO, Open Source evangelist Eric Raymond revealed a leaked email from SCO’s strategic consultant Mike Anderer to their management. The email details how, surprise surprise, Microsoft has arranged virtually all of SCO’s financing, hiding behind intermediaries like Baystar Capital.”
Content is available under CC-BY-SA
uberVU - social comments said,
March 23, 2010 at 11:41 pm
Social comments and analytics for this post…
This post was mentioned on Identica by schestowitz: #Microsoft Proxy Attack on #GNU #Linux Continues With #TurboHercules http://boycottnovell.com/2010/03/23/turbohercules-and-microsoft/…
verofakto said,
March 24, 2010 at 1:23 am
Herr Doktor, you corporate shill, you.
You do know of course of all the instances IBM has been sued because of their anti-competitive practices in the mainframe market, right? I mean you’ve heard of PSI and Neon Enterprises and Hitachi? What about Honeywell? You know IBM has been innovating through patent litigation since the mid-50s? Ever heard of Sperry Rand? Greyhound Computer? Control Data? Well, all that happened way before you were born.
Do you know IBM is a charter member of the Trusted Computing Group?
Do you know that no other tech company in the history of tech has absorbed more firms and thus “innovated” the hell out of the enterprise space? Ever heard of Gluecode for example? Bet not.
Did you know that after IBM bought Informix they proceeded to blanket every last one of their customers with some pretty serious FUD against Oracle? Oh my god, those sales pitches. You would have loved them. I imagine they’re even worse than what Microsoft drags out when they’re trying to avoid losing a contract against Linux.
I’ve noticed you constantly attack Microsoft for outsourcing. Have you looked into what IBM does in that space? Have you ever heard about “IBM Global Services”? Do you remember a few years ago when IBM slashed 14,000 jobs from the US and EU and promptly sent them over to India and China? And then a few quarters later reported record profits? Naaaah, probably not. But OMG MICROSOFT OUTSOURCES KILL KILL. Have you ever heard about eh L2 visa? Look it up. You’ll love it too.
And patents? Don’t get me started on that now. Do you know how many patents IBM holds that affect Linux? ODF? Have you ever looked them up? And all the other patents they hold… for example, I remember they hold one on the implementation of the trim() function. I kid you not. That’s a lot of “imaginary property”, as you like to call it.
So aside from bemoaning Microsoft’s alleged attacks on Google (because you know, Microsoft “hates” Google), now you’re apparently shilling for IBM as well? That’s kind of gutter, don’t you think? Even as a measure of desperation (not that it has anything to do with this, just sayin’ you know, but I remember you being best buddies with Rob Weir on Facebook? tsk tsk)
First the slide into racist overtones with the attacks on Miguel de Icaza and now this? Why are you so desperate?
IBMFanboyMSHater said,
March 31, 2010 at 11:07 pm
verofakto:
Kindly refer to http://catb.org/jargon/html/I/IBM.html
Note especially the statements:
“IBM: /I�B�M/
Once upon a time, the computer company most hackers loved to hate…
From hackerdom’s beginnings in the mid-1960s to the early 1990s, IBM was regarded with active loathing”
And Finally:
“We didn’t know how good we had it back then…
“…in the 1990s, Microsoft became more noxious and omnipresent than IBM had ever been.”
Coming from the Jargon File, I think that is worth something, something quite a lot more than your words. I honestly think you are a troll, but I have no choice but to feed you, you poor fool!
I just registered to post this comment. I’m off!
Agent_Smith said,
April 1, 2010 at 10:46 am
Ohhhhh… IBM is no better than Micro$oft. In fact, what M$ does today is rooted in what IBM used to do long time ago.
Ahhh, another thing to point here: Of course IBM will always be cheaper in the Mainframe. Put IBM hardware with a free(gratis) distro, such as CentOS, and you have unbeatable price. And there’s no anti thrust lawsuit that will ever change this…
But, yes, IBM and M$ are fruits from the same tree. And both deserve to rot.
IBMFanboyMSHater said,
April 1, 2010 at 11:01 am
The two posters above:
Kindly refer to http://catb.org/jargon/html/I/IBM.html
Note especially the words:
“IBM: /I�B�M/
Once upon a time, the computer company most hackers loved to hate…
“From hackerdom’s beginnings in the mid-1960s to the early 1990s, IBM was regarded with active loathing…
“What galled hackers about most IBM machines above the PC level wasn’t so much that they were underpowered and overpriced (though that counted against them), but that the designs were incredibly archaic, crufty, and elephantine … and you couldn’t fix them — source code was locked up tight, and programming tools were expensive, hard to find, and bletcherous to use once you had found them….”
And also pay especial attention to:
“We didn’t know how good we had it back then…
“…in the 1990s, Microsoft became more noxious and omnipresent than IBM had ever been.”
Coming from the Jargon File, I believe this carries some weight, perhaps a trifle more than your ramblings.
Dr. Roy Schestowitz said,
April 1, 2010 at 12:30 pm
@Agent_Smith
Yes, but IBM is less hostile towards FS.
Agent_Smith said,
April 1, 2010 at 1:36 pm
Well, kind of a symbiosis here. Without Linux, IBM would have no relevance today. So, IBM must protect Linux to remain alive. In the end, I hope it will be better for the whole Linux ecosystem.
Dr. Roy Schestowitz Reply:
April 1st, 2010 at 1:53 pm
It’s IBM’s support that gave Linux a lot more momentum.
Dr. Roy Schestowitz said,
April 2, 2010 at 10:00 am
That’s exactly the Web page I had in mind when I wrote this.
By the way, sorry it took so long to moderate comments that got mis-flagged.
Dr. Roy Schestowitz Reply:
April 2nd, 2010 at 10:01 am
Oops. This was in reply to “IBMFanboyMSHater “.