Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Intellectual Property Law Blogs -> Groklaw
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense
Find a Local Lawyer
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402
Intellectual Property Law
: GroklawWhy Microsoft Suddenly Wanted to Be More Interoperable - Comes v. MS Exh. 7068 Tells Us
By Pamela Jones et al.
Exhibit 7068 [PDF] in the Comes v. Microsoft antitrust litigation exhibits list tells us what happened with Intel. It is a 4-page email thread with Bill Gates and others at Microsoft all about trying to get Intel to switch from Linux/Unix to Windows for their development environment. Gates calls it a jihad. What stood in the way, according to the email report on what Intel was telling them: "Linux apparently meets over 90% of their current EDA needs." Intel said Linux interoperability was better, they could port code more easily, EDA ISVs "got burnt with poor experiences with Windows NT" and so were "wary of taking steps in this direction".
Remember when Microsoft told us it was interested in greater interoperability with Linux because their customers were demanding it? That part is true, as I'll show you. But the purpose of developing greater interoperability at the request of Intel, according to this exhibit, was so that Microsoft could get Intel to switch its development environment from Linux to Windows. Intel's Paul Otellini had reportedly asked his people to figure out how to do that. But in 1999, Microsoft and Intel had cooperatively done a comparison test project, testing Windows and Linux against each other, and Linux performed better. Way better. And so after identifying 100 or so Microsoft work items, Intel decided to go with Linux. The email thread is about whether Intel could now switch back.
1999. Think about what that means in the SCO v. IBM context, where SCO alleges that it wasn't until IBM got involved in Linux -- years after 1999 -- that Linux suddenly worked well in the enterprise. Seems they are, at best, mistaken.
The email thread begins with a report on a telephone conference with some Intel and Windows folks, to see what could be done to get Intel off of Linux and back on Windows.
By the way, are two monopolies allowed to work together to figure out how to gang up on one of the monopoly's competitors? Just asking.
Trust me, though, you won't find this exhibit on any Microsoft Get the Facts-style websites.
Full post as published by Groklaw on January 24, 2010 (boomark / email).
Microsoft
Settles with Arizona for $4.4 Million
Mississippi Antitrust
Costs Microsoft $100 Million
Microsoft Corp.
allegedly failed to provide adequate access and service to Xbox Live and its subscribers.
Windows Software
Microsoft fined $1.3 billion for failing to comply with the European Union's antitrust order.
Microsoft Spam
Richter pays $7 million settlement in deceptive email lawsuit.
Internet Gambling
Microsoft, Google, and Yahoo pay $31.5 million settlement for advertising and promoting illegal gambling sites online.

Interoperable EHRs: elusive grail or within our grasp
Microsoft tells EU court 899 million fine too steep
A Tale of Two EC Cases: IBM and Microsoft
Microsoft BizSpark Program for Startups







