This news may be a bit old, but it's something that's been on my mind for a while. According to Steve Ballmer, [1]Linux "uses our intellectual property” and Microsoft wanted to “get the appropriate economic return for our shareholders from our innovation."
In this blogger's opinion Ballmer's statement is ridiculous. The things that Microsoft has patents on are such general things, why should the fact that Microsoft is financially stable enough to purchase patents hurt the free of cost style of Linux?
Although the lawsuit never came to fruition, the empty threats alone were enough to shake the Linux community. Microsoft expected every Linux distro to pay them for patent infringement, and did eventually sign deals with Novell and Red Hat, two very prominent Linux companies. This deal was supposed to be helpful to both parties, but two years later and we here on the Linux side of things have yet to see a single bonus from these deals.
Apparently, we were supposed to receive better support for Windows' codecs and programs, similar to how Mac OSX works now, but none of that ever came to pass. Now that it's been so long, where is our side of the bargain Microsoft? I wouldn't use it personally, but I'd love to see better support for Microsoft Office and the Windows API in Linux.
This may be an empty rant, since it's such old news, but it's something that came to my mind recently and has been bugging me ever since. If someone has any answers please leave a comment, because I've heard nothing lately. 2008's been a quiet year for this ordeal.
[1] http://www.macworld.com/article/53966/2006/11/ballmer.html
About Me
Subscribe To
Posts