-- Leo's gemini proxy
-- Connecting to gemini.techrights.org:1965...
-- Connected
-- Sending request
-- Meta line: 20 text/gemini;lang=en-GB
Posted in Antitrust, Dell, GNU/Linux, Microsoft, Windows at 5:32 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
IT’S NOT UNCOMMON to state the obvious, but concrete proof can make all the difference in the world, especially in court. As we’ve already shown, Microsoft’s strategy has less to do with self improvement & development but more to do with targeted sabotage against attempts of competitors to… well, just to compete. Much like a totalitarian regime, Microsoft spots areas of friction and addresses them before they become uncontrollable; If not by force, then by brainwash [1, 2, 3, 4, 5] (control the minds to avoid direct and out-of-hand confrontations).
“Much like a totalitarian regime, Microsoft spots areas of friction and addresses them before they become uncontrollable…”Last week we gave evidence of this strategy occurring at Wal-Mart and this week we share antitrust material which shows how Microsoft reacted to GNU/Linux at Dell .
Exhibit px09280 (2002) [PDF] from Comes vs Microsoft contains correspondence between Microsoft seniors Bill Veghte and Paul Flessner (the guy who said “we should whack [Dell over GNU/Linux dealings], we should make sure they understand our value”).
They swap opinions and plans with Windows executives like Brian Valentine and Jim Allchin [1, 2, 3] in the background, in addition to anti-Linux characters like Orlando Ayala [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6], even some of today’s chiefs like Craig Mundie and Bob Muglia.
The subject of the messages is “Goldman Sachs Linux Panel.” The Goldman Sachs Group is close to Microsoft and also a shareholder, it is backer of PSI and EDGI taker too. Here are some bits of interest. The text, in full, is appended below.
Bill Veghte writes:
> It’s not $50 of margin for Dell. It will get passed directly back to the customer and they are stuck with the same margin they have today. That is what happened on the desktop any time we made pricing changes broadly with OEMs and that is what will happen on the server (it is already happening on Linux pricing). It is just a fact.
Bill Veghte also writes:
> Let’s start by articulating Dell’s perspective relative to the comments Russ made… Linux is Unix on x86. Dell sees it as the cheapest way to convert Unix LOB servers to being Dell customers. Dell sees no partnership with us on databases and partnership with Oracle as a way of pushing further into the enterprise. Oracle sees partnership with Dell and Linux as a great way at going after us at the lower end of the database market. Dell sees Linux as great negotiating leverage in their relationship with us.[...]Now, lets interject what I am asking into the picture…. We invest big, big $$ in Dell. We will continue to invest big, big $$ in Dell. I am asking that we do this investment with our eyes wide open. I do not want to invest $$ in Dell to fund their Red Hat efforts. I am asking that: a) we be quite prescriptive in our investments with Dell relative to the competitive threats we see with Linux b) we constantly benchmark ourselves against the actions they do with RedHat
Paul Flessner writes:
> Now — there is nothing to disagree with me on around what we should do. We should whack them, we should make sure they understand our value, we should do all of the things you and Brian suggest. I totally agree.In the end, if I were them, I would do all I could to see Linux succeed because it would put $50/pc(or whatever our OEM license costs) back into my pocket. Sure Windows has greater value and lower TCO and all of that. I would keep my relationship with MS and customers and do the dance. But every chance I get I would invest in Linux and try to make more sales on Linux because I increase my margin by $50/pc. It is an advantage for Linux.
Bill Veghte replies:
> Dell’s behavior is predicated on us not acting in response to their actions. I want them to understand that every day they lead with Linux over Windows in Unix migrations they turn our field against them (take the southeast region mail thread as an example). I want them to think very very carefully about when and which forums they decide to push Linux very, very hard. Today, they do not. When they do, you can bet, behavior will evolve.
Veghte also expresses this concern:
> He said their basic strategy is around open standard systems of which there are two; Linux and Windows. He said Windows three times during the whole discussion (it was a Linux panel tho) and then proceeded to push Linux very hard, never mentioning Windows. Ironically, the guy on the panel that was most balanced in their comments was the CTO of the BEA.
He wrote in the briefing:
> Russ Holt (Server VP) was there representing Dell. He was introduced as the man behind Dell’s Linux strategy and the guy driving the Linux initiative at Dell. He started off by saying, Dell is the #1 OEM distributor of Linux and they are committed to seeing that position grow. He said that he believed Linux was ready for the enterprise and as way of evidence said Dell was a significant customer of RedHat and runs it on key mission critical environments; specifically their order entry system. He said he was seeing growth not only in the “traditional” areas of web & f/p but also web, Unix LOB and HPC. He then talked about how good the Oracle/Linux solution was and the strong partnership they had with Oracle around Linux. Later when he was asked about the open source development model he said he saw significant advantages to it because it enabled much closer interactions and synergy with RedHat.[...]Every other panelist underscored (a) that Linux was ready for prime-time in the enterprise, and (b) they were committing significant resources and product to make it even more so.
To summarise, Dell supported GNU/Linux, several companies praised the platform, and Microsoft pumped money into Dell, potentially in attempt to pressure it out of GNU/Linux. █
From: Bill Veghte
Sent: Saturday, November 09, 2002 9:59 AM
To: Paul Flessner
Subject: RE: Goldman Sachs Linux Panel
It's not $50 of margin for Dell. It will get passed directly back to the customer and they are stuck with the same margin they have today. That is what happened on the desktop any time we made pricing changes broadly with OEMs and that is what will happen on the server (it is already happening on Linux pricing). It is just a fact.
—- Original Message —-From: Paul FlessnerSent: Saturday, November 09, 2002 9:02AMTo: Bill VeghteSubject: RE: Goldman Sachs Linux Panel
I would go for the $50 pts of margin. You need to think more broadly. All you say is true but my statement is true as well. It is just fact.
—- Original Message —-From: Bill VeghteSent: Saturday, November 09, 2002 8:08AMTo: Paul Flessner; Bob KellyCc: Brian Valentine; Jim Allchin; Rodrigo Costa; Kevin Johnson; Jim Allchin; Rick Wong; Orlando Ayala; Craig Mundie; Bob Muglia; Gordon Mangione; Andrew Lees Subject: RE: Goldman Sachs Linux Panel
Sigh….Yes, I can disagree with your statement that Dell's behavior won't change. If it won't change, then we should just throw in the towel and settle for %50 market share at best. We will change Dell's behavior by thinking thru their motivations and opportunities and being very creative.
Let's start by articulating Dell's perspective relative to the comments Russ made… Linux is Unix on x86. Dell sees it as the cheapest way to convert Unix LOB servers to being Dell customers. Dell sees no partnership with us on databases and partnership with Oracle as a way of pushing further into the enterprise. Oracle sees partnership with Dell and Linux as a great way at going after us at the lower end of the database market. Dell sees Linux as great negotiating leverage in their relationship with us.
All of these things are reality. Given these realities, lets add our perspective to the picture. If I am Michael Dell, I have to believe that my #1 competitor long term is IBM. Dell has to decide what their competitive strategy is going to be against IBM. If they are going to compete with IBM and it services driven organization, they are a) going to have to build a strong relationship with our field and service partners, b) they are going to have to bet on our engineering engine as their primary innovation machine. That means a close partnership with us. They need to understand that with the passage of time Linux and IBM become more and more equivalent.
Now, lets interject what I am asking into the picture…. We invest big, big $$ in Dell. We will continue to invest big, big $$ in Dell. I am asking that we do this investment with our eyes wide open. I do not want to invest $$ in Dell to fund their Red Hat efforts. I am asking that: a) we be quite prescriptive in our investments with Dell relative to the competitive threats we see with Linuxb) we constantly benchmark ourselves against the actions they do with RedHat
4/6/2005
Plaintiff's Exhibit 9280Comes V Microsoft
MS-CC-RN 000000982974HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL
This is an engineering statement, this is a marketing statement, this is a field statement.
—- Original Message —-From: Paul Flessner Sent: Saturday, November 09, 2002 7:13AMTo: Bill Veghte; Bob KellyCc: Brian Valentine; Jim Allchin; Rodrigo Costa; Kevin Johnson; Jim Allchin; Rick Wong; Orlando Ayala; Craig Mundie; Bob Muglia; Gordon Mangione; Andrew Lees Subject: RE: Goldman Sachs Linux Panel
You can't disagree with my statement. It is fact. It is capitalism, like gravity.
Now — there is nothing to disagree with me on around what we should do. We should whack them, we should make sure they understand our value, we should do all of the things you and Brian suggest. I totally agree.
In the end, if I were them, I would do all I could to see Linux succeed because it would put $50/pc(or whatever our OEM license costs) back into my pocket. Sure Windows has greater value and lower TCO and all of that. I would keep my relationship with MS and customers and do the dance. But every chance I get I would invest in Linux and try to make more sales on Linux because I increase my margin by $50/pc. It is an advantage for Linux.
Where are our advantages? This is a productive discussion.
This is just life. I am not giving up. I don't have a Penguin in my basement. I LOVE Windows which is why I want us to face this so we can figure it out.
The sooner we recognize it the sooner we can get our heads around it and decide how to go after it.
—- Original Message —-From: Bill Veghte Sent: Friday, November 08, 2002 6:44 PMTo: Paul Flessner; Brian Valentine; Rodrigo Costa; Kevin Johnson; Jim Allchin; Rick Wong; Orlando Ayala; Craig Mundie;Cc: Bob Muglia; Gordon Mangione; Bob Kelly; Andrew Lees Subject: RE: Goldman Sachs Linux Panel
Boy do I respectfully disagree with the statement "Dell's behavior is predictable and won't change…
Dell's behavior is predicated on us not acting in response to their actions. I want them to understand that every day they lead with Linux over Windows in Unix migrations they turn our field against them (take the southeast region mail thread as an example). I want them to think very very carefully about when and which forums they decide to push Linux very, very hard. Today, they do not. When they do, you can bet, behavior will evolve.
I think there are two very specific actions:—> alignment in the field pushing Dell on the one that they are going to be most uncomfortabe with… Unix app migration (Kevin & Joe Marengi)—> Clarity and metrics around Windows Server vs. Redhat in marketing and technology (product group and OEM group)
To Rick's last email on this thread around actions, I want to be careful we don't personalize it with Russ because I want to win him back but the key to that is thru Joe.
4/6/2005
MS-CC-RN 000000982975 HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL
—- Original Message —-From: Paul Flessner Sent: Friday, November 08, 2002 9:07AMTo: Bill Veghte; Brian Valentine; Rodrigo Costa; Kevin Johnson; Jim Allchin; Rick Wong; Orlando Ayala; Craig Mundie;Cc: Bob Muglia; Gordon Mangione; Bob Kelly; Andrew Lees Subject: RE: Goldman Sachs Linux Panel
The obvious but: Dell is a HW company. They are facing tremendous margin pressure in a commodity market. If you are Dell you are being forced to squeeze every dollar out of the business you can to survive. Given that situation you would be looking hard at that MS OEM payment.
Think back to Jim Cash's talk this week. These guys are living that situation.
I don't have the answer here but Dell's behavior is predictable and it won't change.
—- Original Message —-From: Bill Veghte Sent: Friday, November 08, 2002 7:55AMTo: Paul Flessner; Brian Valentine; Rodrigo Costa; Kevin Johnson; Jim Allchin; Rick Wong; Orlando Ayala; Craig Mundie;Cc: Bob Muglia; Gordon Mangione; Bob Kelly; Andrew Lees Subject: RE: Goldman Sachs Linux Panel
I was sitting right across the panel from him. We waved at each other briefly before the panel started.
He said their basic strategy is around open standard systems of which there are two; Linux and Windows. He said Windows three times during the whole discussion (it was a Linux panel tho) and then proceeded to push Linux very hard, never mentioning Windows. Ironically, the guy on the panel that was most balanced in their comments was the CTO of the BEA.
Dell is and must continue to be a partner with us but we need to be very aggressive in comparing our position and their investment in RedHat.
—- Original Message —-From: Brian Valentine Sent: Thursday, November 07, 2002 10:27PMTo: Bill Veghte; Rodrigo Costa; Kevin Johnson; Paul Flessner; Jim Allchin; Rick Wong; Orlando Ayala; Craig Mundie;Cc: Bob Muglia; Gordon Mangione; Bob Kelly; Andrew Lees Subject: RE: Goldman Sachs Linux Panel
Did Russ Holt know you were there? I can't imagine he would be this blatant against us if he knew you were there. If he knew and he is really doing this, then we have some serious thinking to do around this relationship.
—- Original Message —-From: Bill Veghte Sent: Thursday, November 07, 2002 10:27PMTo: Rodrigo Costa; Kevin Johnson; Paul Flessner; Jim Allchin; Brian Valentine; Rick Wong; Orlando Ayala; Craig
4/6/2005
MS-CC-RN 000000982976HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL
MundieCc: Bob Muglia; Gordon Mangione; Bob Kelly; Andrew LeesSubject: Goldman Sachs Linux Panel
I was down at Goldman SW conference earlier this week doing a keynote and on the agenda there was a panel discussion on Linux after me so I asked to participate. The panel consisted of CFO of RedHat, VPs from Oracle, BMG, BEA, Veritas and Dell. It turned into quite a lively discussion as you can imagine. Couple quick notes…
Dell & Linux:Each company's position was quite predictably slamming us but the one that really got me animated was Dell. Russ Holt (Server VP) was there representing Dell. He was introduced as the man behind Dell's Linux strategy and the guy driving the Linux initiative at Dell. He started off by saying, Dell is the #1 OEM distributor of Linux and they are committed to seeing that position grow. He said that he believed Linux was ready for the enterprise and as way of evidence said Dell was a significant customer of RedHat and runs it on key mission critical environments; specifically their order entry system. He said he was seeing growth not only in the "traditional" areas of web & f/p but also web, Unix LOB and HPC. He then talked about how good the Oracle/Linux solution was and the strong partnership they had with Oracle around Linux. Later when he was asked about the open source development model he said he saw significant advantages to it because it enabled much closer interactions and synergy with RedHat.
I spoke to Rick Wong about today but we need to make darn certain that our investments with Dell are benchmarked against any investments they make in RedHat. The majority of their business is on Windows and their marketing, their website, and their investment should reflect this or we should call them on it. Same goes for things like sales training or events. When we do events, field engagement and measure our progress it should be benchmarked against the results and/or what they are doing with RedHat. Dell is a key partner for us and one that imho will grow in significance in the coming years so it is a tricky balance but one that we need to be more aggressive around.Linux & the enterprise:This was the focus. RedHat CFO spent his entire time talking about how their entire focus was Linux in the enterprise and all the things that they were doing to make it enterprise ready. He then went on and on around the certification and testing programs that they had put in place and the partnerships they were building with companies like IBM, Dell, Oracle, Veritas, BMC, BEA etc.. Every other panelist underscored (a) that Linux was ready for prime-time in the enterprise, and (b) they were committing significant resources and product to make it even more so.
Linux Development Model:Each of the panelists talked about the interaction with RedHat and the community development model as a real highlight for them. They all talked about how it made it easier to impact the direction of the platform (including Dell ironically) and how transparent the whole process was.
4/6/2005
MS-CC-RN 000000982977HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL
Share in other sites/networks: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
Permalink Send this to a friend
----------
➮ Sharing is caring. Content is available under CC-BY-SA.
-- Response ended
-- Page fetched on Sun Jun 2 04:19:51 2024