Happy Holidays!
People like to reflect over the holidays, so I want to offer up some portions of some internal “Highly Confidental” Microsoft documents that I’m thankful for the US legal system for getting into the public record.
I would like readers to keep one over-reaching points in mind when considering this material:
It’s not just us crazy hateful zealots that think Microsoft counts adoption of its technology as a “victory”. It is Microsoft-itself that thinks that way. This is not only bore out in the referenced documents, but it is so clearly common-sensical that I have serious trouble believing Mono apologists when they pretend otherwise. But pretend they do.
These people are working directly for a Microsoft “victory”. Whether they are doing so intentionally or unintentionally is not clear – but what is clear is that by Microsoft’s own internal reasoning, they are helping Microsoft achieve “victory”:
The Measure of Success
The success of evangelism is measured in the mass of shipping applications that support Microsoft’s platforms. Those applications that support a given platform, move it closer to critical mass, and thus count as successes; those that support a competing platform, move it away from critical mass, and thus count as defeats.
Microsoft has many platforms, and what appears to be a victory for one Microsoft platform may appear to be a defeat for another. If OLE is successful on the Macintosh (making Macintosh applications more powerful), is that a victory for OLE, or a defeat for Windows? If the Windows API is successful on Unix (making Unix applications less expensive to develop), is that a victory for the Win32 API, or a defeat for Windows NT?
Diversionary attacks, holding actions, and retreats may each seem contrary to the achievement of the overall objective when considered solely in their own terms, but taken in light of the overall conflict, may contribute to overall success. In the Chinese Civil War that followed World War II, Mao Tse Tsung’s Army ran away from every battle, until the won the war. They knew that overall victory, not local victory, was the objective.
Thus it is imperative to measure each action in accordance with its contribution to overall, not just local, victory.
Victory
“A computer on every desk and in every home, running Microsoft software.” This is the mission statement of Microsoft itself; it is the definition of the conditions under which Microsoft itself can declare overall victory.”
If you can stomach the rest of that material, you will see laid out in Microsoft’s own internal documents and training material:
- Microsoft fully realizes the value of having third-party software applications built using Microsoft APIs (even if they are for Mac/Unix) “Win32 on Windows. Win32 API on Unix. Win32 API on Mac. ResultL Win32 is the Univeral API. We Win!”
- Microsoft calmly plans to disrupt alliances that compete with Microsoft offerings (OLE vs. OpenDoc)
- Microsoft only helps someone when it helps Microsoft. “We help those who can help us.”
- Microsoft will withdraw help once their needs are served. “They’ll be grateful for our help (for a little while…)”
Read the documents. Everything, everything, that Team Mono is working towards aligns flawlessly with this hyper-agressive style of “Effective Evangelism” from Microsoft.
I do not exaggerate when I say one could literally roadmap out Mono and Moonlight in perfect harmony with the “Effective Evangelism” document. Microsoft itself could not do it better themselves … in fact, they even recognize that in the presentation:
Why Not Do It All Ourselves?
Because we can’t
- There’s just too much to be done
Because they won’t let us
- Lawyers ‘R’ Us
Because third-parties are more efficient
- In their respective markets
It’s crazy. Somehow, and I’m not sure how it happened, Team Mono not only began executing a strategy that Microsoft foresaw and pre-approved, but also seems to be convincing some people that it is some sort of win for Linux!
Microsoft itself recognizes that the exact strategy Mono and Moonlight are carrying out is the best thing Microsoft could hope for, yet point that out and watch the accusations of “hate”, “zealotry” and whatever other memes are in effect come out.
I’m just telling you what’s in the slides. I already know it. You can be damn sure Microsoft already knows it. You are following them precisely. Here’s one more bit of slide for you:
We Are Here to Help Microsoft
- By helping those developers…
- …That can best help Microsoft…
- …Achieve Microsoft’s objectives
Did anyone miss the point, here?
Indeed. Does anyone still miss the point? Drool over that for a while.
Recent Comments