The Halloween documents are a series of confidential memoranda on potential strategies employed by Microsoft relating to open-source software and to
Linux in particular; and a series of responses to these memoranda. Both the leaked documents and
the responses were published by Eric S. Raymond. The documents are associated with
Halloween, October 31, because
many of them were originally leaked close to that date.
Overview
The first Halloween document, requested by senior vice-president James Allchin for the
attention of senior vice-president Paul Maritz and written by Microsoft program manager
Vinod Valloppillil, was leaked to Eric Raymond in October 1998, who immediately
published an annotated version on his web site. The document contained references to a second memorandum specifically dealing
with Linux, and that document, authored by Vinod Valloppillil and Josh Cohen at Microsoft, was
also obtained, annotated and published by Raymond. Microsoft has since admitted the documents' authenticity [1].
Marked "Microsoft confidential", they identify open-source software, and in particular the Linux operating system, as a major
threat to Microsoft's dominance of the software industry, and suggest ways in which Microsoft could disrupt the progress of open
source software.
These documents acknowledged that open source/free software/Linux products were technologically competitive with some of Microsoft's products,
and set out a strategy to combat them. The documents were embarrassing largely because they contradicted Microsoft's public
pronouncements on the subject.
Since the publication of the two original documents, a number of additional Microsoft memoranda on related topics have also
been leaked and published (e.g. Halloween VII). Together, these documents demonstrate Microsoft's continued awareness that its
open-source competitors are a potential threat to its livelihood in the software industry.
The documents
The documents are from a variety of sources. Only some are leaked internal memos (documents I, II, VII, VIII, and X). One is a
public statement (document III). The others are responses by Eric Raymond to various columns, news articles, and other works.
|
Name |
Author |
Date |
Brief Description |
| I |
Open Source Software: A (New?) Development Methodology |
Vinod Valloppillil |
August 1998 |
A leaked internal report |
| II |
Linux OS Competitive Analysis: The Next Java VM? |
Vinod Valloppillil |
August 1998 |
A leaked internal report |
| III |
Untitled statement |
Aurelia van den Berg |
November 1998 |
Press statement from Microsoft Netherlands |
| IV |
When Software Things Were Rotten |
Eric S. Raymond |
December 1998 |
A satire piece based on Microsoft's Ed Muth comparing open source developers to
Robin Hood. |
| V |
The FUD Begins |
Eric S. Raymond |
March 1999 |
A response by Raymond to Ed Muth's allegations that Linux has a "weak value proposition". |
| VI |
The Fatal Anniversary |
Eric S. Raymond |
October 1999 |
A response by Raymond to studies authored by the Gartner group for Microsoft. |
| VII |
Research E-Bulletin: Attitudes Towards Shared Source and Open Source Research Study |
|
September 2002 |
A summary of the results of a Microsoft survey describing reactions to Microsoft's shared
source program. |
| VIII |
OSS and Government |
Orlando Ayala |
November 2002 |
Describes Microsoft's procedures for responding to notable conversions away from Microsoft software |
| IX |
It Ain't Necessarily SCO |
Rob Landley and Eric S. Raymond |
August 2003 |
A response to the allegations made by the SCO Group in its initial filings in
SCO v. IBM. |
| X |
Follow The Money |
Mike Anderer |
March 2004 |
An e-mail from consultant Mike Anderer to SCO's Chris Sontag revealing Microsoft's channeling of US$ 86 million to SCO. |
| XI |
Get The FUD |
Eric S. Raymond |
June 2004 |
A response to Microsoft's Get the Facts campaign |
Documents I and II
These are leaked reports for Microsoft's own use, both written by Vinod Valloppillil, who was a Program Manager at
Microsoft.
Document I provides a detailed introduction to the concepts behind Open Source software, and its possible impact on Microsoft
products and services. It outlines the strengths and weaknesses of Open Source software. Document II describes the basic
architecture of the Linux system, its relation to Unix and Windows NT.
Raymond suggests that the documents show that while Microsoft may be dismissive of open source software in public, it
considers it a serious competitor in private.
While discussing ways of competing with open source, Document I suggests that one reason that open source projects have been
able to enter the market for servers is the use of standardised protocols. It then suggests
that this can be stopped by "extending these protocols and developing new protocols" and "de-commoditize protocols &
applications." This policy has been nicknamed "embrace, extend,
extinguish".
Document I also suggests that open source software "is long-term credible ... FUD tactics can not [sic] be used to combat it," and
"Recent case studies (the Internet) provide very dramatic evidence ... that commercial quality can be achieved / exceeded by OSS
projects."
Document I was filed as evidence on January 16th, 2007 in the current case of "Comes v. Microsoft", and is available as a PDF here.
Document III
The statement from Aurelia van den Berg, the Press and Public Relations manager of Microsoft Netherlands, puts forward
Microsoft's view on the first two documents. It says that the documents are not an "official position", but that "it is routine
and appropriate" to research competitors.
This statement is only a brief response, but many points were later incorporated into an official response from Microsoft.
Document VII
This document is a summary of the results of a survey of developers and IT managers, carried out by Microsoft, describing
reactions to Microsoft's shared source program. Eric Raymond provides commentary
suggesting ways that the open source community can promote itself based on the results of the survey.
The results show favourable responses about both open source and shared source principles. It also describes low
total cost of ownership as a major reason for Linux adoption, opposed to
documents
released by the company suggesting that Windows has a lower TCO than Linux solutions.
Document VIII
"OSS and Government", aka Halloween VIII: Doing the Damage-Control Dance. A memo from Group Vice President of
Worldwide Sales, Orlando Ayala, to general managers of Microsoft regional subsidiaries. Describes the availability of support
from Microsoft corporate for regional sales personnel facing competition from Linux in government markets.
Document X
An e-mail from consultant Mike Anderer to SCO's Chris Sontag, also known as Halloween X: Follow The Money. Among other
points, describes Microsoft's channeling of US$ 86 million to SCO.
References
- ^ Microsoft Responds to the Open Source Memo Regarding the Open Source Model and Linux, Microsoft (cached by archive.org on 04 June 2001)
External links
This entry is from Wikipedia, the leading user-contributed encyclopedia. It may not have been reviewed by professional editors (see full disclaimer)