OStatic

When Microsoft announced it was planning to offer lightweight, web-based versions of some of its Office components, there was some speculation that maybe it could be used with alternate browsers. It seemed Firefox would be a likely candidate beyond IE, and some ventured to wonder about Safari.

Even if Firefox was supported, it didn't seem likely this suite would be specifically web based, so it would need Windows, right? According to a few sources it seems as if that might not be the case. Though the source is a Microsoft Community member blog (and not a pronouncement from corporate sources) the concept of this service on Mac and Linux is fascinating because it suggests so much about what Microsoft might be thinking.

Over at ComputerWorld, Seth Weintraub waxes poetic about Microsoft's decision to offer a Windows 7 Starter edition to keep its presence strong in the netbook arena, and why this is a huge advantage for Google's Linux-based Android.

Windows 7 Starter edition is designed to run no more than three applications simultaneously -- purchasing an upgrade allows users to run, presumably, as many apps as their netbooks can handle at one time. Now, three concurrent applications at a shot might be sufficient for a number of users; it might be all that some netbooks can handle, depending on the applications and system resources running in the background. Microsoft isn't hiding the fact it is experimenting with a limited Starter, and hopefully netbook manufacturers will also make buyers aware of this. But awareness and being almost sufficient in even most cases is irrelevant. It's the concept that there is a limit, and purchasing an upgrade for functionality that most won't need every day (but when it's needed, it's really needed) that will make netbooks running alternative operating systems increasingly attractive. It's an advantage not only for Android, but any Linux distribution netbook builders optimize for their hardware.

The patent dispute between automotive GPS manufacturer TomTom and Microsoft has come to a close, with both sides settling the original suit and countersuit. CNet has a short but informative summary of at least some of the terms (certain financial specifics were not disclosed). The terms are written in order to preserve TomTom's compliance with its obligations under the GPL v.2 licenses on its code. TomTom must also remove functionality from its products that are related to the two file management systems that were under contention in the suit.

This is, at least for the upcoming agreed-upon five year period, how it will be between TomTom and Microsoft. It's been settled, and very little (at least from the Microsoft and TomTom camps), has been officially said about the three patents that dealt with TomTom's implementation of the Linux kernel. It's over, but have the final notes been sung?

This afternoon, Linux Foundation Executive Director Jim Zemlin weighed in with the Foundation's view on the recent patent infringement claims Microsoft has filed against TomTom.

Zemlin says at this point, there's no reason to doubt Microsoft's assurances that this is a dispute solely between TomTom and itself, or that the claims against TomTom are in any manner a direct (or indirect) move against the wider Linux ecosystem.

The Linux Foundation is hopeful, Zemlin says, that the dispute will be resolved as quickly and as peaceably as possible. However, he indicates that if the litigation turns towards the Linux environment in a general sense, the Foundation is prepared to defend the platform.

Microsoft Watch's Joe Wilcox, in solemn observance of Friday the 13th, compiled a list of Microsoft's ten most unlucky breaks. The strokes of misfortune chosen were weighted according to heinousness (with #10 being least signficant, and #1 the most).

Checking in at #7 is the development of the Linux kernel. Putting aside Microsoft's whole Schrodinger's cat sort of approach to Linux over the years (Linux is not a threat. Linux is a threat), it is interesting Wilcox (and the analysts who helped him narrow down the list) focused on the kernel as the bad break.

Perhaps it's inevitable -- people react strongly to hyperbole, it gets them talking, it makes them curious, it's a quick way of making a subject hot. For years, every new MP3 player was met with speculation -- would it be an iPod Killer? Perhaps ASUS didn't release new hardware quickly enough before solid competition entered the market, but for a few months last year the term Eee Killer was thrown about. Yet, despite the bounty on their heads, iPods and Eees still exist, as do alternative devices.

As Microsoft allowed people to take an early version of Windows 7 out for a test ride, the -Killer suffix re-emerged. It's not an OS X-Killer. It's a Linux-Killer. I'm sure this is due in large part to the robust netbook market and Apple's absence there. It's interesting that suddenly Linux is seen as competition. It's also intriguing that this is portrayed as the nail in the coffin, and not an opportunity.

Over at ChannelWeb, Kevin McLaughlin gathered some industry insights on the significance of Linux netbooks. In some ways, the subject seems as though it's reached critical mass and there's not much more to say, but McLaughlin's article highlights a few points that aren't often mentioned and are easily glossed over.

The seventh August Penguin conference, for open-source programmers, managers, and users in Israel, took place in Tel Aviv earlier today. The August Penguin was sponsored by the Israeli open-source advocacy group, HaMakor ( the source ), and co-sponsored by a number of other organizations, ranging from the Israeli branch of the Internet Society, to small companies servicing the open-source sector, to Microsoft. About 300 open-source advocates gathered for half a day of technical and general lectures, as well as socializing, around the common theme of open source.

On Tuesday Microsoft released over 14,000 pages of documentation concerning Sharepoint Server 2007, Exchange 2007, and MS Outlook 2007 as well as the communications protocols used these products. The documentation was released on the companyﾒs MSDN site as part of the openness pledge it made following the recent EU court judgment against the company.

The good news is that open source developers can use the published protocol information to develop clients that interact with Microsoft servers using the same feature sets available to Microsoft software clients. We may finally see open source email and calendaring applications that can natively integrate with corporate MS Exchange servers. Outlookﾒs stranglehold on the enterprise IT email client market may soon come to an end.