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.

A short piece on Xbit Labs directed me to an interesting post by Chris Kenyon, Canonical's Director of Business Development. In this piece, Kenyon tackles another absolutely critical factor in marketing Linux netbooks (I discussed a few of the others on Tuesday) -- offering quality engineered hardware and carefully configured software that's ready to go, right out of the box.

Kenyon's post offers advice and points to consider to OEMs, consumers, and yes, even Microsoft. It's sound, it's reasoned -- perhaps to the point one wonders why it needed to be said -- and it paints an encouraging picture of the future for Linux netbooks.

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?

In February, Microsoft filed suit against TomTom, claiming that the portable GPS manufacturer had violated eight of its patents. Three of the patents in question dealt in some manner with TomTom's implementation of the Linux kernel.

While Microsoft's Horacio Gutierrez stated the lawsuit is between TomTom and Microsoft, and not an attack on the Linux kernel as whole, many in the open source world are wary. The Linux Foundation's Executive Director, Jim Zemlin, has said that it would be prudent to keep an eye on the situation, but there was no reason to get overly excited, yet.

TomTom has made the next move, lending some credence to the Gutierrez's it's just between the two of us claims. On Monday, TomTom filed a countersuit in the US Court District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia. TomTom alledges that Microsoft violated its intellectual property (though sources vary on the number of patents involved) in its Streets and Trips products.

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.

As some OStatic readers have likely already heard, Microsoft is taking TomTom, a manufacturer of in-car navigation devices, to court for patent infringement. This is especially disturbing to those in the open source world for at least two reasons -- Microsoft's previous claims that Linux violates over two hundred patents it currently holds, and three of the claims against TomTom deal with TomTom's implementation of the Linux kernel in its products.

Techdirt's Mike Masnick presents some good analysis of the story, including links to the patents in question and those with particularly tenuous claims (in terms of infringement and patentability, in a few instances). While this is worrisome to those who use Linux, and certainly causing TomTom executives to lose sleep, I can't help but wonder, really, what this positioning actually means. Why is this coming up now? If hundreds of Microsoft patents are being violated, why go after a company infringing on eight (with three relating directly to Linux)? And why TomTom?

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.