New MS policy on Internet Windows Activation

Gordon · External Since: Sep 21, 2006 Posts: 8

have just done a clean re-install of the retail copy of XP Pro that I have
owned for 4 years, on the same un-changed laptop that it has resided on for
that four years. The last installation was well over a YEAR ago. It failed
the internet activation and I ended up having to speak to a customer
services representative. I asked him why it did not activate over the
internet. He told me that a new policy just issued is that even with retail
copies, internet activation is now restricted to ONE instance - any more
than that has to be over the phone.

That's going to push a lot more people to Linux, isn't it?
If this is true, WHAT THE HELL DO MS THINK THEY ARE DOING?

billwg · External Since: Aug 15, 2006 Posts: 393

The Ghost In The Machine wrote:
>
> My brain hurts.
>
Given the lack of corroboration of this anecdote in other venues, you
might consider that the whole episode is not as advertised, ghost.

Rex Ballard · External Since: Feb 22, 2006 Posts: 947

billwg wrote:
> The Ghost In The Machine wrote:
> > My brain hurts.
> >
> Given the lack of corroboration of this anecdote in other venues, you
> might consider that the whole episode is not as advertised, ghost.

So this means that Microsoft is (no longer) going to force end-users to
call in, confess their sins, admit to being idiots, give lots of
personal information, OEM serial numbers, and all of that other
snooping - to get a machine for which they paid $1000 or more (3 times
the price of a television, 10 times the price of a meal for 2 at the
best restaurant in town,...) to work properly after it was invaded to
death by worms, viruses, malware, spyware, slopware, and bloatware?

How generous of them.

I've always said that the best anti-piracy measures involve simply
tracking the activity. If you can trace the publisher of 200 copies
back to it's origin, you have a really good chance of getting a
settlement, or a conviction.

I think Microsoft realizes that far less piracy that they would like to
believe, really occurrs. In fact, most people are pretty careful to
completely wipe out Windows before turning it over to a "recycler". I
even install a fresh copy of Linux, because the mkfs cleans up the hard
drive pretty effectively.

Linonut · External Since: Mar 31, 2006 Posts: 3492

After takin' a swig o' grog, Gordon belched out this bit o' wisdom:

> have just done a clean re-install of the retail copy of XP Pro that I have
> owned for 4 years, on the same un-changed laptop that it has resided on for
> that four years. The last installation was well over a YEAR ago. It failed
> the internet activation and I ended up having to speak to a customer
> services representative. I asked him why it did not activate over the
> internet. He told me that a new policy just issued is that even with retail
> copies, internet activation is now restricted to ONE instance - any more
> than that has to be over the phone.
>
> That's going to push a lot more people to Linux, isn't it?
> If this is true, WHAT THE HELL DO MS THINK THEY ARE DOING?

It's not really true. MS has a dominant position that will be hard to
lose, since the majority of people cannot conceive of alternatives.

It'll probably give Linux a 1% or 2% boost.

--
"I'm going to f'in *kill* Google!"
-- Steve Ballmer, CEO Microsoft

billwg · External Since: Aug 15, 2006 Posts: 393

The Ghost In The Machine wrote:

>
> There is the consideration as to whether billwg thinks your
> testimony trustworthy. Smile

Personally, I can believe it;
> there's been a few horror stories floating around about
> activation issues. But it's a very weird problem, in
> some respects; a modern PC, after all, consists of freely
> replaceable subcomponents.
>

If you google around, ghost, you will have a hard time coming up with
much more anecdotal evidence. Considering that there are hundreds of
millions of copies of XP now shipped that are in the same category, it
is hard to come up with a valid generalization. If gordo's tale is
true, it represents an infinitessimal percentage of the population. To
determine a trend we need a much clearer picture.

As you pointed out earlier, there is nothing that gives MS any gain
deriving from such a policy. The linux proponents are eager to paint a
picture of an evil empire savaging its citizens ala' the Hussein boys,
Cusay and Uday, just to be mean. While decrying the injustice of it
all, they darkly suggest that this final insult will drive the
population to the open arms of OSSville.

I think it all derives from the need to assign Microsoft's success to a
combination of shady deals and good fortune brought about by Bill
Gates' mom putting in a good word with IBM. If you can assume that MS
is run by fools and idiots and the odd evil mastermind, then you can
postulate that they may do something to chuck the whole season. But,
sadly for OSS, such is not the case and such is not going to be the
result.

Roy Schestowitz · External Since: Jun 26, 2005 Posts: 24202

__/ [ Gordon ] on Thursday 21 September 2006 17:52 \__

> have just done a clean re-install of the retail copy of XP Pro that I have
> owned for 4 years, on the same un-changed laptop that it has resided on for
> that four years. The last installation was well over a YEAR ago. It failed
> the internet activation and I ended up having to speak to a customer
> services representative. I asked him why it did not activate over the
> internet. He told me that a new policy just issued is that even with retail
> copies, internet activation is now restricted to ONE instance - any more
> than that has to be over the phone.
>
> That's going to push a lot more people to Linux, isn't it?
> If this is true, WHAT THE HELL DO MS THINK THEY ARE DOING?

To be honest with you, I think that Microsoft is trying to crack down on
piracy (yes, honest!) as means of squeezing out revenue that is left to be
made from overpriced properietary software. Within a couple of years, not
only will such software become cheap, but it will also become less
prevalent, or its importance lowered/obviated by (LAMP/OSS-based) Web
services.

Linonut · External Since: Mar 31, 2006 Posts: 3492

After takin' a swig o' grog, Rex Ballard belched out this bit o' wisdom:

> Sony decided to retaliate against the X-Box, by selling it's PS3 as a
> Linux machine. When it's released, probably very soon now, we will see
> millions of little Linux machines, complete with KDE desktops, and
> maybe even OpenOffice, being sold at K-mart, WalMart, Sears, BestBuy,
> and any other place that sold the PS/2. Suddenly Microsoft will not
> even have a seat at the table while kids and parents take real-live
> tours of Linux, OpenOffice, and possibly even XGL desktops.

Interesting news, seems to be corroborated by a quick search.

> If Microsoft really is in the same boat as IBM was in 1991...

No wonder clods such as Mike, Hadron, Nudds, and Wong are in full throat
lately.

--
Secret hacker rule #11: hackers read manuals.

The Ghost In The Machine · External Since: Aug 04, 2005 Posts: 3878

In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Gordon
<gordon.DeleteThis@lgbpcomputing.co.uk.invalid>
wrote
on Thu, 21 Sep 2006 17:52:21 +0100
<4nfu72Fa8te2U1.DeleteThis@individual.net>:
> have just done a clean re-install of the retail copy of XP Pro that I have
> owned for 4 years, on the same un-changed laptop that it has resided on for
> that four years. The last installation was well over a YEAR ago. It failed
> the internet activation and I ended up having to speak to a customer
> services representative. I asked him why it did not activate over the
> internet. He told me that a new policy just issued is that even with retail
> copies, internet activation is now restricted to ONE instance - any more
> than that has to be over the phone.
>
> That's going to push a lot more people to Linux, isn't it?
> If this is true, WHAT THE HELL DO MS THINK THEY ARE DOING?
>

Erm...

[1] Trying to tie up their Customer Support? Say, isn't that a profit
issue?

[2] Making sure that they have one-on-ones with all of
their desktop customers? Since there are over 100 million
customers, see #1.

[3] Trying to defeat those eeeeeeevil nasty Peruvian and
Chinese so and sos who think that Microsoft is overpriced
and therefore duplicate it in order to undercut them?
Possibly a laudable goal but one might question the
implementation. (Given your example, one *will* question
the implementation, and rightly so.)

[4] Trying to ensure that everyone thinks of Microsoft in
a positive light? Wait...how would being required to yell
at a beleagured service rep be a positive light?

[5] Ensuring that we're all moral? See #1, replacing
"service rep" with "priest in confessional box".

My brain hurts.

--
#191, ewill3.DeleteThis@earthlink.net
Windows Vista. Because it's time to refresh your hardware. Trust us.

Roy Schestowitz · External Since: Jun 26, 2005 Posts: 24202

__/ [ Linonut ] on Thursday 21 September 2006 22:22 \__

> After takin' a swig o' grog, Rex Ballard belched out this bit o' wisdom:
>
>> Sony decided to retaliate against the X-Box, by selling it's PS3 as a
>> Linux machine. When it's released, probably very soon now, we will see
>> millions of little Linux machines, complete with KDE desktops, and
>> maybe even OpenOffice, being sold at K-mart, WalMart, Sears, BestBuy,
>> and any other place that sold the PS/2. Suddenly Microsoft will not
>> even have a seat at the table while kids and parents take real-live
>> tours of Linux, OpenOffice, and possibly even XGL desktops.
>
> Interesting news, seems to be corroborated by a quick search.
>
>> If Microsoft really is in the same boat as IBM was in 1991...
>
> No wonder clods such as Mike, Hadron, Nudds, and Wong are in full throat
> lately.

This was a good post. Expect a personal attack on Rex pretty soon. I'm
convenced that an expedition has been dispatched to investigate his Web site
and scour parts of the Web. [sarcastic, of course]

--
For governments that eavesdrop, here is a quick list of tags: Communism,
Hawaiian shirts, China, Suitcase, Martha Stewart, Encryption, Prison,
Stalin. Thanks for tuning in.

Gordon · External Since: Sep 21, 2006 Posts: 8

"billwg" <bill RemoveThis @magnoliaplantation.net> wrote in message
news:1158870613.845854.320410@e3g2000cwe.googlegroups.com...
>
> The Ghost In The Machine wrote:
>>
>> My brain hurts.
>>
> Given the lack of corroboration of this anecdote in other venues, you
> might consider that the whole episode is not as advertised, ghost.
>

well I can assure you it happened to me today. And the thing happened
EXACTLY as I wrote it. Word for word.

The Ghost In The Machine · External Since: Aug 04, 2005 Posts: 3878

In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Gordon
<gordon DeleteThis @lgbpcomputing.co.uk.invalid>
wrote
on Thu, 21 Sep 2006 22:27:45 +0100
<4ngebeFa6e85U1 DeleteThis @individual.net>:
> "billwg" <bill DeleteThis @magnoliaplantation.net> wrote in message
> news:1158870613.845854.320410@e3g2000cwe.googlegroups.com...
>>
>> The Ghost In The Machine wrote:
>>>
>>> My brain hurts.
>>>
>> Given the lack of corroboration of this anecdote in other venues, you
>> might consider that the whole episode is not as advertised, ghost.
>>
>
>
> well I can assure you it happened to me today. And the thing happened
> EXACTLY as I wrote it. Word for word.
>

There is the consideration as to whether billwg thinks your
testimony trustworthy. Smile

Personally, I can believe it;
there's been a few horror stories floating around about
activation issues. But it's a very weird problem, in
some respects; a modern PC, after all, consists of freely
replaceable subcomponents.

[1] CPU. The most obvious one, to garner a little speed.
Probably also the most useless to replace regarding speed
upgrades, though it depends on what one is doing; given
a choice between CPU and RAM, more RAM will definitely be
more effective in increasing speed, if one is paging.

[2] RAM. This is more of a commodity than a component,
but one could in theory replace this too -- in fact,
one might have to, if one replaces the CPU along with the
entire motherboard.

[3] GPU/Graphics card. Obviously, this is another venue
in order to attack slow speed issues in graphical contexts.
Probably the easiest to replace for such things as better
gaming performance.

[4] Disks. Generally speaking, the bigger, the faster,
plus one can store more stuff.

[5] NIC. I frankly don't know how Microsoft enforces
uniqueness, but a network interface card has a unique
identification number (MAC). This could be used (and
AFAIK has been used) for various licensing schemes.

[6] Software. While not strictly speaking a component
one does occasionally upgrade software, either the OS
(Win3.1->95->98->XP) or various drivers and/or software
packages.

[7] Other. One could contemplate such things as monitors,
USB sticks, and CD-ROM devices as part of the system.

One could also contemplate some very weird scenarios in
the near future. For example, I have system A, which
is a dual-boot. System A currently has XP and a version
of Linux.

Over time system A gets its things replaced: a faster CPU,
a better card for graphics, more memory, an additional
hard drive, a faster NIC, and various software upgrades.
It is now system B. Is it the same system, in XP's lights?

Especially since one could contemplate that system A/B's
other side -- XP -- is never booted until the upgrade
is complete several years past, just because someone has
forgotten its there or maybe because he wants to access
something. Since XP is theoretically smarter than you
(ha!) it will automatically figure out what went wrong,
and try to figure out if it got moved to another machine
or not. If it's *really* intelligent it might look at
the deltas between boots, but I'm not hopeful.

I'm old enough to remember Apollo DOMAIN units, which were
supposed to have a unique node identifier. Back then,
that's all they needed, methinks (that, and a pair of
cables for their token ring). Nowadays, it's a lot more
complicated a problem.

And of course allowing one upgrade is a bit iffy, from a
customer experience standpoint. Oh yeah, assume one's a
crook just because one has a slightly unusual problem!

Sheesh.

--
#191, ewill3 DeleteThis @earthlink.net
Windows Vista. Because it's time to refresh your hardware. Trust us.

Rex Ballard · External Since: Feb 22, 2006 Posts: 947

Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
> In message <1158868616.660768.217610 DeleteThis @k70g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>, Rex
> Ballard wrote:
>
> > Sony decided to retaliate against the X-Box, by selling it's PS3 as a
> > Linux machine.
>
> This sort of thing mystifies me. All versions of the XBox and PlayStation
> have been sold at a loss, which means that more than 100% of the profits
> have to come from selling the games. So if the companies start promoting
> their games consoles as suitable for things other than those games (whether
> as an entertainment centre, running Linux or whatever), it's inevitably
> going to mean fewer games sold, which means less profit.

But even games aren't that much of a money maker. On the other hand,
using a playstation with keyboard as an appliance to sell services -
pure gold. It's why Microsoft so rabidly defended their position on
the desktop, threatening to revoke ALL of Compaq's Prolinea licenses
unless they removed Netscape and stopped removing IE from the desktop.

Using Linux as an "internet appliance" means that you can generate a
whole new level of services that couldn't be supported by the
traditional Windows PC. With fast multitasking, security, and server
capabilities, Linux machines can be faster, more efficient, and more
flexible. They can run interactive games, including multiplayer games
on Linux without issues. Keep in mind that multiplayer games started
on Unix about 20 years ago with a game called Empire. It was a
text-based came, but those played it got very involved in it and it
could go for days, or even months, depending on how well you played and
how many people were in the game. An animated version was created
later, but many of the principles and concepts are still used today. I
read recently that someone was trying to enforce a patent on
multiplayer games. 20 year old technology and someone just filed a
patent on it.

There's bucks to be made in a Linux machine. And even more to be made
in a PS3.
Microsoft knows it, and that's why they have tried so hard to maintain
control of the desktop, the network (MSN, Verisign...), and the OEM
channel.

Keep in mind that Microsoft is just one piece of a much bigger
organization of companies that are partially owned by Microsoft. Even
if you figure that Microsoft only gets 25% of their take, that could
still be another $40 billion in sales and services through these
regulated satellite companies.

> Diversifying from games just doesn't jibe with the loss-leader business
> model.

Yes, but putting Linux directly on the desktop as an "Interactive
Internet Appliance" makes a lot of sense. TiVo boxes are sold for as
little as $80 per machine, but users typically subscribe to a service
for $30 per month in ADDITION to their regular cable bill.

There are something like 80 million TiVo machines out there?

[H]omer · External Since: Apr 21, 2006 Posts: 2134

Roy Schestowitz wrote:
> __/ [ Gordon ] on Thursday 21 September 2006 17:52 \__
>
>> have just done a clean re-install of the retail copy of XP Pro that I have
>> owned for 4 years, on the same un-changed laptop that it has resided on for
>> that four years. The last installation was well over a YEAR ago. It failed
>> the internet activation and I ended up having to speak to a customer
>> services representative. I asked him why it did not activate over the
>> internet. He told me that a new policy just issued is that even with retail
>> copies, internet activation is now restricted to ONE instance - any more
>> than that has to be over the phone.
>>
>> That's going to push a lot more people to Linux, isn't it?
>> If this is true, WHAT THE HELL DO MS THINK THEY ARE DOING?
>
> To be honest with you, I think that Microsoft is trying to crack down on
> piracy (yes, honest!)

There's a problem with that tactic:

AFAIK the *pirate* copies of XP floating around, are actually the
so-called "Corporate Edition" that require *no* activation. So making
re-validation more difficult will likely only adversely affect *genuine*
customers anyway.

The only thing "Corporate Edition" pirates have to worry about is WGA,
which by all accounts has been cracked over and over again. In fact,
I've even read about a WGA crack that has it's own *update* service, to
automatically provide an updated crack, every time Microsoft releases a
new patch against it. The crackers are pissing themselves laughing at
Microsoft.

Validation is not the answer, and frankly I don't know what is ...
within the realms of ethicalness. I suppose MS could insist that patches
and updates are only available via account login to their servers, but
then somebody would just redistribute those files elsewhere (binary
Warez groups, BitTorrent, P2P), or produce periodic slipstream ISOs.

The Closed Source development model will always suffer from piracy. It's
only by switching to a Services model based on Open Source and Open
Standards, that any company can guarantee that their customers are genuine.

Meanwhile, well motivated though they may be, Microsoft continues to
implement more and more draconian measures against Windows users;
becoming as ethically challenged as the criminals they attempt to
defeat, and turning the the Windows XPerience into a prison sentence.

--
K.
http://slated.org - Slated, Rated & Blogged
Beware the Penguin:
http://www.victorialodging.com/video/Never_Trust_A_Penguin.mpg

Fedora Core release 5 (Bordeaux) on sky, running kernel 2.6.16-1.2133_FC5
04:06:48 up 96 days, 4:23, 3 users, load average: 0.89, 0.87, 0.39

Rex Ballard · External Since: Feb 22, 2006 Posts: 947

Robert Newson wrote:
> Rex Ballard wrote:
>
> ...
> > Sony decided to retaliate against the X-Box, by selling it's PS3 as a
> > Linux machine. When it's released, probably very soon now, we will see
> > millions of little Linux machines, complete with KDE desktops, and
> > maybe even OpenOffice, being sold at K-mart, WalMart, Sears, BestBuy,
> > and any other place that sold the PS/2.
>
> How will this affect the "market share" of Linux? Or will MS [apologists]
> just say it's not the PC market, hence no meaning? But it will be
> interesting in terms of "games machines" - Linux would "hold" a large
> percentage of that market. ^_^

There are Lies, Damn Lies, and Statistics.

Wintrolls can point to actual surveys like Statmarket and state that
Linux is less than 1% of the market.

I can count every single actual deployment of Linux ever done, compared
to the number of Windows machine actually deployed in the market today,
and come up with 55 million it 1999, or 200+ million in 2006, giving
Linux 20% of the market today.

If I really want to get perverse, I could count all of those
depoylements and compare them to this year's sales of PCs, giving Linux
200% of the market.

The one number Microsoft does not want published is the number of NEW
Linux deployments in the last year, compared to the number of NEW
deployments of Windows PCs actually sold in the last year. After all,
if I have 5 VMWare appliances, and 10 million other PC users deployed
Linux on VirtualPC, VMWare, Xen, and Cygwin, and all of these are new
deployments (upgrades, new distributions, new configurations,...), and
you had to deduct one deployment for each machine replaced with a newer
machine (how many were recycled?), then Linux could have 75% or more
of the market by those measures.

The bottom line is that Linux is a growing market and current attempts
to "cash in" are still based on old paradigms. Even though Linux has
some "killer apps", there are still some very limited approaches to
getting a "killer market" that can yield $millions or $billions in
revenue. TiVo was one of those examples of a company that played the
Linux card brilliantly.

Robt. Miller · External Since: Oct 02, 2004 Posts: 111

On 2006-09-21, Rex Ballard <rex.ballard.RemoveThis@gmail.com> wrote:
> Roy Schestowitz wrote:
>> __/ [ Gordon ] on Thursday 21 September 2006 17:52 \__
>>
>> > have just done a clean re-install of the retail copy of XP Pro that I have
>> > owned for 4 years, on the same un-changed laptop that it has resided on for
>> > that four years.
>
> Yes. The problem is that Microsoft really can't tell anymore, whether
> you are installing it directly on the laptop, or if you are installing
> into a VMWare Image. My guess is that Microsoft has been seeing a
> sudden SURGE in activations of existing licenses, especially OEM
> licenses. Installing Windows into a VM isn't expressly prohibited by
> the license, and provides Windows users with rapid recovery
> capabilities, especially when running as a Linux client.

I did a demo of a "Disposable Windows" machine, an XP VM on SuSE that
used SuSE Samba shares for the XP data storage - you could totally
destroy the XP config, click an icon, and in under 5 minutes you'd be
back working with your previous configuration. We're soon going to
experiment with Exchange set up the same way.

--

(o< |)
//\ ..may the beacon /\obt.
V_/_ pass you by.. /\/\iller
6:42am up 12 days 16:11, 24 users, load average: 0.00, 0.04, 0.05
processes 383837

Erik Funkenbusch · External Since: May 27, 2005 Posts: 2362

On 22 Sep 2006 04:11:45 -0700, Rex Ballard wrote:

> There are Lies, Damn Lies, and Statistics.

And then there's Rexisms....

> Wintrolls can point to actual surveys like Statmarket and state that
> Linux is less than 1% of the market.

Yes, we can point to physical surveys conducted by real people with real
numbers that exist in the real universe.

> I can count every single actual deployment of Linux ever done, compared
> to the number of Windows machine actually deployed in the market today,
> and come up with 55 million it 1999, or 200+ million in 2006, giving
> Linux 20% of the market today.

Which only exists as fictitious numbers in Rex make believe land.

I mean seriously, do you even listen to yourself? You can count "every
single actual deployment of Linux ever done"? Really? You can do that?
Are you omnipotent in your fantasies?

> If I really want to get perverse, I could count all of those
> depoylements and compare them to this year's sales of PCs, giving Linux
> 200% of the market.

Perverse being the key words there.

Robert Newson · External Since: Apr 03, 2004 Posts: 710

Rex Ballard wrote:

....
> Sony decided to retaliate against the X-Box, by selling it's PS3 as a
> Linux machine. When it's released, probably very soon now, we will see
> millions of little Linux machines, complete with KDE desktops, and
> maybe even OpenOffice, being sold at K-mart, WalMart, Sears, BestBuy,
> and any other place that sold the PS/2.

How will this affect the "market sharce" of Linux? Or will MS [apologists]
just say it's not the PC market, hence no meaning? But it will be
interesting in terms of "games machines" - Linux would "hold" a large
percentage of that market. ^_^

chrisv · External Since: Nov 02, 2004 Posts: 1649

Rex Ballard wrote:

>If I really want to get perverse,

.... stop right there, we don't want to know. Cool

Rex Ballard · External Since: Feb 22, 2006 Posts: 947

Linonut wrote:
> After takin' a swig o' grog, Gordon belched out this bit o' wisdom:
[snip]
> > That's going to push a lot more people to Linux, isn't it?
> > If this is true, WHAT THE HELL DO MS THINK THEY ARE DOING?
>
> It's not really true. MS has a dominant position that will be hard to
> lose, since the majority of people cannot conceive of alternatives.
>
> It'll probably give Linux a 1% or 2% boost.

If there is a bear in the bush, but you can't see it, then it's safe to
go to sleep, right?

You go back to sleep, I'll leave a couple of salmon in your tent, and
if you're right,
I'll see you tomorrow.

Wink

> --
> "I'm going to f'in *kill* Google!"
> -- Steve Ballmer, CEO Microsoft

billwg · External Since: Aug 15, 2006 Posts: 393

Robert Newson wrote:
> Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
> ...
> Care to comment on my original statement that if MS is going to use /Market
> Share/ as opposed to /Insalled Base/ then every PS/3 being sold as a /Linux/
> [games] machine is going to cause the percentage of the market share to
> Linux to be high?
>
You have a wrong view of "market share", bob. Market share relates to
how much of the available market are you selling versus how much your
rivals are selling. After all, the pupose of business is to make
money, not establish mindshare in some population group. If you want
to do that, you need to get into politics.

A business measures its success by its profits compared to its
investments. Market share is only a metric that can be of use in
determining product development tactics. For example, a Taurus and a
Corvette are distinctly different vehicles. If GM were to look at the
Corvette's share of a market comprised of all auto sales, they might
despair and terminate the Corvette business as being a loser, but they
do not do that because they can recognize that the Corvette sells to a
distinct segment of buyers and dominates that segment. They will
rather evaluate the potential of the segment than their share of it.
If you have 80% of a market you will make the same decisions that you
would if you had 99% of the market and they would be different from
those made if you hade 20% of your product market.

You are looking at market share as some kind of popularity contest
result and you are not understanding what it means. It is a guide for
product development and sales tactics and is more of a compass than a
map.

> It'd be interesting to see how the MS Xbox market share compares to the PS/3
> [Linux] market share, and what spin MS puts on it.

Right now XBox is outselling PS2 and that is the market. The
conventional wisdom is that MS is in the game box business in order to
have a nose in the future home network tent. What is most interesting
is that the Home and Entertainment business at MS is more than $4B per
year, which is a good sized business on its own. Bigger, I think, than
the linux businesses combined.