In the last week of October 1998, a confidential Microsoft memo detailing their strategy against Linux and Open source was leaked to Eric S. Raymond, who annotated it and posted it on the web. This became known as the first Halloween Document. Between 1998 and 2004 Eric posted 10 other Halloween Documents

Microsoft's recognition of the GNU/Linux threat as shown in its internal, confidential presentations

The FOSS (Free/Open Source Software) Community knows, thanks to leaked Microsoft internal documents, that since about 1998 Microsoft has been in a sort of war against them. Because of this, it is not surprising that the FOSS community has looked at Microsoft with suspicion and has vilified it to no end. But, is Microsoft really evil?

Antitrust exhibit shows Microsoft's fear of GNU/Linux and StarOffice

Antitrust exhibit shows how Microsoft changes its pricing to suppress interest in Mandrake (GNU/Linux)

The SC34 Bellevue Plenary Report is leaked to reveal what ISO had in mind when hosting a meeting in Microsoft's own turf

MICROSOFT'S "academic kickbacks" are no news to us. Microsoft pays hundreds of dollars to professors who secretly promote its products (and bullies those who don't). Microsoft was doing almost exactly the same thing to throw fire at the GNU GPL version 3. The company from Redmond routinely pays academia to promote its agenda and here is the very latest example which comes from the New York Times.

Must users of GNU/Linux give Microsoft clues with which to criminalise? If not, then why make it the default option for them?

It's a funny thing how Microsoft succeeds in getting their logo and the Windows logo plastered on everything-- computers, advertising, and even other companies' ads. That "We recommend Windows Vista!" blurb is on every darned ad and product catalog that exists, it seems.