Halloween documents

ENGLISH RESEARCH PAPER
THE HALLOWEEN
DOCUMENTS
1998 – Microsoft Corporation compelled to admit the authenticity
of some Confidential memoranda about the suppression of Open
Source Systems.
Facts, consequences and main events about the documents
which put Microsoft in a big pickle at the end of 90’s.
Workgroup:
- Andrea Tino
- Mariacarmela Spada
- Vincenzo Sofia
- Cristian Santoro
EXAM RESEARCH PAPER
A.Y. 2006-2007
UNICT – INGEGNERIA INFORMATICA

MICROSOFT HALLOWEEN DOCS – ENGLISH RESEARCH PAPER PAGE I
CONTENT INDEX
WHAT ARE THE HALLOWEEN DOCUMENTS
· Microsoft Illegal economic strategies to suppress OSS (Pag. 1)
· 1998 – Microsoft in a big pickle for many reports found (Pag. 1)
· Discussing and analyzing facts and events (Pag. 1)
· How we will talk about the Halloween Documents in this paper (Pag. 1)
GENERAL INFORMATION ABOUT MICROSOFT
· Brief history of Microsoft (Pag. 2)
· The importance of Microsoft (Pag. 2)
· Brief history from the foundation (Pag. 2)
· Microsoft today (Pag. 2)
· Microsoft’s internal structure (Pag. 2)
· The Board of Directors (Pag. 3)
· The Executive Team (Pag. 3)
· The Corporate Staff Council (Pag. 4)
ANALYSIS OF THE LINUX AND GNU-LINUX PHENOMENA
· Most important considerations about Linux (Pag. 5)
· Brief history (Pag. 5)
· Linux in the beginning (Pag. 5)
· Linux today (Pag. 6)
· Main characteristics of Linux (Pag. 6)
· A small but important consideration (Pag. 7)
· GNU, GNU-Linux and Linux (Pag. 7)
· An important difference (Pag. 7)
· Introduction to the GNU system (Pag. 7)
· Introduction to the GNU-Linux system (Pag. 7)
INSIDE THE HALLOWEEN DOCUEMNTS OF THE MICROSOFT CORPORATION
· Microsoft background near 1998 (Pag. 8)
· Something to say first (Pag. 8)
· Microsoft general situation before the Halloween Documents (Pag. 8)
· Microsoft economic situation close to October 1998 (Pag. 8)
· Inside Microsoft Halloween Documents (Pag. 9)
· The finding of the first memos (Pag. 9)

MICROSOFT HALLOWEEN DOCS – ENGLISH RESEARCH PAPER PAGE II
ANDREA TINO, MARIACARMELA SPADA, VINCENZO SOFIA, CRISTIAN SANTORO – 2006-2007
· The original authors of the memoranda and all the people around them (Pag. 11)
· Main content of the Halloween Documents (Pag. 12)
· The main question (Pag. 12)
· Halloween I (Pag. 12)
· Halloween II (Pag. 14)
· Microsoft’s response to Linux’s growth (Pag. 16)
MICROSOFT’S REACTION TO THE HALLOWEEN DOCUMENTS AND THE MAIN CONSEQUENCESON THE
COMPANY AND ITS POLICY
· Interviews, comments, speeches and official positions of Microsoft towards the publication
of the Halloween Documents (Pag. 17)
· The importance of reactions (Pag. 17)
· Three months of “No Comment” (Pag. 17)
· First comments and official positions (Pag. 18)
· The official Microsoft spokesperson’s statements: Ed Muth (Pag. 18)
· The main consequences of the Halloween Documents on Microsoft, its policy and Linux (Pag. 19)
· Scandal and rumors (Pag. 19)
· Microsoft’s policy (Pag. 20)
· Linux’s reaction (Pag. 20)
MICROSOFT’S ECONOMIC STRATEGIES INCLUDED IN TH HALLOWEEN DOCUMENTS
· A general view of Microsoft’s strategies (Pag. 21)
· A general vision (Pag. 21)
· What kind of strategies (Pag. 21)
· EEE – Embrace, Extend and Extinguish (Pag. 21)
· Brief history (Pag. 21)
· General working (Pag. 22)
· FUD – Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt (Pag. 22)
· Brief history from IBM (Pag. 22)
· How it works (Pag. 23)
· Phases of the FUD strategies actuated by Microsoft towards Linux from 1997 to 2001(Pag. 23)
FINAL CONSIDERATIONS ABOUT THE HALLOWEEN DOCUMENTS AND GENERAL OPINIONS
· Final considerations on the Halloween Docs in this paper (Pag. 25)
· Why these were important (Pag. 25)
· Final considerations (Pag. 25)
· General opinions of the group (Pag. 26)
· Looking now at what happened then (Pag. 26)

MICROSOFT HALLOWEEN DOCS – ENGLISH RESEARCH PAPER PAGE 1
WHAT ARE THE HALLOWEEN DOCUMENTS?
Microsoft illegal economic strategies to suppress OSS
1998 – Microsoft in a big pickle for many reports found.
At the end of 1998 Microsoft went in the teeth of a very big cyclone.
Halloween Documents is the name that is today used to referee to a series of Microsoft Corporation
confidential memoranda. During that time, these memoranda were written by some engineers of the well-
known Company, and they are now famous because these documents related how to suppress the
growth of Open Source Systems, with particular attention to some well known informatic technologies such
as GNU/Linux, UNIX and Netscape.
The importance of the Halloween Docs: Halloween Documents were a very important event because they
contradicted the official Microsoft’s public pronouncements on the subject (OSS), and also the Microsoft’s
public policy about software production and worldwide competition with other firms.
Discussing and analyzing facts and events
How we are going to talk about the Halloween Documents in this paper.
In this paper we want to analyze what really happened during 1998 with particular interest in the
consequences and in Microsoft’s actions.
Talking about the argument: We will talk about the Halloween Documents following a specific line of
thought. Our purpose is not to judge Microsoft’s actions or to define what was wrong or right. This paper’s
only purpose is to analyze the main events and the most important facts, in order to understand what
consequences those events caused during then, and now.
For this reason, we will focus on the elements which we consider among the most important and significant:
· General information about Microsoft Corporation and OSS.
· Most important facts and events about the core of the Halloween Documents.
· General information about the economic strategies applied by Microsoft.
· Most important consequences of the Halloween documents on Microsoft and its general internal
policy.
Opinions: Discussing the arguments, our purpose is also to express our considerations and opinions on their
consequences at that time (1998 and later) and during the present. We deem that the Halloween
Documents have been a really important event in the history of IT (Information Technology), so it is
impossible not to give some considerations on it.

GENERAL INFORMATION ABOUT MICROSOFT
Brief history of Microsoft
The importance of Microsoft.
In this part of the paper we will talk about Microsoft Corporation. This is necessary because the Halloween
Documents concerns Microsoft in the first place.
Microsoft, the full name is Microsoft Corporation, is today one of the most important
multinational computer technology corporations in the world. It has a global annual revenue
of 44,28 billion US$ and a total employees number equal to 71.553 spread in 102 countries
(data upgraded to July 2006).
The company is headquartered in Redmond, Washington, USA and its products are sold all over the world.
Among Microsoft’s most famous software we can find: Office, Windows, Windows Server System and .NET
Framework. At the moment Microsoft is hard working in order to release in January 2007 the new version of
Windows XP: Windows Vista.
Brief history from the foundation.
Microsoft’s name, originally bi-capitalized as MicroSoft or with hyphenation Micro-Soft, is a portmanteau of
“Microcomputer Software” and it is often abbreviated as “MS”.
The company was founded in Albuquerque, New Mexico, USA on April 4, 1975 by Bill Gates and Paul Allen.
The company was not very famous after the foundation and for some years it has kept on remaining so.
Microsoft begun to be a well known firm after the first important collaboration with IBM. Microsoft, in fact,
produced the first computers which could be used by everyone, that’s to say the Personal Computers or
PCs.
The fast growth: The first Operating System by Microsoft was MS-DOS, it is still very famous, which has some
success after its release. Then the system grew very fast in several versions until Windows 3.0.
Windows was the most important step for Microsoft’ growth because it was the first Operating System with
a GUI (Graphic User Interface). Thanks to Windows 95 Microsoft verified good sales and starting from there,
the company became very famous, even because the contract with IBM was over.
Microsoft today
Microsoft’s internal structure.
All we know that Microsoft was founded by Bill Gates, even if not all know that Paul Allen founded the
company too, and that he is still inside the company as an important executive figure. In order to better
understand the facts concerning the Halloween Documents, it is important to explain and describe how
Microsoft is organized internally.

Analyzing all Microsoft’s internal structure is too difficult and, for our purpose, useless; for this reason we are
going to talk about the most important managerial structures: the Board of Directors, The Executive Team
and the Corporate Staff Council.
These are, in ascending order of importance, the most important groups of people at Microsoft.
The Board of Directors.
The company is mainly run by a group of ten people: the directors of the company. These ten people, at
the moment, are (in order of importance): Steve Ballmer, James Cash Jr., Dina Dublon, Bill Gates, Raymond
Gilmartin, Ann Korologos, David Marquardt, Charles Noski, Helmut Panke and Jon Shirley.
Election of the Board: The ten members are elected every year at the annual shareholders’ meeting; but
some of these cannot be elected, some of them are stable in the Board of Directors (like Bill Gates). During
the election, those who don’t get the majority of votes must submit a resignation to the Board, which will
subsequently choose whether or not to accept the resignation.
Subdivisions: Inside the Board there are five committees which oversee more specific matters, there
subdivisions consist of:
· The Audit Committee: It handles accounting issues including auditing and reporting.
· The Compensation Committee: It approves compensations for the CEO and others employees
inside the company.
· The Finance Committee: It handles mainly financial matters.
· The Governance and Nominating Committee: It mainly oversees the activities during the reelection
of the Board.
· The Antitrust Compliance Committee: This committee, really particular, oversees the actions of the
company in order to approve or deny their actuation whether or not they suit the Antitrust market
laws.
The Executive Team.
The Executive Team is another important body inside Microsoft. It is made up of sixteen
company officers across the globe. The team is charged with various duties including
making sure employees understand Microsoft’s policy and its culture for business.
But the Executive team has many other tasks very important. These sixteen members can be
considered as the head of the entire company, they decide about economical actions and operation
and, besides, they are the main figures who can decide about the future of the company.

Members: The Executive team is made up of the most important people at Microsoft. In the first place,
among these people, we can find the three CEO (Chief Executive Officer) of the three Microsoft’s
worldwide economic areas: Middle East, Europe and Africa; but there are also other members:
CEO: Inside a company there are some important figures, one of these is the CEO. This member can be considered
as the most important element in the company because he it is part of the Board of Directors and has many tasks. In
this case, given that Microsoft has three geographic economic areas of sales, there is the necessity to have uniformly
distribute the executive power on the globe. For this reason in Microsoft there is a main CEO, but there are other
CEOs on the globe representing the various sales areas.
· Chairman and CEO: Inside the Executive Team there is the most important elements of the
company: the Chairperson and the CEO. We must underline that the CEO and the Chairman are
two separate figures having different tasks and roles, but in our case, at Microsoft, we can find one
person covering both positions: Bill Gates. Bill Gates is part of the Executive Team, he is Chairman
and CEO of Microsoft and he is also part of the Board of Directors.
Bill Gates has always been the main figure inside Microsoft, but in the next years he is going to
abandon his position at Microsoft to work full time at the Gates Foundation.
· CSA – Chief Software Architect: This is another important figure in the company. The CSA oversees
all the Software Development Team’s operations.
· The General Counsel: Inside the Executive Team, during every Team Session, the General Counsel
oversees the operations of the members and the activities of the Team.
The Corporate Staff Council.
The Corporate Staff Council handles all major staff functions of the company, including approving
corporate policies. The Council consists of many members; mainly it is made up of employees from the Law
and Corporate Affairs, Finance, Human Resources, Corporate Marketing and Advanced Strategies groups
at Microsoft. There are also some Executive Officers just like the Presidents and the Vice-Presidents of the
various Product Divisions of the company.

ANALISYS OF THE LINUX AND GNU-LINUX PHENOMENA
Most important considerations about Linux
Brief history.
“Linus Benedict Torvalds” is the name of the young student of the University of Helsinki, who started building
a new Operating System which now we all know with the name of Linux.
Linux from Minix: Torvalds, during those years, used a very particular system called “Minix” which was
distributed with many facilitations to students and professors. Linus believed to be able to improve the
system with new features, but he couldn’t do that because the system’s license didn’t allow any edit and
its producer, a professor of the University of Amsterdam: A.S. Tenenbaum, rejected that changes too.
So, Torvalds decided to start building its own system anew; the name “Linux” was attributed to it only later,
nevertheless this name was not an idea of Torvalds, but of Ari Lamke who first rendered the system
available on the Internet. In particular, “Linux” was the name of the directory containing the core files of
the system.
Linux in the beginning.
When Torvalds decided to build another system anew, he decided to program the Kernel using a GPL
license (General Public License). This allowed every user to access the software and reprogram it.
In the beginning Linux was just an emulator programmed in C and Assembly; slowly the kernel grew until it
was able to manage an entire system on its own.
Kernel: An Operating System works thanks to the Kernel, that’s to say a particular software which can be considered
the core of an OS. The kernel in fact manage the data stream of the system and in it there are the most important
programming structures that let the system work.
GPL License: Every software is sold with a license, it is the permission of using that particular software. Normally a
license also establish how the user can use the software. A GPL License allow every kind of operation.
C: C is a programming language very common and also one o the most popular. Almost every system today has a
lot of components programmed in C or in C++ and C#, which are other languages based on C.
Assembly: As C, Assembly is another programming language among the most common and popular. Today it is used
for OS and satellite systems.
In October 1991 Torvalds released the first version of Linux: Linux 0.02, but it didn’t have much success
because it was a very simple system which could work only on Minix (because Linux 0.02 used the Minix File
System). But going on with time Linux grew and overtook Minix until it became a complex OS with all the
requested features. When Linux reached this level, Torvalds decided to reprogram Linux in order to be
installed also on other systems, in particular onto the GNU platform.

Linux today.
After the first steps, Linux grew and the kernel programmed and always improved by Torvalds, reached
high power and functionality levels.
We must remember that Linux is not an Operating System, it is in fact only a kernel structure which Torvalds
keeps on reprogramming everytime in order to improve its capacities and functions. In 1996 Torvalds chose
the penguin as official Linux’s mark, its name is “TUX” which signify “Torvalds Uni X…”. At the moment,
thanks to the possibility to access the programming structures of Linux, this kernel is the most favorite in the
world by programmers and software developers.
Main characteristics of Linux.
The kernel of Torvalds has a lot of functionalities and has several aspects which renders it unique:
· Multitasking management: Today every kernel supports multitasking, that’s to say the possibility to
do several actions at the same time, and Linux supports it.
· Multi-user management: Linux is able to manage more than one user in the system.
· Multi-platform management: Linux is able to manage more platform installed on the computer.
· RAM exclusive protection: Linux manage the RAM memory of the computer so that every program
has its own memory space which doesn’t interfere with programs’ other.
· Memory sharing: On the contrary, Linux can also manage an open sharing RAM memory for
several applications which can use the same data, stored in the same storage area.
· Availability of the source code: The core of Linux, that’s to say, the source files containing the
programming structures of the kernel, is available for edits by the user.
· File System: Linux has a particular File System called UMSDOS.
· Modularization: Linux can be expanded by adding other modules to its standard structure.
Linux, in the end, has also several advantages in comparison with other OS in the IT market, but also some
weaknesses, here is a brie list of its main advantages and disadvantages:
· License cost: Surely one of the most powerful advantages of Linux is its license’s cost which is
completely free.
· System stability: Linux is a very stable structure, it is very difficult that Linux goes on crash and if it
does, the problem must be searched in the hardware configuration.

· Software limits: Linux, nevertheless, has several problems of software integration. In fact, not many
applications today are built for Linux and this takes a lot of problem for a user who needs some
programs that cannot be installed on its computer..
A small but important consideration.
We have said that Linux is not an Operating System but just a Kernel structure. In spite of this we have said
sometimes that Linux could be considered as a system anyway. Then, what is it all about? The truth is that
Linux is a Kernel but in our times it is incorrect not to consider it as a system too. Today Linux works as a
system and as a Kernel too.
GNU, GNU-Linux and Linux
An important difference.
Understanding the history of Linux is important in order to understand what happened in the Halloween
Documents matter. But now we want to spend a minute to describe a little difference between three
technologies that are confused one with each other.
Introduction to the GNU system.
GNU is an Operating system launched in 1983 by Richard Stallman, its main purpose was to build a system
completely free. To do that many applications and programming structures were created in order to cover
the most the needs of the user but, even today, GNU still needs to be improved. To renders the system free
for the users, Stallman endowed it with a GPL license.
Introduction to the GNU-Linux system.
The project of Stallman was great if we consider the time, but with years, Stallman realized that GNU
needed several changes in order to better serve the needs of the users. For this reason, the GNU system
and the Linux kernel were combined together.
We are now talking about GNU-Linux which is a different system in comparison with GNU only. In fact the
kernel of Linux rendered the GNU system more stable and endowed it with a higher complexity level.
Thanks to these new characteristics, the GNU-Linux system was able to support more technologies and also
many other applications.
Main architecture: GNU-Linux is today used by many people and companies. In fact we must not forget
that all the system has a GPL license. Furthermore, Gnu-Linux combines the advantages of Linux with the
power of GNU. GNU maintains its functionalities, but the new kernel, Linux, gives it more stability and other
significant aspects. One of the most important to underline is surely the difference between User-Space
and Kernel-Space.
In a GNU-Linux system, the processes of the system, GNU, are executed separately from the kernel’s ones.
This is another factor of major stability.

INSIDE THE HALLOWEEN DOCUMENTS OF MICROSOFT
CORPORATION
Microsoft background around 1998
Something to say first.
Before talking about the core of the Halloween Documents and what happened during that time, we must
first talk a little bit about the Microsoft general situation until 1998; it is necessary in order to understand as
well as possible what happened later (the beginning of all the story).
Microsoft general situation before the Halloween Documents.
Microsoft’s new step: Around 1998 Microsoft finished building one of its most famous Operating Systems:
Windows 98. During that period, Microsoft was about to take a very crucial step in the world of computers
and software, because this new Operating System was supposed to change the vision of IT (Informatic
Technologies) in the world.
The new system built by Microsoft had a lot more new features if compared to Windows 95; we also must
not forget that, in those years Internet was growing up and Microsoft also finished building its browser:
Internet Explorer. In short, 1998 was a very intense year for Microsoft which had to face the new market with
new products.
A new threat: So, in a situation of general alert, Microsoft had to find out everything which could represent
a minimal threat, in order to take the suitable countermeasures; this behavior in economy is completely
normal for a company which is launching a new product on the market, it is in fact an ordinary aspect of
competition. And just in those years Microsoft found a potential threat: Open Source Systems.
OSS represented a very big problem for Microsoft because they could be an obstacle for its products in the
market (We have talked about OSS before so now it is possible to understand why Microsoft did really care
about them).
Microsoft economic situation close to October 1998.
So, as we can see, 1998 was a really important year for Microsoft. Now we want to take a look at
Microsoft’s general economic situation, during the months when Windows 98 was released, within other
products (Office 97, Internet Explorer etc.).
Windows sales: After Microsoft released the new version of Windows: Windows 98, the company verified a
large increase of sales all over the world. Windows, after few months from the presentation, was the best
OS (Operating System) sold, although the system still had many problems and bugs (solved in more than
one year, with the release of the first service packs and security updates).
Office sales: Also Office 97, when presented (before Windows 98, that’s to say in 1997), experienced good
sales. Most of the users who had older versions of the suite, migrated to the latest one, in few months.

Internet market: The only problem was the Internet development. Microsoft, in fact, was one of those
companies that missed the first years of the “Internet Boom” at the beginning of 1990. But the company
was able to access the market thanks to ActiveX technology and COM (Microsoft Component Object
Model).
Active X: Active X is a particular Microsoft technology released in 1996 as an upgrade of the old OLE (another
technology which can be considered as the parent of Active X). Active X is used to build media content for web
pages; it is, I short, a technology for the web.
COM: Microsoft Component Object model is a special platform for software componentry introduced by the
Company in 1993. This platform can be used to enable interprocess communications and dynamic object creation
in any programming language that supports the same technology. The innovation of COM is to allow every user to
build programs which can be run on every Windows platform.
At the end, in 1995, Microsoft launched its own network: MSN, Microsoft Network as a major point of access
for Microsoft users.
We can see at the end, how Microsoft’s economic situation was really good during 1998 and before. This is
important now to understand what happened later.
Inside Microsoft Halloween Documents
The finding of the first memos.
Now, it is the moment to really talk about the main argument of this paper. Until now we
have in fact dealt with other arguments concerning general aspects of Microsoft and OSS, in
order to better understand those series of events which affected Microsoft in 1998 and that
are commonly known as Halloween Documents.
Steven Raymond: Everything begins on October 1998, when a confidential memorandum from Redmond
was leaked to Eric Steven Raymond (the picture beside).
Redmond: Redmond is a city located in the state of Washington (USA). It is a famous place because it houses
Microsoft’s international office. So sometimes it is possible to refer to Microsoft Corp. using the name of this city.
E. S. Raymond: Steven Raymond is a well-known figure inside the computing world. He was born on December 1957 in
Massachusetts but now he lives in Pennsylvania. At the moment, he is one of the most famous hackers all over the
world. During the last years he has written several books about OSS and other technologies. He is also known
because he developed several applications and contributed to build others among which there are some GNU
libraries. Inside the Halloween Documents events, he was deeply connected with all the happenings during that
time.
The memorandum which Raymond had in his hands was marked “Microsoft Confidential”, and contained
much information about Microsoft’s strategies against OSS and Linux. The source through which Raymond
obtained that document is still nameless, and for much time it was thought there was a mole inside
Microsoft’s hierarchy.

However, after few days Raymond published the entire document (with some comments of his) on his
personal website. It took just few hours, and suddenly the memorandum was divulged all over the world.
SOURCES OF THE HALLOWEEN I AND I I
It is very important to underline a significant fact: Raymond, after the publication of the documents on the
Internet, officially affirmed that the sources of the memoranda were three, but that these three sources were not
among those people who wrote the memoranda; that’s to say all those ones who were directly involved in the
documents inside Microsoft (the authors or people who ordered the documents).
Raymond also affirmed that he knew those sources.
Halloween I and II: After this first event, the publication of the Microsoft memorandum, things didn’t stop. In
fact, only a few days later, another Microsoft confidential memorandum was leaked to Raymond. This
document contained other important information about Microsoft competitors and in particular, in the
memo, some special strategies against Linux were explained.
This further document wasn’t really a surprise, because in the first memorandum there were some
references about a second eventual file. Raymond, who published and commented this one too, on his
website, said that the second file was leaked by two different sources (nameless too).
It is now that Raymond gave the name of “Halloween Documents” to the memos leaked to him.
Halloween Documents: Raymond called the memoranda with this name just because of the period: it was Halloween
and it might have been a good idea to call the documents like this.
Halloween III and all the others: Within days, Raymond collected another memorandum from another
nameless source and also published other documents written by himself, until they became a large series.
At the end the complete series included eleven files:
· Halloween I, II and III: These are the first Halloween Docs written by Microsoft and also the most
famous. Raymond commented and published them on his website.
· Halloween IV and V: These memos are probably the most discredited among the Halloween Docs,
because their content consists just in a parody of the first two memos (even if a part of Halloween
V deals with an important argument).
· Halloween VI: Number six was written by Raymond and it is just a response from him to a Microsoft
group.
· Halloween VII, VIII and X: This documents are a summary about costs, statistics and sales and
damage-control strategies of Microsoft. They contain some original parts from Microsoft and other
parts edited by Raymond.
· Halloween IX: Number nine consists in another satire on Microsoft by Raymond.
· Halloween XI: This document is a response from Raymond to a campaign by Microsoft called “Get
the facts” on negative marketing against Linux.

The publication: Before talking about the authors of the documents, we want to focus on a particular thing:
“Why didn’t Raymond publish the original uncommented version of the memos?”. The answer is simple but
important. Raymond said in his web site, to those ones who requested him a copy of the original files, that
he couldn’t publish an uncommented version of the Halloween Docs.
The reason is almost legal; in fact if Raymond had published the original version of the memos then
Microsoft would have been able to sue him for damages.
We consider this to be a very important fact because just for this reason Microsoft couldn’t touch Raymond
at all. Raymond in fact never had to defend himself from an eventual Microsoft legal action against him,
even if the documents published were confidential and property of the Microsoft Corporation.
The original authors of the memoranda and all the people around them.
It is evident how most of the Halloween Documents are not “completely original”. In fact the first three
memos are, physically, documents written by people inside Microsoft’s hierarchy, while the others are just
publications of Raymond about the first three Halloween Docs or other aspects of Microsoft.
It is for this reason that we will take only the first three documents into consideration.
We know that the documents came to Raymond were memoranda written by “someone” inside Microsoft.
Now we are going to talk about who, physically, wrote the memos now known as Halloween Docs and
who got involved in them.
Vinod Valloppillil: The main author, main because the memoranda were written by more
than one person, of the Halloween Documents is Vinod Valloppillil. During 1998 Valloppillil
worked as an engineer, in particular as a Program Manager (PM), for Microsoft in the Proxy
Server and Windows NT team, and during the summer of that year he was asked by
Microsoft Executive James Allchin to write several memos for Executive Paul Maritz, in order
to discuss potential strategies for combating OSS and Linux.
Program Manager (PM): A Program Manager, or PM, in a software company or in a research group, is an engineer or
a qualified person assigned to coordinating the interactions between development groups. Usually in a
development group, the PMs coordinate several tasks and manage the general work.
As it is possible to see, Valloppillil was not part of Microsoft management, the reports were in fact asked by
an executive. However during the events concerning the Halloween Docs, Valloppillil was surely in the
middle of attention, but the files were just true economic analyses. Now Valloppillil works for Microsoft no
longer.
Josh Cohen: The first three, original, Halloween Documents were written by Vinod Valloppillil and Josh
Cohen. There is not much information about Cohen, but, although his name appears on the documents
among the authors, his influence on them was almost irrelevant, because he just helped Valloppillil to write
them.

James Allchin: James Allchin was one the most important people involved in the Halloween
Documents events. His high position inside Microsoft’s hierarchy (he was a senior executive)
caused him several problems after Raymond published the memos. In fact, as we said
before, it was Allchin who asked Valloppillil to write those memos.
But this is not the first time that Allchin got involved into a problematic situation; in fact he
also had to testify in some trials against Microsoft. He was dismissed from Microsoft on September 29th 1999.
Paul Maritz: Maritz was a senior executive of Microsoft from 1986 to 2000, and he was
involved in Halloween Documents too. His importance is not very relevant, but the memos
written by Valloppillil were just for him. For this reasons, he was one of the Microsoft’s
executives to be investigated. We mustn’t forget that Microsoft, for several months, tried to
find the mole inside the company who leaked the confidential files.
Maritz retired from Microsoft in September 1999 at the top of his career inside the company, for, he said,
personal reasons.
Analyzing how these men were involved in the Halloween Docs matter, it is possible to understand how
their positions inside the company put them into a pickle; this happened for two reasons: first of all, Linux
and all the other firms mentioned in the memoranda tried to take Microsoft to court, and meanwhile,
Microsoft tried to discover the mole inside the company who leaked the confidential documents to
Raymond.
Someone says it was not a chance that most of the people involved in the Halloween Documents were
dismissed from the company. Nevertheless, it is impossible to know what happened inside Microsoft during
those years, surely many things changed and the company had to take timely countermeasures.
Main content of the Halloween Documents
The main question.
The question we want to give an answer to now is: “Why were the Halloween Documents so harmful for
Microsoft?”.
The answer in some parts is simple but there are other aspects of the entire matter which must be
considered. So to understand the threat that these files represented to Microsoft, it is necessary to know, in
general, the content.
Halloween I.
The main content: The Halloween I is surely the most famous document published by Raymond; but its fame
is due to its embarrassing content for Microsoft.
We mustn’t remember that the document consists in a confidential memorandum written for a Microsoft
executive in order to analyze the market and the possible threats for the company’s products; for this
reason the file must be analyzed by topic.

Halloween I basically dealt with the most dangerous threats that Microsoft’s new products might face in
the market. In the document, in fact, Valloppillil documented how Open Source Software and Systems
could be dangerous for Microsoft, because they had several strengths that Microsoft’s products had not.
Furthermore, Valloppillil deduced that Linux represented surely one of the greatest threat to Windows 98
and that it was better to take adapt countermeasures.
These affirmations demonstrated that Microsoft was really scared about OSS. And basically for this reason
the first Halloween Document was so embarrassing for Microsoft, because the company, during several
interviews, affirmed that OSS were not better than its own products and that, for this reason, Microsoft
didn’t fear competition with them. But as it is possible to see, the first memorandum showed something
completely different that contradicted the company’s official version.
Threats: Inside this memo, Valloppillil, besides providing a list of the most dangerous threats, explained
several possible strategies to actuate, in order to maintain Microsoft’s top position on software and OS sales
in the market.
The list of these potentially dangerous software included these ones (to be noticed: for every item are
described its strengths, its weaknesses and the best strategy to beat it):
· Linux: The first threat identified by Valloppillil was GNU Linux, an operating system now famous
among the OSS. Valloppillil deemed, in fact, that Linux could really represent a danger for
Windows, because one of its strengths was the capacity to support SMP, virtual memories and the
most used platforms (x86, alpha, PowerPC, SPARC etc.).
· Netscape: Another dangerous company was Netscape (now Netscape exists no more). In fact its
web browser: Netscape Navigator, was one of the most competitive products within Internet
Explorer. Valloppillil listed a series of weaknesses in order to combat the software.
· Apache: Valloppillil also found out Apache as a threat for Microsoft. Apache in fact produces
today one of the best server user-manager platform and during 1998 Apache Server software was
growing fast.
As we said before, inside the threat description, Valloppillil also added a lot of information about the
software’s history, strengths, weaknesses and defeating strategies. For this reason this part of the document
in particular was very embarrassing for Microsoft.
Licensing systems: In the end the final argument dealt with by the Halloween I, was the licensing systems of
the other companies, competitors of Microsoft.
Licensing system: Every company which produces software, operating systems, applications, informatic platforms or
something similar, sells these products using a particular licensing systems; that’s to say the way of managing the
permissions of using one of its products.
So it is possible imagine the license just like a permission. A company in fact produces a software; the user, to use that
software, must buy a license, an authorization which enables him to use the product for a specific range of time.

There are many kinds of license. For example, what makes OSS really different form every other kind of applications
or software in general, is exactly the license: licenses for OSS are free.
Surely, in fact, one of the most dangerous aspects of OSS for Microsoft was, and is at present too, the
licensing system. Every Microsoft’s product has several types of licenses, but they all have a cost, while OSS
ones are completely free.
So Halloween I described how to eventually change the Microsoft licensing system in order to combat the
OSS’ ones; this aspect was really dealt with by Valloppillil who added in the threat list also a description of
the licensing system of every company.
Halloween II.
The main content: While Halloween I mainly deals with some particular applications among OSS, Halloween
II is really more centered on one technology only. In fact Valloppillil, in Halloween II, made a careful
analysis about Linux. Inside this document it is possible to read a lot of information about various
characteristics of Linux and some of its components.
Linux: So, as we can see, Halloween II is completely dedicated to Linux, Operating System identified by
Microsoft as a threat among its competitors, and this memorandum deals with a lot of aspects of the most
famous OSS in the world (during 1998 of course). In order to understand how deep was the analysis of
Valloppillil on this argument, we are going to see what Halloween II reported on Linux.
The memorandum dealt with all the aspects of Linux as Operating System, as OSS, as competitor and as
potential threat for Microsoft; everyone of these items was discussed with a wide range of statistics and
information. The aspects of Linux analyzed in the document are many, so we are going to make a list of the
most important:
Note: all the information reported in the document, Linux’s organization, economic situation, most important facts
etc. refers to 1998.
· Linux’s growth: The first part of the document deals with the most important parts of the history of
Linux, how it started and how it grew. Finally there is also a description of its organization.
· Technical analysis (part 1): The technical analysis is divided in two parts. The first one deals with the
main structure of Linux (Operating System). Inside this section Valloppillil described a lot of core
aspects of the software just like:
· Kernel and GPL structure.
· System internal libraries and Applications.
· Main development tools.
· Data stream management.

· Commercial aspects: The commercial analysis concerns a description of the Linux Operating
System distribution with particular attention to its versions (each one analyzed and commented):
· Linux RedHat.
· Linux Caldera.
· Technical analysis (part 2): The second part of the technical analysis concerns all the main features
of the Operating System, user-side. In fact, while the first part dealt with the programming aspects
of the Operating System (all those aspects that a software programmer can analyze), this part
deals with the system features available to the user who decides to install Linux:
· User Interface (GUI).
· Networking.
· Applications.
· Operating System installation.
· Main performances and tools.
· Linux on client-side and on server-side: One of the most interesting parts of Halloween II is the
client-server side system analysis. Here Valloppillil analyzed the main weaknesses and strengths of
Linux when it is installed onto a server or onto a client. In this part of the document, in fact,
Windows Server is compared with Linux on the server and Windows for ordinary users is also
compared with Linux’s versions on the client.
Server and client: When Internet developed fast and when Microsoft Windows 98 was first released, server
and client concepts became a milestone in Informatics. An Operating System has different characteristics
and purposes depending on where it is installed. In fact when a system is installed on a client, that’s to say a
normal computer, it must satisfy the needs of an ordinary user. But when the system must satisfy the needs of
a server, everything changes because a server is a special computer connected to a network (many
computers) and all the computers connected to it must be managed (because that’s the purpose of a
server). A server manages the clients’ accesses (every computer connected to a server is a client) and a lot
of other services. That’s why a Server Operating System is endowed with something more than a normal
Client Operating System.
· Forecasts: In the last part of the memorandum Valloppillil finishes with his analysis and begins with
some forecasts about Linux, in order to try to anticipate the results of the situation discussed and
analyzed by himself. These forecasts are just a conclusion of the entire discussion made during the
document.
· Linux competitive analysis: The final part of Halloween II is a complete analysis of the total
competitive level of Linux. Here Valloppillil makes several comparisons between Microsoft and
Linux in a wide range of aspects, concluding that Linux must be treated as a real threat.

Well, it’s possible to see how Halloween II contains the “core” of the Halloween Documents. When the
documents were published by Raymond, Halloween II was one of the most read documents.
Microsoft’s response to Linux’s growth.
Final part of Halloween II: However, “Linux competitive analysis” is not the final part of Halloween II. In fact
the document finishes with a very important chapter titled: “Next steps and Microsoft response”. In this
special chapter, Valloppillil takes into consideration the main aspects which make Linux’s products better
than Microsoft’s ones. In this further analysis it is possible to see a lot of information concerning economic
and programming aspects of Linux.
Process vulnerabilities: The main argument in this section is surely “Process vulnerabilities”. Here Valloppillil
examinates the main strengths of Linux and suggests what kind of strategies Microsoft could adopt in order
to improve the quality of its products.
Beating UNIX: In the end the final paragraph is “Beat UNIX” . In this part Valloppillil takes a list of the main
strategies adoptable by Microsoft, in order to beat UNIX and Linux in the Market.
UNIX: We introduce now another system strictly connected with Linux: UNIX. UNIX is an Operating System, its
peculiarity is to have been the very first Operating system. In fact every other system we know was built from this
particular system. The main differences between UNIX and all the other systems is that UNIX is a system without a user
interface which works without windows, like Windows or Linux or Macintosh. This doesn’t mean that UNIX is now
obsolete, on the contrary it is one of the most used systems in the world. Given that UNIX hasn’t got a user interface
(GUI), this renders the system light and very fast. A lot of networks are managed with UNIX systems and these
networks are very robust and efficient. Linux is deeply connected to UNIX as it is the only system which maintains a lot
of connections with it. Many internal parts of the Linux’s software is programmed with UNIX components and libraries,
and, besides, UNIX and Linux are OSS together.
These strategies are, above all, about the general Linux’s success, strongly connected with UNIX market.
The main aspects of UNIX to beat, found out by Valloppillil were:
· DNS integration with directory: A characteristic which renders the UNIX system endowed with
upgrades, security and authentication services.
· HTTP-DAV: This is a particular protocol, very complex, which provides the system with an infinite
level of complexity for various applications.
· Structured storage: UNIX storage system has different properties in comparison with the storage
systems of other Operating Systems. It has different rules and different advantages.
· Customization: UNIX, being an OSS, can be reprogrammed as the user wishes.

MICROSOFT’S REACTION TO THE HALLOWEEN DOCUMENTS AND
MAIN CONSEQUENCES ON THE COMPANY AND ITS POLICY
Interviews, comments, speeches and official positions of Microsoft
towards the publication of the Halloween Documents
The importance of reactions.
Analyzing and talking about the Halloween Documents’ content, it is now possible to see how
compromising these memoranda were, knowing that they were leaked and published on the Internet
without the company’s knowing it. In fact what happened later was very important both for Microsoft’s
reaction, the press’ releases and public opinion changes.
Reactions analysis, so, is important. For this reason in this part of the paper we are going to deal with the
main events which affected Microsoft from November 1998 to February 1999.
Three months of “No Comment”.
A three months hole: We have talked about reactions from Microsoft, but Microsoft preferred to set up a
“No Comment” wall rather than releasing comments or official positions on the argument. Public opinion
was strongly affected by the publication of the memoranda by Raymond and the press, TV news and
newspapers, have talked about that for months.
Confirming the rumors: This hole in Which Microsoft got itself, had as its main and most important
consequence, the confirmation of all the rumors about Microsoft’s illegal competition towards Linux and
OSS. As we said in the first pages, we have seen how Microsoft passed trough a lot of trials and happenings
just because of its possible monopoly on IT (Information Technology) and all that happened with the
Antitrust authorities.
That’s why, during December 1998, Microsoft was at the center of attention. For many aspects, the
Halloween Documents were just what everybody was waiting for: a confirmation of the illegal operations
performed by Microsoft in order to maintain its monopoly. Surely these three months of silence didn’t put
Microsoft in a better position.
Not a complete silence: Although Microsoft issued no comments, the company had to give a sort of official
position on the argument. As it is possible to suppose, the company’s official channels, during the first days,
released statements and articles, where Microsoft neither denied nor confirmed the authenticity of the
memoranda published on the Internet by Raymond, but just admitted that inside the company, some
confidential documents were leaked by an “internal source”. For the rest, in spite of the continuous
requests by the press to issue interviews and other information about the company’s official position on the
Halloween Documents, Microsoft did never say nothing.

Direct questions: At the end, it is important to underline not only the general behavior of the company, but
also the individual behavior of every Microsoft manager and officer towards these happenings. During
these three months of utter silence, a lot of journalists tried to have some statements or positions from many
important members of the company. When asked about the Halloween Documents, everyone of them
always refused to give any information or statement and, sometimes, there were episodes of violence
between journalists and managers. It is also a common rumor that Microsoft Call Center and Microsoft
Office for Public Relations collapsed during those months.
First comments and official positions.
January 1999: After almost three months, Microsoft finally released the first comments and issued also
several interviews in order to make up for the blank, left from October to January (1998 - 1999). But what
were the statements issued by the company and what was its main position regarding the Halloween
Documents?
Beginning to talk about it: So after only three months later, Microsoft itself decided to talk about the
argument. In fact, it was impossible for the company to keep on maintaining the “No Comments” official
position.
And in order to establish Microsoft’s official statements on the Halloween Documents, many managers and
officers of the company had several interviewing sessions in January and February (1999).
Microsoft’s official position: During all the interviews and all the Q & A Sessions, every Microsoft’s manager
and officer released the same kind of answers. Microsoft’s official position was just one: Microsoft
considered Linux and OSS in general, like competitors in the IT market and every analysis of them,
concerning every aspect, was performed in order to improve the quality of Microsoft’s products.
The official Microsoft spokesperson’s statements: Ed Muth.
An important Q & A: In order to see what were the official Microsoft statements on the
Halloween Documents, it is important to have a look at an important Q & A Session taken by
Microsoft’s Enterprise Marketing Group Manager Ed Muth during January 1999. This interview
is very important because Muth was the most important people who every journalist tried to
reach in those months. This special Q & A Session was also published on Microsoft’s website
and it is available even today.
The session: We are going now to see the most important questions and answers of Muth during that
interview:
· Are the Halloween Documents posted by Raymond genuine? To this question, a core question,
Muth answered by saying that Microsoft never performed a line-for-line review of those
documents, but surely those ones appeared to be official Microsoft memoranda sent internally in
the company.

· What was the purpose of creating these documents? Muth said that at Microsoft it is standard
practice to write and research about the most important competitors. Microsoft would do a
disservice to its shareholders if it didn’t monitor market conditions.
Furthermore, the memoranda written by Valloppillil were intended to stimulate an internal
discussion about OSS and Linux.
· Is this an official response to the Open Source Model and Linux? The first word pronounced by Muth
was “NO!”. Muth in fact explained that the internal memoranda leaked were just a market analysis
by an internal engineer.
· Who is Vinod Valloppillil and what his role at Microsoft? Here, Muth explained how Valloppillil was
an internal engineer and how his role was just to analyze the market in order to perform deep
researches about the most important competitors. Muth also finished saying that Valloppillil was
not an official spokesperson.
· Does Microsoft consider Linux a competitor? Muth answered “Yes!”. Microsoft consider Linux as an
important competitor. Furthermore, Muth also said that every action performed by Microsoft was
part of the ordinary operations that a company must take in such a robust and competitive market
like IT.
· How did these documents get leaked to the press? Here, Muth explained how Microsoft couldn’t
confirm how the documents were distributed outside the company and who was the direct
responsible for this.
· The first document talked about extending standard protocols as a way to “deny OSS projects
entry into the market”. What does this mean? As it is possible to see, this is surely one of the most
important and embarrassing questions for Muth. To this question Muth answered by saying that
Microsoft needs to develop and build more innovative standard protocols, with new features and
tools for the users. This leads to the inevitable possibility of redefining a new standard. Microsoft, for
this reason, acts in order to better serve its customers, that’s why raising the standard level was a
need for Microsoft and also a consequence for Linux’s users.
Muth’s answer to the final question was not good or complete. That’s why there is a common rumor about
how Microsoft could repair damages about the purpose of the documents but not about the statements
on Linux included into them.
The main consequences of the Halloween Documents on Microsoft, its
policy and Linux
Scandal and rumors.
After talking about Microsoft’s response to the Halloween Documents, it is, at the end, very important
talking about what was the general reaction of the public and of all the other companies in the IT market.

Rumors during November and December 1998: After the publication of the documents by Raymond, as we
said during the last pages, Microsoft was in the eye of a great storm: journalists, the press, newspapers,
tabloids and media always talked about the memoranda. The reason is simple: the events happened
during those months could be, at the eyes of the peoples, just a confirmation of what Microsoft has always
been accused for years: its boundless, and illegal, monopoly on IT and OS market. Surely this can be
considered as one of the most immediate reactions.
Microsoft’s policy.
However, the most important thing is what changed in Microsoft’s policy towards its costumers and the
other companies, competitors or not.
Well, it is impossible to describe Microsoft’s reactions to the Halloween Documents in terms of behavior
towards its costumers, because there are no physical evidences of this. In fact Microsoft never released
public statements about an eventual change of its “behavior”. We can just report how Microsoft reacted
during those months in comparison with the past time.
So, Microsoft didn’t really change what we are calling its “behavior” towards the customers, in fact, it
remained almost the same. But surely what changed deeply, are the relationships of Microsoft with other
companies, just like competitors and allies.
Here, in fact, many things changed: on a side, competitors and a lot of other companies in the IT market
embittered the controversy about Microsoft’s monopoly and, some of them, denounced the company of
Bill Gates, even if without results. Instead, on the other side, Microsoft’s alliances changed as its allies; this is
something that happens when a company pass through such intense and difficult happenings, and in
order to reconstitute the general structure, it has to redefine its allies.
Linux’s reaction.
But what really matters is just Linux’s reactions to the Halloween Documents. If these documents affected
Microsoft so much in economic, financial and credibility terms; how deep was Linux affected?
What happened to Linux is something really interesting and ironic. The well known OSS in fact, after the
publication of the Halloween Documents by Raymond, verified a large increase of the selling and a lot of
publicity. But what is really marvelous is that Linux, instead of not considering what was written on the
Microsoft’s memoranda, used the Valloppillil’s analysis’s to improve the quality of the system. After few
months, in fact, Linux changed several things in the Operating System and the corrections applied took the
starting point just from the weaknesses of the system reported in Halloween II.
Summarizing, Linux used the Halloween Documents as a tool to improve the quality of the system. In the
end, it seems that these Microsoft’s memoranda, at the beginning finalized to outline a strategy to defeat
Linux, instead helped Linux itself. For this reason, the Halloween Documents were considered an ironic
event for Microsoft.

MICROSOFT’S ECONOMIC STRATEGIES INCLUDED IN THE
HALLOWEEN DOCUMENTS
General view of Microsoft’s strategies
A general vision.
As it has been possible to see during these pages, Microsoft wanted to adopt some particular strategies in
order to succeed in the market ant to stop the Linux’s growth. With the publication of the memoranda,
containing these strategies, it was impossible for Microsoft to realize these ones, so they remained just on a
piece of paper, never actuated for real.
We are going now to talk about tight these very important strategies that, we remember, was the main
cause of embarrassing for Microsoft when the documents were published by Raymond.
What kind of strategies.
But what were these strategies?
Microsoft is a well known company which has always succeeded in the market thanks to its notoriousness,
the quality of its products and even its publicity (which is always an important element in the IT market).
As we said before, the company has always actuated several strategies in the market and these strategies
(some of them included in the Valloppillil’s researches in the Halloween Documents) were sometimes
judged as unethical, anticompetitive and wrong by the general opinion; the reason? Surely because of the
methods used or outlined. In fact some of the strategies had as purpose, the suppression of several
companies classified by Microsoft as competitors, and they provided the using of particular actions in order
to make these companies fail.
EEE – Embrace Extend and Extinguish
Brief history.
One of the most important strategies included in the Halloween Documents, in the analysis of Valloppillil, is
the Embrace Extend and Extinguish known also as EEE. This particular strategy was just used by Microsoft
and it is very important to explain it, as most clear as possible.
Embrace and Extend: As we said before this strategy was used by Microsoft and, how it is possible to see by
the name, it sounds something ironic. In fact the strategy used by Microsoft was first called Embrace and
Extend (without “Extinguish”) because a company’s executive officer, during an interview, said that
Microsoft was about to Embrace the standards in order to extend them later; this affirmation, after a few
time, was taken by the critics and modified adding the word “Extinguish” to make some irony on the
Microsoft’s monopoly.

General working.
What does it consist in: So this strategy is used very often in the IT market because it is connected with the
software sharing and selling market. It consists in a long term series of procedures which a company
actuates in order to establish the superiority of its products on the others. It can be summarized with three
main steps:
· Embrace: The firm makes known that it wants to support a specific standard for its own products. So
the firm takes contact with the producer of that standard in order to define the support protocols
or similarities.
· Extend: After having supported the standard in exam, the firm begins building and distributing new
applications with new extensions, not prevented, which doesn’t support the standard.
· Extinguish: When the first two phases success, the firm is ready to end the strategy. In fact,
distributing programs which doesn’t support the standard, even if there is a contract for supporting
it, the firm weaken the producer of that standard because its customers (of the firm) are
accustomed in not using the application which loses users and positions in the market. At this point
the producer is compelled to abandon the market because its own applications are no more
standards.
It is important to underline another aspect of this strategy. In fact it is generally actuated also in the
Internet-targeted applications because of the Network effect. In fact, the more a program or a technology
is diffused, the more it is used by the users. This amplifies the effects of the EEE in terms of time and
effectiveness.
FUD – Fear Uncertainty and Doubt
Brief history from IBM.
There is another strategy in the Halloween Documents mentioned and even commented by Raymond in
his web site where he published the memoranda; this strategy is very important and it has been actuated
in a lot of situations by several companies and firms. Its name is Fear Uncertainty and Doubt known also
with the abbreviation FUD.
Starting from IBM: The FUD has a very long history, in the IT world it was associated for the first time to the IBM
which was the first company to actuate such a particular strategy in 1970.
IBM: The International Business Machines is a famous American company founded in 1914 in the USA. It is one of the
first companies in the world of Informatic. Now it is one of the most important firms in the IT market; it producers, builds
and distributes software and computers all over the world.
The term FUD was also used for the first time right by IBM ex-director Gene Amdahl. He called “FUD” that
strategy used until that time by the IBM in order to discredit the competitors in the market giving rise to

rumors about the low level quality of their products.
After that event, even now, this term is generally used for referring to every kind of misinformation as a
competitive weapon.
How it works.
General meaning: FUD is a particular marketing strategy actuated by a company when a competitor
launches in the same market a new product which is more convenient, more economic and in general
better than the ones of that same firm. In this case the company in exam can actuate several
countermeasures and, among them, there is the FUD.
How it works: Actuating a FUD strategy is not difficult, it consists just in sending misinformation through non-
official channels about a company, or its products, in order to discredit the same firm or some products of
its. Doing this operation the company which is the target of the FUD loses credibility and its products on the
market are less sold.
Such a technique like this one has been judged unethical by the public opinion and by a lot of companies,
so that also the Antitrust and other market – supervisor companies decided to formulate a general rules –
system in order to prevent such anticompetitive actions.
Phases of the FUD strategies actuated by Microsoft towards Linux from 1997 to 2001.
Staring from 1997 about until 2001, Microsoft actuated several actions against Linux in order to succeed in
the IT market. These actions has several consequences, but in the end these ones were not useful for
Microsoft:
· 1997: Microsoft individuated Linux and OSS in general as a possible threat for its products in the
market and decided to actuate several strategies to defeat the emerging system.
· 1999: From 1997 to 1999 Microsoft always declared that Linux was not considered as a threat for
the company. But starting from 1999 Microsoft’s official statements about Linux changed. The
company in fact admitted the high potential of the Open Source, but always declared that
Microsoft’s products were the better ones.
So, on April 1999 a performance – testing firm called Mindcraft, published an article titled
“Mindcraft study shows Windows NT outperforms Linux”. After few months it emerged that
Mindcraft was charged by Microsoft itself, so there was the possibility that the article was not
completely truthful.
· 2001: Although the Microsoft’s actions and the information apparently wrong to the detriment of
Linux, the famous Open Source didn’t fall and, instead, was able to survive in the market. The
strategy actuated by Microsoft failed.
An important thing: We know about the Microsoft’s actions against Linux just because we are dealing with
events really happened. But we don’t know if these actions were performed by Microsoft in order to

actuate a FUD against Linux, this is a supposition convalidated by some real events. However it is a
common rumor that Microsoft during those years tried to suppress Linux with several economic, and
sometimes unethical, strategies.

FINAL CONSIDERATIONS ABOUT THE HALLOWEEN DOCUMENTS
AND GENERAL OPINIONS
Final considerations on the Halloween Docs in this paper
Why these were important.
Well, we have dealt with the main events concerning the Halloween Documents and as it is possible to see,
what happened during that period was very important. In general, when such a strong and great event
like this one happens, its consequences are important and affects everything. In our case, Microsoft, Linux,
the general informatic world and the IT market verified several changes; now that changes are irrelevant
but just why we cannot see them as it was before.
At present, Microsoft, Linux, OSS and other systems are the way they are because of these happenings;
that is the main reason why we really think that the Halloween Documents were so important in the history
of Informatics.
Microsoft has been one of the first leader companies in IT market since its birth; when something happens
to such an important firm, everything connected to it, changes. We deem that our present society has
been modified by those events, that’s the reason why we think that our research constitutes a valid
document and a significant source of information from everyone interested in this argument.
Final considerations.
So what is it possible to say in the end?
Reading what happened we can see how hard and difficult is the IT market and how strong is the
competition among the companies and the firms there. Our research has the only one purpose to be a
significant source of information for these happenings and for what happened to Microsoft, but expressing
some considerations is surely possible.
Every market has its own rules. Competition is present in every level and in every economic sector, even in
the IT world. And right in the IT market we can see one of the strongest competitions; in fact, computers,
software, innovative technologies and informatic products constitute a very big business in the world.
When a company tries to emerge in the market, when it tries to succeed there and, so, to be the best;
economic strategies are a very important component in order to reach such a kind of objective.
Surely Microsoft adopted some strategies, some of them were not completely ethical and others were
wrong and anticompetitive.
But what we want to underline is just a thing: today, what Microsoft did, is part of the various existing
markets; it is impossible to demand a company to succeed within behaving absolutely “right”. In Economy
anticompetitive actions are common and, in spite of the existence of special supervisors like the Antitrust,

things like this happens anyway. So seeing what Microsoft did, like an extraordinary thing is wrong because,
at contrary, it is a very common situation.
General opinions of the group
Looking now at what happened then.
At the end of this research we want finally express our personal opinions about the Halloween Documents.
In general we consider the Microsoft’s behavior not right; but considering that some confidential and
strictly secret documents were leaked, the company had to face difficult times. We consider the leakage
of the documents out of Microsoft as another wrong and anticompetitive action, even if the leaking source
remains unknown.
Furthermore, given that the competition in the IT market is strong and very exclusive, we also think that
Microsoft maintains its top position inside the market thanks to its products’ quality, and not only for its
strategies.
Because of all these aspects of the general problem we don’t feel like judging the Microsoft’s behavior as
wrong, but given that its actions were anticompetitive, we cannot judge these ones right too.
Finally we believe that events like this one, are part of the market dynamics.
So what happened is just a consequence of something larger like the market’s general dynamics. Until
there will be organizations like the Antitrust or other supervisors, the market strategies will be always,
somehow, ruled and commeasured.

MICROSOFT HALLOWEEN DOCS – ENGLISH RESEARCH PAPER
COMPONENTS OF THE GROUP
· Andrea Tino: Project Manager and Research Division (Halloween Documents’ core)
· Maria Spada: Research Division (Information about Microsoft Corporation)
· Vincenzo Sofia: Research Division (Microsoft’s economic strategies)
· Cristian Santoro: Research Division (Information about Open Source Systems and Linux)
INFO & CREDITS
THE HALLOWEEN DOCUMENTS: MICROSOFT COMPELLED TO ADMIT THE AUTHENTICITY OF SOME CONFIDENTIAL MEMORANDA
ABOUT THE SUPPRESSION OF OPEN SOURCE SYSTEMS.
© 2006/2007 - All rights reserved.
University of Catania, Academic Year: 2006 – 2007.
MAIN SOURCES
All the information used to make this paper have been taken from official and reliable sources. Folowing is
the list of the main sources used in this paper:
· Microsoft: www.microsoft.com, www.microsoft.it
· Open Source: www.opensource.org
· E.S. Raymond’s official site: www.catb.org/~esr/Halloween
· Wikipedia: en.wikipedia.org, it.wikipedia.org

Halloween documents

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (20)

Similar to Halloween documents

Similar to Halloween documents (20)

More from Andrea Tino

More from Andrea Tino (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Halloween documents