Why Microsoft Bought Connectix

Dan Geer has a paper on OS monocultures in which one of the things that stood out for me was Geer's belief as to why Microsoft bought the Connectix Virtual PC emulation software.

Geer points out that there are only two ways to handle monoculture: go for it completely, so that risk management is based upon the notion that since everything is the same, any problem can be fixed on every machine the same way, or diversify completely, so that no one OS has more than 43% of marketshare-- apparently, an inflection point determined empirically, after which the compromise of a predominant but not monopoly OS harms the efficacy of all operating systems.

Microsoft wants to do the former: that is their stated goal. They believe, cultlike, that we should be pleased that an organization run by a man as enlightened (yes, they use that word) Bill Gates controls the majority platform.

Ballmer doesn't buy the enlightnment argument: he's a brutal businessman. His objective is world domination. And he knows that if a few more nasty viri break loose, or if governments finally get their stuff together and understand that the Microsoft platform is the problem, then "enlightened, progressive" politicians will get involved. That's the last thing anyone in the software industry wants.

Microsoft therefore plans, after Longhorn, to deploy an entirely new operating system, perhaps based upon research coming out of the Singularity project. The next OS will be written in C#, and will be incapable of running "dangerous" or "unauthorized" code.

But what of all our legacy software? What of all the games we own, that we love to play? That's where Connectix comes in. You can run those games inside the "protected" box of the Connectix Virtual PC running in a Singularity memory segment, isolated from the OS. If that Virtual Windows box becomes a problem, well, Microsoft can always say that's your fault for running infectable code. They did everything they could. Tough luck.

Brilliant and evil.

You Gotta Licence For That PC, Pal?

In my last post, I discussed Microsoft's plans with respect to the post-Longhorn development cycle. I think it's important to look beyond that moment when Singularity bears fruit and look at the ten year plan.

Microsoft is putting a lot of money into the X-Box, and the X-Box has a hard drive, networking capability, and even high-definition multimedia capability. I think it should be obvious what life is going to be like in Microsoft's 2010.

Most families on the Internet will use MS's X-Box for all of their interneting. They won't need much more. They may rent their .net Office on a daily or hourly basis, putting it away when they don't need it. They'll play games, do IM, download music and movies, and do everything they want to that doesn't demand real creativity with their X-Box.

Those who still have "general purpose" boxes will come under more and more scrutiny. The most commonplace question will be "Why do you need a PC?" And the most common assumption will be, "Because you pirate content."

And then the U.S. will start to license PCs. I mean, it makes sense: given that all of the "legitimate" uses for a PC are covered under the X-Box Singularity 2010 utility, there will be only two reasons for having a PC: "illegitimate" purpose, and development. And it will finally be time for states to create a licensing program for developers and for the platforms on which they develop. France has already started down this road: it will soon be illegal to publish source code in France, because if you know how the software works, you can circumvent the market plan-preserving code of existing business.

More and more, Richard Stallman's "Freedom to Read" is looking prophetic. Enjoy your future, citizen.

Or else.