The Bloor Perspective: the empire strikes back against Linux, Generation Dot and the Napster saga

It's been an awfully long time coming but it seems Microsoft has finally rustled up the nerve to have a pop at Linux. In an advertising campaign, devised by ad agency McCann Erikson, the company has come up with a splendidly witty retort to the bullish Linux brigade. The adverts consist of a number of penguins, based presumably on Tux the Linux mascot, that all have rather deformed, or at least mutated, heads.

Underneath this image Microsoft puts the boot in with the tag line that reads: 'An operating system does not just have advantages' - followed by the sucker-punch - 'It can mutate unexpectedly. But with Windows 2000, you get all of the services and support from the same vendor. That will save time and real money.' Pretty heavyweight stuff for Microsoft.

However, there is one fairly fundamental problem with Microsoft's campaign, that will be run in the popular German 'c't' magazine. That problem is quite obviously that Microsoft isn't really in much of a position to comment. Having come to market with more variations of its operating system than most of us would care to remember, it's hardly in a position to talk about operating systems mutating. But presumably that irony is lost on Microsoft.

Nevertheless, it's a bit of a big step for the Redmond posse. Instead of spending its whole time cowering in darkened rooms every time Linux notches up yet another success, it looks like the company is preparing for a battle of epic proportions. The chances are that this advertising campaign is just a little teaser to test the water and see how the world reacts to Microsoft fighting back against Linux.

*The rise and fall of Generation Dot*

The fall of the dot-com Icarus was greeted with unashamed, rabid zeal from the national and industry press on both sides of the Atlantic. Righteousness comes easily to those who have watched, tormented with anxiety and self-doubt, the progress of another taking a lucrative risk that is rewarded by failure.

It is the tribal, youth-dominated demographics of Generation Dot that seduced many. Generation Dot meant the cutting edge, a company composed of your mates, a salary you could live on, and share options that would have you retired before you hit thirty.

This was possible because the technology of the web was simple to learn and yet revolutionary in potential. Catch the boat early and you can surf all the way to the bank.

Have a drink with anyone who actually works or worked for a dot-com and you'll begin to feel the Generation Dot reality isn't so far removed from its corporate counterpart as the evangelists pretend. Glass ceilings seem to be just as common in 'flat hierarchies' as elsewhere, while the 'work-and-play' ethic can deliver as much grief as enjoyment.

No wonder the corporates are keen to mop up the dot-com refugees. Generation Dot worked long hours, and picked up invaluable experience along the way. Anyone with two years of management skills battle-hardened in a dot-com should always be able to get a smart corporate to pay their mortgage, should they ever need that.

The vision may have gone sour and the past may well be filled with regret, but the lessons learned along the way will be priceless. Commitment to a vision, commitment to colleagues, and the determination to fight to the last penny despite knowing the faults of both, builds a work ethic that many corporates aspire to, but few actually get near to delivering. And that's priceless.

*Napster lessons*

As the Napster trial progresses it's hard to help noticing just how many Napster wannabes have appeared - giving the original Napster yet more battles to fight.

First comes the site naming. The owners of Aimster.com and XNapster.com have obviously developed their own unique view of internet branding where the phrases originality and differentiation do not exist.

Next there are the claims of technical superiority. A press release from the web site gotchaport.com, which allows the streaming of files from a hard drive while prohibiting the copying of files, claims '"by ingeniously using technology that maximises existing technology gotchaport.com has accomplished what copycat sites only dream of". Dreaming is obviously what the marketer was doing when they thought up that line or maybe this is the same individual responsible for naming the web sites.

After that comes the legal aspect. Ths-Music.com claims that by using its site you don't need to worry about being sued for downloads. The site encourages, but does not enforce, users to make a small payment for each download if you keep the file for more than 30 days. This would be fine but the limited selection of artists provided by this copycat site cannot be compared to the vast Napster offering.

It is not only the activity of Napster look-a-likes that's increased - so has the activity of the music industry itself.

Universal Music, on a trial basis, is letting 5,000 users select from a set of 20,000 online tracks. If successful the scheme will allow users to pay a small monthly fee for the service, but it only allows streaming, not downloading of audio tracks.

Whether or not Napster loses its court case, the business model for the music industry has been redefined. The court case stalls any further development of Napster and in the meantime the large corporates are busy trying to play catch up. They seem to have missed the fact that Napster gave people what they wanted - downloadable music. If people want to listen to the radio on the internet they will go to internet radio sites such as Kerbango.com; they will not go to a streaming site like the one produced by Universal.

The corporates have the money and the resources to produce high quality downloading sites which provide users with access to back catalogues, out of print tracks, videos, artist information and many other content rich and more importantly chargeable features. So what is stopping them? Maybe they should be offering Napster a job rather than taking them to court.