Print 41 comment(s) - last by Spar.. on Nov 13 at 3:29 PM

Microsoft to offer sales support and collaborate on technology

According to the Wall Street Journal, Microsoft has entered into a partnership with Novell Inc. to offer sales support and technology sharing for Novell's Suse Linux product.

While the deal has yet to be finalized, it represents a surprising new alliance between two warring sides in the operating system world. CEO Steve Ballmer made the announcement at a San Francisco news conference that Linux plays an "important role" in many companies, including Microsoft itself. "We see huge potential upside in these markets."

Novell's Suse Linux is currently the second largest commercial Linux distribution, with first place going to Red Hat. As a result of the announcement, shares in Novell jumped 16% to $6.79.

Financial terms of the agreement were not disclosed, but one of the high points is the expected construction of a joint research facility where the two companies can design and test their software together. Improvements in compatibility between Microsoft Office and OpenOffice are also expected.

Speculation about the long-term outcome of this union has begun already. Frank Artale, vice-president of XenSource, noted that Microsoft's embracing of Suse Linux as opposed to another particular variant could cause a "halo effect" in that the association between the two could make users choose it over another distribution. The open-source community also may have reservations about using a distribution that is "sleeping with the enemy."

As another part of the deal, Microsoft agreed not to file patent infringement charges against Suse users, and Novell has agreed not to sue users of Windows.

Comments     Threshold

This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

By FastEddie on 11/2/2006 10:10:31 PM , Rating: 2
If you can't beat 'em, then buy 'em. jk.
Seriously though, I can't really see anything bad resulting from this union.

RE: Union
By codeThug on 11/3/2006 12:29:31 AM , Rating: 1
Try looking a little harder. Or better yet, talk to Sun Microsystems about the success they had with M$ and java.

M$ would love nothing better than to get their greedy claws into Linux and splinter it.

RE: Union
By Spivonious on 11/3/2006 10:28:15 AM , Rating: 2
Can you honestly say that Windows development is easier in Java than in C#?

RE: Union
By codeThug on 11/3/2006 3:44:04 PM , Rating: 3
The point is Microsoft signed on to support the java STANDARD and then immediately, purposefully, and systematically began to deviate from the standard to corrupt the spirit of platform independence.

Expect them to do the same with Linux if given half a chance.

Don't you recall some of the statements by Ballmer vowing to kill the competition?

Do you think he has changed any?

RE: Union
By TomZ on 11/3/2006 5:12:24 PM , Rating: 3
Microsoft did not have a PLAN to destroy Java. In fact, quite the opposite - they planned their entire next generation software development tools and technologies all around Java. But the problem they found was that when new requirements came to light, and opportunities to improve the development experience identified, Sun did not allow Microsoft to make changes to "their" proprietary platform.

So Microsoft made changes anyway, and the rest as they say is history. The situation really has to be viewed as a battle between two technology titans wanting to control the platform. From a legal standpoint, Microsoft was found to be wrong, but from the perspective of wanting to improve the platform, Microsoft were right. And now that Java is going to become open-source, this will legally allow the exact sort of changes that Microsoft got in trouble for with the older, proprietary contracts that Sun had in place for Java.

So now, as a result of Sun's actions, Microsoft has pulled all support for Java and instead developed .NET which is taking a big bite out of Java in many ways. Obviously, .NET is going to continue to completely dominate Windows desktop, server, and mobile development. Java could have owned 100% that market share if Sun had been more flexible eariler on. Only now is Sun realizing their mistake and making Java open source in order to try to regain some share.

So, I applaud Sun's short-sightedness which led or even forced Microsoft to innovate to create .NET, C#, VB.NET, the newer Visual Studio versions, as well as all the newer managed applications and managed APIs available. Realistically, Microsoft never would have been able to do this much innovation if they stuck to Sun's Java platform.

RE: Union
By Rayz on 11/4/2006 3:00:57 AM , Rating: 2
That's not really what happened.

To begin with, you stated that Sun did not allow Microsoft to make changes to the Java platform. This is incorrect. You are allowed to extend the Java platform in any way that you wish, but you must leave the core frameworks intact. IBM has added loads of extra bits to their Java implementation, and every vendor has added megabytes of proprietary stuff to the J2EE platform too, This is not a problem,

What MS did, is remove bits from the core frameworks, and change the structure of the packages. This would mean that even if folk didn't use the Windows-only extensions that they were perfectly free to add, the app would only run on Windows.

And this is a popular misconception with folk who don't know the Java framework, or licensing rules; extensions are allowed, and folk are free to use them; but you cannot delete parts of the core.

Very simple to understand; a clear attempt to wrest control from Sun, which failed.

In the end, MS would have come up with .NET anyway, or tried to buy Sun to extinguish Java that way; so not pursuing the case would not have made any difference, and Sun made a boatload of money out of it, so a good deal for them.

RE: Union
By TomZ on 11/4/2006 8:15:22 AM , Rating: 2
The issue was not that they removed functionality, but that they added functionality to the core packages. The concern that arose from that was that if programmers started programming against Microsoft's extensions, then the code they wrote would not be compatible with other implmentations.

You brought up the payout - it's also interesting to note that the Microsoft lawsuit is really the only significant money Sun *ever* made on Java. Most analysts believe that Sun only makes a few million a year on licensing Java, which doesn't even come close to covering their investment.

RE: Union
By tbtkorg on 11/4/2006 12:08:14 PM , Rating: 2
If you like Microsoft Windows, if you enjoy using it and don't really see the point of Linux, then you must find it hard to understand why Microsoft excites such persistent, passionate opposition. What you need to understand is that the opposition is over an extensive, long-established, deeply entrenched pattern of Microsoft behavior, not over any one specific thing Microsoft has done.

I hope that readers who like and admire Microsoft will nevertheless read this post and consider what it has to say. Even if they don't agree, they may at least gain illumination as to why the other side believes as it does.

In analyzing the matter, one must be careful not to conflate two separate issues. The one issue is what constitutes a smart business tactic on Microsoft's part. The other issue is what is good for computer users. If I object that a thing Microsoft has done is bad for computer users, one cannot reply that it was a smart business tactic. That is separate question.

Now, with respect to Java, we know from the "Halloween memos" [] and from other sources that giving Java users additional useful functionality was incidental to Microsoft's motive for tinkering with the Java standard in the first place. Microsoft's underlying motive was to poison the standard by fragmenting it, by ensuring that Java applications developed by Microsoft users would never run quite right on the Sun platform, indicating to Sun users that they needed to "upgrade" to Microsoft. Now, of course, in the abstract, there is nothing wrong as such with a company's attempts to convince its competitor's customers to upgrade and switch vendors -- if this is done honestly. This however is not an abstract case; and the specific case of Microsoft demands closer scrutiny. The whole point of Microsoft's activity was to monopolize, to render fundamentally untenable the position of any competitor who might presume to try to implement Java; to gain power to crush Java developers who failed to pay Microsoft protection money in one form or another. Microsoft's business strategy is not centered around providing a superior product; it is centered around ensuring that no competitor can provide a viable alternative. Such a strategy may benefit Microsoft's shareholders, but it is hard to argue that it is good for you and me.

(Someone will object here that consumers need some dominant industry player like Microsoft to dictate standards. That may or may not be so, but don't you see? The aim of Microsoft's Java assault was to destroy a standard. Microsoft does not care about standards as such one way or the other; any long-time user of Microsoft Word can tell you this. Microsoft cares only about assimilating you and me into its vast system of dependent tributaries.)

Microsoft's poison was not limited to Java. Microsoft tried to poison Web standards in much the same way, only thankfully failed because, in a rare Microsoft blunder, Microsoft joined the Web game a few months too late. This is just one of many other examples of Microsoft's strategy.

Microsoft calls its strategy to poison and monopolize, "embrace and extend."

Bill Gates appears to have made the fundamental strategic judgment years ago that the computer software industry must trend toward a natural economic monopoly, that except in niche markets there would in the end remain only one gigantic software survivor. He wanted to be that survivor, and he was prepared to do almost anything in a business sense to achieve his goal. Except perhaps regarding the unexpected emergence of open source, history has tended to prove Mr. Gates' business foresight right. It is the rest of us who now pay the price for Mr. Gates' vision.

You don't have to dislike Microsoft to appreciate what it's doing here. You may even say, "That's what I would do, too, were I Bill Gates." But the fact that Microsoft is the most skilled, most brutal American monopolist since J.D. Rockefeller does not mean that the rest of us have to like it. Microsoft's extensions to Java had nothing, absolutely nothing, to do with helping Java users, and everything to do with helping Microsoft manipulate Java users into helping them destroy Sun. Smart business tactic? Maybe. But I will never condone it, nor will I assist it. Neither should you. Let Microsoft carry its own tainted water up the hill.

The point of this post is not really to convince anyone to abhor Microsoft. I have no power to dissuade people who have already decided (mistakenly, I think) that Microsoft is a force for good in computerdom. I know this. However, the next time Microsoft adds incidental additional functionality to its implementation of a non-Microsoft standard, before you commit the error of praising Microsoft for its commitment to its users, consider what you have learned here of Microsoft's "embrace and extend" strategy, and decide for yourself if you aren't being manipulated by Microsoft more than you are being helped.

RE: Union
By Samus on 11/4/2006 6:07:16 PM , Rating: 2
microsoft was the best thing that ever happened to java, sun ruined it.

in short
By Wwhat on 11/2/06, Rating: 0
RE: in short
By Wwhat on 11/2/06, Rating: 0
RE: in short
By Wwhat on 11/3/06, Rating: 0
RE: in short
By stmok on 11/3/2006 6:41:39 AM , Rating: 2
I suspect this partnership has five possible explanations as to "Why?"

(1) This is a direct response to Oracle's move into providing services for their version of Linux. (undercut Red Hat in a way). So the timing is suspicious/obvious.

(2) Mono. (This is the open-source implementation of .Net)...This allows both Novell and Microsoft to combine a .Net framework that works with both Linux and Windows. Effectively, this can help increase the adoption of .Net development in general.

(3) MS is setting the pieces up to take on VMware. They have signed up with XenSource (open-source virtualisation solution), and are now teaming up with Novell. (an active Xen source promoter in their Suse Linux distro).

(4) MS has long been attacking open-source and Linux in general. (In 2001, when Steve Ballmer called them "cancer"). Its seems this year is a sudden change for Microsoft. Essentially, "If you can't beat them, join them". (They have tried: such as the "Get the Facts" campaign...But failed. Even the dude who came up with the idea for the campaign was fired!)

(5) This allows Microsoft to look like they're playing nice now...Since SUSE Linux comes from Europe (and has a big following there), this plays in good light infront of the EU.

This has absolutely, positively got NOTHING to do with Apple.

The only things I've seen MS reacting to Apple is:

(1) GUI and some of the default apps of Vista...Its very similar to OSX.

(2) Zune...Obviously a direct response to the iPod.

So how about you get out of your "Apple Reality Distortion Field" and see wtf is really going on in the REAL world.

RE: in short
By Wwhat on 11/3/2006 8:03:29 AM , Rating: 2
The bottom line is the green buck, and microsofts attempt to control markets.
As for the EU thing, that's just ridiculous, suse isn't EU anymore for ages and people that do the politics in the EU would not even know what linux is let alone have heard of suse.
So what 'EU' are you speaking of? and what would it matter, you think the prosecuters will say "Oh you can continue with your illegal monopolistic practises now, you made a deal with the owners of suse and that used to be euro"?

As for an open source .net, well I think we'd both be struck by lightning several times sooner than that happening.

If anything this would be an attempt to lock down (suse) linux and make it less open source, not more.

I just feel that apple having windows run on apple computers would be felt as an encroachement by microsoft and by doing the same but reversed, namely have a linux-based OS run as secondary OS next to windows they would get a foothold in the linuxmarket and in the growing popularity of linux. after all, they even sell computers with just linux pre-installed now, not something microsoft appreciates I bet.

But I admit it's just a wild guess I throw out there.

RE: in short
By Wwhat on 11/3/2006 8:32:50 AM , Rating: 2
Incidentally, the EU does not hate what you would call 'american companies', the EU does not hate microsoft, just because they are held to laws doesn't mean they are hated.
Microsoft is quite big in the EU (as you can imagine if you give it some thought), with a large 'local' presence - and they even make the belgian national ID card I read.
So it's not like the EU spitefully 'attacks' microsoft because they are 'americans', that's a silly misconception.

RE: in short
By TomZ on 11/3/2006 5:18:27 PM , Rating: 1
The feeling that I, and many other Americans have, is that Microsoft is mainly getting in trouble in the EU because they are successfully competing against European companies in the market. The EU has not shown any actual damage to consumers, has been ineffective in its so-called "remedies" for consumers, and has been extremely irrational in its demands that it has made of Microsoft.

Also, I don't see any concept of fairness, since I don't see any similar prosecution of European monopolies by the EU. At least to me, the EU's actions seem random and humorous at best, and discriminatory and protective at worst.

RE: in short
By Wwhat on 11/4/2006 12:01:28 AM , Rating: 3
paranoia is a powerful condition.
BTW, the companies that benefit from the EU's actions against microsft's monopolistic behaviour are all american companies it seems, but of course no argument will ever help agains paranoia.

RE: in short
By TomZ on 11/4/2006 8:17:44 AM , Rating: 2
LOL, no paranoia here. But you are right in that it does seem that EU has tried to help American companies against Microsoft, e.g., Sun. But again, this has been completely botched.

RE: in short
By Wwhat on 11/5/2006 12:26:30 AM , Rating: 2
I tell you the secret of why the microsoft thing is fought so fiercly, the EU woman who runs that show is a dutch women from up north, and that part of the county is known for its tough women, I think it's as simple as that.

RE: in short
By Helbore on 11/5/2006 10:26:38 AM , Rating: 2
TomZ, I agree with you entirely. The EU are being big bullies towards a more successful American company. I (more or less) live in the EU (UK) and I can't stand the useless rabble that is the European Parliament. I'm a consumer. I want a good product. I will buy whatever is the best product for what I want and if that's an American product, then I'm buying American. I don't want some nanny government trying to force me to but sub-standard "home-grown" merchandise because they don't like the idea that the Yanks made something better than them.

The EU are idiots who waste time on crap like this, instead of turning their attention to issues that governments should really be concerned with. Leave the free market, free, you jackasses.

(I don't like the EU much, in case you couldn't guess!)

Microsoft patents
By ioannis on 11/3/2006 6:32:43 AM , Rating: 2
There is an interesting point made here:

I'm quoting T Patterson (second post):
"After the Q&A segment it was clear that the patent agreement was a defacto acknowledgement by Novell that Linux violates MS patents. Ballmer made it clear that the patent agreement protects ONLY users of SuSE Linux. When questioned about wether the patent agreement covered technology which will be developed or if it covers MS patents already existing in Linux the attorney made it clear that the agreement protects existing Linux in the form of SuSE. So MS has found the big Linux vendor foolish enough to "legitimize" a patent claim on Linux by Microsoft. This makes it easier for MS to claim that Linux infringes their "IP" and claim that Novell recognized this "fact" and struck a deal. Now it's only a matter of asserting claims against all distributors except Novell thereby thinning the herd and finally, deal with Novell SuSE last. Nice going you Novell morons. After using SuSE for years it looks like it's time for a change. "

RE: Microsoft patents
By shamgar03 on 11/3/2006 6:39:40 AM , Rating: 2
THAT could suck....but at the same time don't you think this could be a big step for linux? Once people realize that linux is usable, they may be more willing to move to the free alternatives. I am always happy when suse does stuff that pulls peoples head out of the microsoft sand.

RE: Microsoft patents
By stmok on 11/3/2006 6:45:08 AM , Rating: 2
Yeah...This may all be some big elborate plan.
I'm still a bit weary and skeptical. (Its Microsoft remember).

RE: Microsoft patents
By johnsonx on 11/3/2006 11:06:28 AM , Rating: 2
You may be reading too much into that. First, Novell has a LONG history of going up against Microsoft: they're not about to start cowering in front of Microsoft's lawyers. Second, let us not forget that Novell itself (even before the Suse aquisition) claims to own quite a few of the Linux patents that SCO has claimed for themselves, which stems from Novell's spinoff and sale way back when of their first Linux/Unix products (anyone remember UnixWare in a red Novell box? I do). So this patent agreement may be as much an acknowledgement of Novell's substantial UNIX/Linux patent portfolio as it is any admission of infringement by Linux of Microsoft patents. Microsoft products and Linux products travel in the same circles, so there is bound to be some IP bleed between the too whether it be intentional or not. Novell and Microsoft have simply agreed not to get bogged down in endless lawsuits over minor IP issues.

RE: Microsoft patents
By johnsonx on 11/3/2006 11:14:37 AM , Rating: 2
Damn, I committed what I consider to be one of the 7 deadly spelling sins: I wrote 'two' as 'too'! Curse you lack of edit function!

Also, I do get so tired of seeing the 'Oops something went wrong, click to return to website' message everytime I take more than 30 seconds to type a message. I then have to go back, hope my message is still in the window, highlight it and copy it to the clipboard, go back to the news article, find the comment I wanted to reply to, paste my message back in and finally post. Are you guys EVER going to fix that?

RE: Microsoft patents
By Nekrik on 11/3/2006 2:22:17 PM , Rating: 2
Isn't it an issue of when there is a new post made between the time you first open the thread's page and the time you try to post your comment? I usually just hit F5 right before hitting the 'reply' or 'post comment' link.

RE: Microsoft patents
By johnsonx on 11/4/2006 6:01:56 AM , Rating: 2
Oh, is that what causes it? I thought it had to do with a new message being posted while I was typing mine. Either way, they really ought to find a way to fix it.

for those who care
By johnsonx on 11/2/2006 10:21:04 PM , Rating: 2
Here's Novell's press release on the matter:

RE: for those who care
By johnsonx on 11/2/2006 10:23:22 PM , Rating: 4
and, here is the e-mail everyone on Novell's mailing list got today (I presume Ron Hovsepian won't mind this being posted; I don't know why he or Novell would have a problem with it):
================================================= ==========

Today, Microsoft and Novell announced an historic new initiative. Important because it means a lot to you as our partner.

Let me begin by quickly outlining what we just announced. Microsoft and Novell, starting today, have agreed to build and market solutions so that Novell's technology works on Microsoft's and vice versa. Specifically, customers will now be able to run virtualized SUSE Linux Enterprise on Windows or Windows on SUSE Linux Enterprise. This landmark agreement also calls for both Microsoft and Novell to provide patent coverage to each others' customers for our respective products. Why is that important? It's important because our customers shouldn't have to worry about legal matters when it comes to which operating system they use. They also shouldn't have to worry about barriers such as intellectual property agreements, who owns which patent portfolio, and indemnification. None of those issues move their business forward. Now many of those barriers have been removed.

I am also proud to tell you that earlier today Novell and Microsoft demonstrated, by our words and actions, that we can work together for the mutual benefit of our customers. Steve Ballmer, Microsoft's CEO, was very passionate and genuine in his support for this agreement. He spoke about how it will help customers leverage both the Microsoft Windows platform as well as our SUSE Linux Enterprise platform. He said this combined solution will give customers choice and flexibility in building their technology environment. As we all know, choice and flexibility are both something our partners often complain are in short supply. We're determined to change that.

I'd like to also build on what Steve said, and today I had the opportunity to make some of these points in person to the assembled press, analyst, and industry experts. This agreement between us and Microsoft is a key cornerstone to our overall Novell promise to deliver the open enterprise to our customers, working in conjunction with you. It's an agreement where we can leverage a mixed environment- with open source and open standards based software- on our customers behalf. It's an agreement that will accelerate Novell's stated goal of helping our customers reduct cost, manage complexity and mitigate risk. Together, we are both in a better position to help customers achieve this.

I titled this a “landmark” announcement, and I truly believe it is. Transformational in its scope and important to us, our customers and our partners on many levels. You may wonder how this changes our relationship with Microsoft. It's no secret we've competed with them in the past. And we still will. However, it's also important for us all to remind ourselves that all organizations, particularly those in our industry, need to adapt and change. Further, for whatever differences we've had with Microsoft over the years, we also share a number of the same values. A strong belief in building solutions for our customers and an unwavering belief in the power of technology and innovation.

This is the beginning of a new and exciting chapter for Novell. It's also a new and exciting opportunity for us together. Working together we can do a better job for the customers we serve. I'm truly excited about this transformational announcement. The payoff will be better results where it counts most. On helping us deliver innovative solutions so our customers can grow and innovate. We look forward to working together.

Best regards,

Ron Hovsepian
CEO, Novell

RE: for those who care
By peternelson on 11/2/2006 11:22:53 PM , Rating: 2
Well, it's great that MS will virtualise on Suse Enterprise, and Suse enterprise will virtualise on MS.

Not sure which hypervisor (or both) they will be using ie Xen or microsoft's own?

Anyway I would welcome if this interoperability also worked for non-enterprise versions of suse linux. ie the opensuse and novell desktop distros ought to support such virtualisation in an ideal world.

Also in terms of the microsoft OS discussed here, does it refer to XP, 2003, Vista, ultimate edition, home.... etc. The news does not state this explicitly.

with M$
By laok on 11/2/2006 10:34:40 PM , Rating: 5
so we will get SUSE Genuine Advantage soon?

RE: with M$
By codeThug on 11/3/2006 12:25:31 AM , Rating: 2
No kidding.

Suse is a great distro with good support
By peternelson on 11/2/2006 10:08:18 PM , Rating: 2
"it represents a SURPRISING new alliance between two warring sides in the operating system world."

To say the least!

I'm a big fan of Suse.

It's GOOD news that MS has agreed not to sue any Suse users.

Also about time Microsoft shared their proprietary networking methods etc.

Also seems significant that Microsoft sees upside in linux and decided effectively "if you can't beat them, make money out of supporting them" ;-)

Novell/Suse already has great support and an enthusiastic following in the community.

I agree it is wise to be vigilant and suspicious of Microsoft practices here.

However, there is some potential to make an excellent distro even better.

Now we just need more protection against SCO lawsuits ;-)

By TomZ on 11/3/2006 5:20:20 PM , Rating: 2
It's GOOD news that MS has agreed not to sue any Suse users.

Yes, and Novell promised to not sue any Windows users. LOL. I was really worried about that one - it kept me up at night.

I can't believe...
By CrazyBernie on 11/4/2006 1:00:04 PM , Rating: 2
... that someone hasn't made a comment about the second coming of Christ or the arrival of Doomsday :D

RE: I can't believe...
By Wwhat on 11/5/2006 12:27:55 AM , Rating: 2
I'm an atheist :]

MS braces for the inevitable
By MonkeyPaw on 11/2/2006 10:32:26 PM , Rating: 2
Just look around, European nations and various levels of government in America are migrating networks to Linux. I think MS knows that they can't win every lawsuit with the EU, and they certainly can't strong-arm institutions like they use to. What I see coming in the long term is Office for Linux. They've already lost the OS sales to these switchers, but why lose Office sales, too? Government employees still need some sort of office suite, so MS can't ignore this growing sector. Best way to keep Office for Linux proprietary is to parter up with the bigger distro's in the spirit of cooperation.

DX10 for Linux I WISH!!
By wingless on 11/5/2006 4:19:53 PM , Rating: 2
Ofcourse this would NEVER happen but it would be neat.

Seriously though, this union cant hurt. Maybe it will actually help improve Windows as well. Linux/Unix based OS's offer the type of flexibility and freedom I like and a little M$ knowhow couldnt hurt. This will certainly be interesting to see what Microsoft does in a Linux environment. My guess is M$ Office will be out for Linux ASAP....

By Spar on 11/13/06, Rating: -1
By BioHazardous on 11/3/2006 1:47:58 PM , Rating: 2
What? Have you even seen SLED (SuSE Linux Enterprise Desktop) 10? You should see the work Novell has been putting into their desktop solution to make it user friendly.

With Novell teaming up with Microsoft, that can only mean more acceptance of Linux as an operating system for both servers and personal computers. This will lead to more programs being able to be installed onto Linux without having to use any emulators.

I am not a Linux expert, so I don't know the ins and outs of how to make everything work on Linux and to be quite honest, I gave it a shot on my new home desktop but gave up since I primarily use it for gaming and ran into all sorts of compatibility issues with hardware and software. I even had the Linux experts in the integration lab of the company I work for try to get it all working so it could be a gaming rig, but at the time everything I had was too new for it to work correctly. Had the Linux OS I installed worked with my games, I'd be using that instead of MS at home. So if MS and Novell are teaming up, and compatibility issues become more of a thing of the past with Linux, then I'd be all for installing Linux again on my home computer.

I don't know what's so un-user friendly about MS anyway. I have no problem doing everything I want to be able to on my computer with MS Windows running on it.

Just my two cents.

"If you look at the last five years, if you look at what major innovations have occurred in computing technology, every single one of them came from AMD. Not a single innovation came from Intel." -- AMD CEO Hector Ruiz in 2007

Copyright 2016 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki