November 24th, 2009

Can (and will) Microsoft keep Silverlight compatible across platforms?

Posted by Mary Jo Foley @ 6:47 am

Categories: .Net Framework, App Compatibility, Apple, Corporate strategy, Development tools, Linux, Novell, PDC 2009, Silverlight (wpf/e), Windows Mobile, Windows client

Tags: Microsoft Silverlight, Microsoft Corp., COM, ActiveX/COM/COM+/DCOM, Middleware, Microsoft Windows, Software Development, Software/Web Development, Enterprise Software, Software

As Microsoft made plain at its Professional Developers Conference last week, there’s no end in sight to the list of new features and functionality it plans to add to Silverlight.

Some developers who have been on the fence about whether they should be developing Windows applications using Windows Presentation Foundation (WPF) or Silverlight applications see a light at the end of the tunnel of confusion. Microsoft is adding more and more WPF features to Silverlight (and vice versa). But as Tim Anderson, an IT journalist/blogger noted last week, there is a downside to this strategy: By adding technologies like COM support to Silverlight, Microsoft is doing damage to its story that Silverlight is a cross-platform browser plug-in that supports Windows, Mac — and, thanks to the Mono folks at Novell , Linux — equally.

(The Register’s Gavin Clarke and I talk more about the risks of making Silverlight better on Windows than other platforms during our latest episode of the Microbite podcast.)

The COM object support that Microsoft is promising for Silverlight 4, the version of Microsoft’s Web application framework/plug-in due to ship by mid-2010, is applicable to Silverlight running on Firefox or Internet Explorer on Windows only. Neither Mac OS X nor Linux support COM.

Microsoft officials were quick to note that adding access to COM components was a customer request, not something Microsoft did in a vacuum. When I asked Microsoft about its plans to keep Silverlight in sync across platforms, a spokesperson sent me the following statements:

“In Silverlight 4 we addressed over 8,000 customer feature requests. One specific request was adding support for accessing COM components, enabling common enterprise scenarios such as automating Microsoft Office and providing developers easy access to hardware capabilities such as scanners and security card readers.”

But check this out: Microsoft officials say they are evaluating how to add some kind of COM component access to the Mac version of Silverlight. From the aforementioned spokesperson:

“Unfortunately, the Mac offers no support for COM interfaces and we’re actively evaluating options to get COM-like features on the Mac.”

There’s no further word on when or how Microsoft plans to add this kind of support to Silverlight for the Mac.

Meanwhile, it looks like Novell’s Developer Platform Vice President Miguel de Icaza is itching to create support for the new Silverlight 4 functionality to future implementations of Moonlight, the Novell/Mono team-developed implementation of Silverlight for Linux. After the PDC, de Icaza blogged:

“For the Moonlight team, this means that there is a lot of work ahead of us to bring every Silverlight 3 and 4 feature. I think I speak for the whole Mono team when I say that this is exciting, fascinating, challenging and feels like we just drank a huge energy boost drink.”

Microsoft’s latest Silverlight moves mean that Silverlight is evolving to become a universal run-time for Microsoft’s Common Language Runtime (CLR), the heart of .Net, according to de Icaza. Developing a desktop suite of Silverlight apps isn’t just a pipe dream, de Icaza said; it’s a real, doable project.

Some developers are already dreaming of the possibility of a Silverlight operating system. (For some reason, I think the Windows team might try to derail that effort before it could ever happen, but who knows?) Microsoft has more immediate and pressing concerns, though: It needs to keep Silverlight in sync across platforms if the company plans to play up the “available everywhere” piece of its Silverlight message.

November 10th, 2009

Did Microsoft Windows 7 download tool violate the GPL?

Posted by Mary Jo Foley @ 7:30 am

Categories: Corporate strategy, Linux, Open source, Windows 7, Windows client

Tags: GPL, Microsoft Corp., Tool, Productivity, Microsoft Windows 7, Microsoft Windows, Open Source, Operating Systems, Software, Mary Jo Foley

Microsoft has pulled an update tool for Windows 7 from the Microsoft Store site after a report indicating that the tool incorporated open-source code in a way that violated the GNU General Public License.

Rafael Rivera of the “Within Windows” blog reported on November 6 that he had found something suspicious when mucking around int he code for the Windows 7 USB/DVD Download Tool. (That tool, which Microsoft made available on October 22, is designed to help netbook users upgrade from XP to Windows 7 in a more streamlined way.)

On November 9, Microsoft pulled the download tool from its site. A spokesperson sent me the following update:

“Microsoft is looking into this issue and is taking down the WUDT tool from the Microsoft Store site until its investigations are complete. We apologize to our customers for any inconvenience.”

Rivera noted that the Microsoft tool may violate more than a few GPL terms and conditions. From his post:

“A simple search of some method names and properties, gleaned from Reflector’s output, revealed the source code was obviously lifted from the CodePlex-hosted (yikes) GPLv2-licensed ImageMaster project. (The author of the code was not contacted by Microsoft.)…

“Microsoft did not offer or provide source code for their modifications to ImageMaster nor their tool…. Second, Microsoft glued in some of their own licensing terms, further restricting your rights to the software (TermsOfUse.rtf).”

Microsoft has run afoul of the GPL licensing terms on a few occasions. Most recently, there were questions raised by some in the open-source community about Microsoft’s motives for making some of its drivers available for inclusion in the Linux source tree. (Microsoft officials maintained that the company didn’t release the source code because of potential legal issues; some in the open-source community begged to differ.)

Stay tuned for more on this, as Microsoft proceeds with its investigation….

October 6th, 2009

Microsoft considering making Zune services available to Apple users

Posted by Mary Jo Foley @ 12:55 pm

Categories: Apple, Corporate strategy, Linux, Windows CE, Windows Mobile, Windows client, Xbox, Xbox Live, Zune

Tags: Microsoft Zune, Apple Inc., Microsoft Corp., Corporate Communications, Digital Music, Digital Media, Marketing, Personal Technology, Consumer Electronics, Mary Jo Foley

For all you who still believe Microsoft is still consumed with the impossible task of beating the iPod with the Zune, here’s more proof that Zune’s future is all about software and services and not hardware.

Microsoft is considering whether it should port the Zune software and services to other platforms, including Apple’s. There’s no guarantee that the Redmondians will end up doing this — or timetable as to when this could happen — but it’s one of many strategies under active consideration.

That’s what I heard today from Jose Pinero, Director of Communications for Microsoft’s TV, Video and Music Business. I had a chance to chat with Pinero at Microsoft’s consumer open-house showcase in New York on October 6.

As I’m currently using the Zune Pass subscription in conjunction with my Sony Walkman MP3 player, I realized that the service isn’t tied to the device. Sure, you don’t get the Zune HD operating system and user interface, but it’s still workable (with a little finagling).

I’ve been thinking that there might be a number of Apple iPod/iPhone users who might prefer a music subscription service over a pay-per-song one. (And one that’s better than Rhapsody.) Given the problems many iTunes users have trying to run iTunes on Windows, maybe they’d be interested in using the Zune software on their Windows PCs, even if they are iPod/iPhone users.

“We are evaluating a lot of options in terms of platforms,” Pinero confirmed, when I asked about this scenario.

He noted that with the addition of the ability to stream music from a browser that is part of the new Zune 4.0 experience, Mac and Linux users already can stream music to their systems if they have a ZunePass subscription. The streaming capability isn’t limited to Internet Explorer; it works with any browser, he said.

So what would it mean to take the Zune experience to Apple users? simply make it easier for iPods/iTouch devices to connect to Zune Pass and to run the Zune software?  I didn’t get any more specifics from Pinero.

While most pundits and many enthusiasts continue to posit that Microsoft is still focused on trying to beat the ubiquitious iPod, that isn’t what the Zune team is thinking.

“Zune is a music and video service from Microsoft. Period,” said Pinero.

(As I’ve reported before, Microsoft officials have said they plan to deliver “at least one more” version of the Zune media player to market, but beyond that, aren’t committing to continue making Microsoft-branded music/video devices. Their thinking is that users will prefer converged devices and want their music  and video on phones and other portable devices instead of dedicated media players.)

I asked Pinero when Microsoft might be bringing the Zune music and video service to Windows Mobile phones.

“Our next step is mobile phones, but we haven’t talked about a timeline for when that will happen,” he said.

Pinero said Microsoft’s more immediate priorities are to get Zune music and Video services on the Xbox. Microsoft officials said earlier this year that Microsoft plans to make the Zune video marketplace available as part of Xbox Live this fall.

Do you think Microsoft could and should port the Zune software and services to other platforms, especially those from Apple? Any brave and/or crazy Apple iPod/iTouch users out there who have found a way to use their devices with ZunePass?

October 5th, 2009

Flash 10.1 beta coming to Windows Mobile 6.5 phones by year-end

Posted by Mary Jo Foley @ 5:06 am

Categories: Channel, Corporate strategy, Google, Linux, Network service providers, OEMs, Silverlight (wpf/e), Telecommunications, Windows CE, Windows Mobile, Windows client

Tags: Phone, Microsoft Silverlight, Microsoft Windows Mobile, Mobile, Microsoft Corp., Beta, Microsoft Windows, Mobile Operating Systems, Operating Systems, Mobile Applications

On October 5, Adobe did what Microsoft’s own Silverlight team still has yet to do: Pin a date on when it will bring its ad/video-display plug-in to Windows Mobile.

Adobe officials said a public developer beta of the browser-based runtime of Flash 10.1 is expected to be available for Windows Mobile — as well as Palm’s WebOs and Windows, Mac OS and Linux — before the end of the year. A developer’s beta for Google’s Android and the Symbian OS are expected to be available in early 2010. The final version of Flash 10.1 should be out for Windows Mobile in the first half of 2010, according to Adobe’s latest time table.

Adobe’s press release didn’t mention which version(s) of Windows Mobile will be getting full-fledged Flash. PCMag.com said it will be Windows Mobile 6.5, which Microsoft is rolling out officially with its phone-maker and carrier partners tomorrow, October 6. “Lower-tier” devices, meaning older Windows Mobile phones, will be Flash-enabled but not run full-fledged Flash, PCMag.com added.

Adobe announced its intentions to bring Flash to ARM-based phones a year ago, in November 2008, with the first devices supporting it available in mid-2009.

I’m betting we’ll get dates and details from Microsoft about exactly when Silverlight will be coming to Windows Mobile (and possibly other non-Windows-Mobile OS phones) in the next day or so, just in time for the Windows Mobile 6.5 launch. Will Microsoft be making the already-shipping Silverlight 3 on these devices, or will developers and users have to wait for Silverlight 4, which so far, doesn’t have a public release date? Guess we’ll find out soon.

MIcrosoft recently released to manufacturing a new version of Windows Embedded CE, which is the core platform upon which Windows Mobile phones are based, that includes Silverlight support. But officials said availability of that release (Windows Embedded CE6.0 R3) has no bearing on when Microsoft will bring Silverlight support to WIndows Mobile.

Microsoft also recently announced it is porting Silverlight to Moblin-Linux-based mobile devices. That port will be available by early 2010, according to Microsoft.

Update (October 6): I was wrong. Microsoft doesn’t have an update, re: Silverlight’s availability on Windows Mobile, to share today. Company officials said that Microsoft isn’t going to support Silverlight on Windows Mobile 6.5, which launches today on new phones. The official line is users will get Silverlight on Windows Mobile 7.  Windows Mobile 7 phones aren’t currently expected to debut before the end of 2010. I asked if Microsoft might make it available on WM phones before WM 7 and was told no comment.

September 23rd, 2009

That's one way to get Silverlight on a mobile device: Port it to Moblin Linux

Posted by Mary Jo Foley @ 11:53 am

Categories: Channel, Corporate strategy, Linux, OEMs, Resellers, Silverlight (wpf/e), System builders, Windows 7, Windows client

Tags: Microsoft Silverlight, Mobile, Microsoft Corp., Mobile Device, Intel Atom, Intel Corp., Moblin Linux, Linux, Microsoft Windows, Netbooks, Nettops & MIDs

To date, whenever anyone asked Microsoft officials when the company will deliver a version of Silverlight running on mobile phones, the answers range from a flat-out no comment, to a “real soon now/stay tuned.”

Most company watchers assumed that Microsoft would make Silverlight available on Windows Mobile devices first — and, if Microsoft still plans to pull any rabbits out of its Windows Mobile hat on October 6, launch day for Win Mobile 6.5 phones, maybe it will.

But at the Intel Developer Forum on September 23, Intel demonstrated Microsoft’s Silverlight 3 running on an Atom-based Moblin device. That means Silverlight — and not Novell’s Moonlight version of it, but Microsoft’s own Silverlight — will run on mobile Linux netbooks, phones and more, as of early 2010.

Moblin is an Linux Foundation project and is an open source Linux-based system for next generation devices, primarily those based on Intel Atom hardware. Moblin can run on netbooks/PCs, phones and other mobile Internet devices, or MIDs. A beta of Moblin Version 2, optimized for nettops/netbooks, went to testers on September 23. Intel’s press release today said “operating system support for Microsoft Silverlight will be expanded to include Moblin early next year.”

Silverlight is Microsoft’s cross-browser plug-in that works with Internet Explorer on Windows, Firefox on Windows and Linux platforms and Safari on the Mac.

Microsoft, unsurprisingly, is emphasizing that Intel is supporting Silverlight on Atom on both  Windows 7 and Moblin. From a September 23 post on the official Microsoft Silverlight blog:

“Today, Intel announced at IDF (Intel Developer Forum) support for Silverlight 3 on their Atom-based devices. This collaboration is focused on enabling consumers to have a great out of the box experience for browsing the Web and we see Silverlight support as a key aspect of that.

“These Atom-based devices run Windows 7 or Moblin, which is Intel’s preferred flavor of Linux for embedded scenarios. As part of this, Silverlight will become one of the technologies supported within Intel’s Atom Developer Program.  Developers can target Silverlight as a preferred client runtime and know they will get solid support on Atom-based devices.”

The Silverlight blog post also made sure to throw in a mention of Moonlight, the port of Silverlight to Linux which Microsoft origially shunned and then embraced (to the point where Microsoft now uses the pronoun “we” when referring to who is doing the work there). From the post:

“We see this is a clear extension of our current efforts with Novell where we are building an open source implementation of Silverlight called ‘Moonlight’ that is targeted at the broad range of Linux–based PCs.”

Microsoft also announced delivery of Windows Embedded 6.0 R3, which includes a custom version of Silverlight, earlier this week. But Microsoft officials said that the inclusion of Silverlight in that operating system had no implications for making Silverlight available on mobile phones.

Update: Microsoft isn’t offering a whole lot of particulars about how Silverlight is being moved onto Moblin, other than reconfirming the effort uses neither Moonlight nor Mono. From a spokesperson:

“Microsoft plans to make a porting kit available to OEMs that will enable them to port Silverlight to their Moblin-based devices. Microsoft will provide Intel with Silverlight source code and test suites, and Intel will provide Microsoft with an optimized version of Silverlight for Moblin devices that Microsoft can then redistribute to OEMs. So when you get a device with Moblin, it will come with Silverlight.”

September 22nd, 2009

Microsoft buys desktop parallel-computing software maker ISC

Posted by Mary Jo Foley @ 5:44 am

Categories: .Net Framework, Corporate strategy, Development tools, Linux, Multicore/distributed computing, Windows client, Windows server

Tags: Software, Desktop, High-performance, Microsoft Corp., ISC, Leadership, Management, Mary Jo Foley

Microsoft has purchased the assets of Interactive Supercomputing (ISC), a desktop parallel-computing vendor, according to a blog post on the Windows Server Division Weblog.

The move fits in with Microsoft’s continued efforts to build up its high-performance server capabilities so as to better take on Linux in that market. It also fits with Microsoft’s larger Server and Tools and research projects to make parallel programming easier.

Microsoft has a wide variety of ongoing projects in the parallel/distributed computing space, from its Axum concurrent-computing language, to the Parallel FX extenions to the .Net Framework. Earlier this year, Microsoft formed a new eXtreme Computing Group, headed by supercomputing expert Dan Reed, that is focused on exascale computing.

According to the Windows Server post, dated September 21, from Kyril Faenov General Manager, High Performance & Parallel Computing Technologies:

“ISC’s products and technology enable faster prototyping, iteration, and deployment of large-scale parallel solutions, which is well aligned with our vision of making high performance computing and parallel computing easier, both on the desktop and in the cluster.”

Faenov said in the post that Microsoft recently began planning to integrate ISC technologies into future versions of unnamed Microsoft products and that Microsoft will provide more details “over the coming months.” In the short term, Microsoft will be providing support for ISC’s current Star_P customers, he said.

The CEO of ISC, Bill Blake, will be bringing the ISC team to work at Microsoft’s New England Research & Development Center in Cambridge, MA.

PEHub reported yesterday that Microsoft had purchased ISC, but Microsoft declined to confirm that report.

PEHub noted that ISC’s P-Star is “technical computing software that enables users to code computing problems on their desktops using familiar mathematical software such as MATLAB and Python, and run them instantly and interactively on parallel high-performance computers (HPCs).”

September 10th, 2009

Early licensing details emerge from Microsoft-backed CodePlex Foundation

Posted by Mary Jo Foley @ 2:37 pm

Categories: Corporate strategy, Linux, Open source, Windows server

Tags: Mary Jo Foley

Among the biggest questions about the newly-minted and Microsoft-backed CodePlex Foundation will likely be around how it will handle code licensing and patenting.

Sam Ramji — the soon-to-be-former-Softie who is the interim board president for the Microsoft-founded and -funded open-source CodePlex Foundation — shared a few specifics on these points on September 10.

Ramji spoke to press and analysts on Thursday about the new Foundation, for which Microsoft is ponying up an initial $1 million in funding and is filling a many of its interim board seats with its own execs. The Foundation is dedicated to “break down barriers to open source projects in commercial settings,” according to Ramji.

One of the areas about the Foundation that open source developers are sure to be monitoring closely is how it plans to handle contributed open-source code.

Ramji said there will be a “straightforward contributor agreement” available on the Foundation’s Web site for individuals or groups interested in providing any kind of open-source code/projects. Ramji said commercial software companies who contribute source won’t be required to provide any kind of broad patent-portfolio transfer as part of their contributions. The CodePlex Foundation, in turn, will extend derivative-works rights to all “downstream” developers and users of the contributed code. And the organization will be “license-agnostic,” allowing contributors to work with a broad variety of open-source licenses, Ramji said.

Microsoft, for its part, has released a number of its own pieces of technology under a variety of bonafide open-source licenses — everything from its own OSI-approved MsPL, to the GPL.

Ramji told conference-call participants that the group expects to have created its bylaws, appointed a full-time board head, board members and filled out its advisory board within its first 100 days. Ramji acknowleged he is leaving Microsoft for personal reasons (and not because Microsoft is “mainstreaming” its Open Source Technology Center by folding it into the larger Windows Server engineering organization), but he has another full-time job with an unnamed cloud-infrastructure startup in California awaiting him.

The Foundation is looking for other commercial vendors to join and, ultimately, dilute the Microsoft domination of the organization, Ramji said.

What’s your take: Is there a place for a foundation that is dedicated to smoothing some of the bumps between closed- and open-source developers? Any stumbling blocks you foresee already with the CodePlex Foundation?

September 10th, 2009

Is Microsoft stalling on its GPL Linux drivers?

Posted by Mary Jo Foley @ 9:29 am

Categories: Corporate strategy, Linux, Novell, Open source

Tags: GPL, Microsoft Corp., Microsoft Windows Server Hyper-V, Open Source, Linux, Operating Systems, Software, Mary Jo Foley

After releasing with much fanfare 20,000 lines of driver code under the GNU General Public License (GPL) for inclusion in the Linux kernel, Microsoft hasn’t followed through with the necessary updates and fixes required by the community, according to one Linux leader.

Greg Kroah-Hartman, a Novell fellow with SuSE Labs and Linux Driver Project lead, posted on September 9 a status update on the drivers being assembled for inclusion in the Linux 2.6.32 kernel, Kroah-Hartman had some harsh words about Microsoft’s participation since its original announcement of its GPL plans in late July.

Kroah-Hartman chided a number of driver-code contributors for not doing the necessary work to get their code in shape. But he singled Microsoft out with the following words:

“hv (Microsoft Hyper-V) drivers. Over 200 patches make up the massive cleanup effort needed to just get this code into a semi-sane kernel coding style (someone owes me a bit bottle of rum for that work!) Unfortunately the Microsoft developers seem to have disappeared, and no one is answering my emails. If they do not show back up to claim this driver soon, it will be removed in the 2.6.33 release. So sad…”

(Kroah-Hartman also is the guy who belatedly called into question Microsoft’s motives for releasing the driver code under the GPL by seemingly backing one open-source community member’s claim that Microsoft was in violation of the GPL by mixing and matching open- and closed-source code. Some in the open-source community consider that kind of behavior as a violation and others don’t.)

I asked a Microsoft spokesperson whether Microsoft had had second thoughts about making its Hyper-V code available under the GPL. The spokesperson denied that was the case and said the primary person responsible for the Hyper-V drivers had been traveling in Europe for the past two weeks “meeting with various OSS (open-source software) constituencies and customers.”

I wonder if and when Kroah-Hartman will update his driver-status log….

September 10th, 2009

Microsoft founds, funds a new open-source foundation

Posted by Mary Jo Foley @ 8:34 am

Categories: Corporate strategy, Linux, Novell, Open source

Tags: Open-source Foundation, Microsoft Corp., Commercial Software, CodePlex Foundation, Open Source, Mary Jo Foley

A new, non-profit open-source foundation — one dedicated to increasing the participation of commercial-source vendors in the open-source world — is being unveiled on September 10. Microsoft is providing the initial funding and is a founding member of the new group, known as the CodePlex Foundation.

Sam Ramji [below]– Microsoft’s Senior Director of Platform Strategy and the company’s main point man on open-source issues — will be the interim president of the Foundation, according to a press advisory sent to members of the media today. I’d assume this would mean Ramji is leaving Microsoft, but when I asked Microsoft whether this was the case, company officials declined to comment.

Sam Ramji (Photograph copyright James Duncan Davidson)

Update: Ramji is, indeed, leaving Microsoft, as of September 25. Ramji is moving back to California for personal reasons and taking a job with an unnamed cloud-infrastructure startup, he said during a conference call today. He will serve as the interim board president of the CodePlex Foundation until a full-time replacement is found.  Meanwhile, Microsoft is “actively recruiting” someone to take his post at the company, Ramji said.

Other interim board members of the new foundation are primarily from Microsoft, at this point. They include Bill Staples, General Manager of the Web Platform and Tools Engineering teams ; Stephanie Boesch, a Microsoft Program Manager for the .Net Framework; Miguel de Icaza, Vice President of Developer Platform at Novell ; Britt Johnston, a Microsoft Product Unit Manager for Data and Modeling; and Shaun Walker, Co-founder and Chief Architect of DotNetNuke.

According to a press release, the CodePlex Foundation will be license- and project-agnostic. The group is pitching itself being complementary to other open-source foundations, rather than a rival to them.

While the CodePlex Foundation shares a similar name with Microsoft’s source-code repository-hosting site, CodePlex.org, the two are not merging. According to a FAQ on the Foundation’s site:

Microsoft’s “CodePlex.com launched in June of 2006 out of a need for a project hosting site that operated in a way that other forges didn’t – with features and structures that appealed to commercial software developers. The next chapter in solving for this challenge is the CodePlex Foundation (Codeplex.org). The Foundation is solving similar challenges; ultimately aiming to bring open source and commercial software developers together in a place where they can collaborate. This is absolutely independent from the project hosting site, but it is essentially trying to support the same mission.”

The new foundation is planning to share more details about its charter, structure and other matters later this afternoon.

What more do you want to know about this new group?

September 9th, 2009

Wall Street still worrying over netbook impact on Microsoft's Windows 7 sales

Posted by Mary Jo Foley @ 11:36 am

Categories: Channel, Corporate strategy, Linux, OEMs, Resellers, System builders, Windows 7, Windows XP, Windows client

Tags: Microsoft Corp., Sales, Netbook, Netbooks, Nettops & MIDs, Microsoft Windows, Microsoft Windows 7, Hardware, Operating Systems, Software, Mary Jo Foley

How much will netbooks dent Microsoft’s Windows sales?

It’s a question that continues to preoccupy many a Wall Street analyst, especially as Microsoft marches toward the October 22 launch of Windows 7. No matter how many times Microsoft officials claim that they believe the company will be able to charge premium prices for Windows 7, even on netbooks, Microsoft watchers ask again about just how elastic Windows’ pricing really can be, given that netbooks go for a few hundred dollars.

On September 9, the netbook question arose again during a question and answer session with Microsoft Chief Financial Officer Chris Liddell at the Citi Annual Global Technology Conference. Analysts asked Liddell the same-old: When Bing will actually give Google a run for its money; whether Microsoft would be able to continue to control costs; whether and when Microsoft will do stock buybacks (yes and in the coming months, Liddell said).

But analysts seemed most interested in the netbook issue. How can Microsoft predict that the continued popularity of netbooks, which comprise a fifth of the portable PC market (according to a recent market study), isn’t going to force Microsoft to charge less per copy of Windows, rather than more?

As expected, Liddell didn’t share details about how much Microsoft is planning to charge PC makers per copy for Windows 7 Starter or Windows 7 Home Premium, the main two SKUs expected to show up on low-end netbooks. (Word is Microsoft charges about $15 per copy for XP on netbooks.) But he did share more about why he said he isn’t worried about potential price erosion with Windows 7.

First, Liddell said that he believes netbooks, as a category, are “maturing.” They aren’t topped out yet and, according to Microsoft’s calculations, represent about 10 percent to 15 percent of the overall PC market. But they are likely to grow a percentage point or two higher, at most, he told Citi conference attendees.

Secondly, Microsoft is planning to continue to offer PC makers the option of licensing Windows XP “for a period of time,” as well, he said. That could appease the makers of some of the lowest price-point netbooks, at least for the time being. (Microsoft has said that OEMs will be able to license XP Home edition through June 2010 or one year after general availability of Win7, which I’m assuming means October 2010.)

Liddell reiterated Microsoft’s claim that 92 percent to 93 percent of netbooks are now going out with Windows XP, not Linux, attached. He said that proves that people are willing to pay at retail a premium of $30 to $40 per copy for “the Windows experience,” even when offered an alternative that is free. He acknowledged Microsoft won’t ever get to the 100 percent preload “attach” with netbooks, but even in the bargain segment, there is a group of people willing to pay for the familiar Windows experience — especially those netbook users who care more about the small form-factor benefits than the cut-rate price tags.

How Microsoft thinks about the actual cost of Windows was the part of Liddell’s remarks I found most interesting.

While Microsoft charges multiple hundreds of dollars for a new copy of Windows, Liddell said the actual cost is $15. Here’s how he calculated that number: The average selling price for Windows (when figured across all versions) is $60 per copy, he said. The average user sticks with a particular version of Windows for four years. So the cost of Windows isn’t really $249 or even $99. It’s $60 divided by four, or $15 for a “one year experience.” And if you compare $15 to the cost of having to learn a new OS or port your apps to a new platform, Windows looks downright cheap, Liddell said.

Hmmm. I’m not really buying Liddell’s new math. It’ll be interesting to see if any company watchers are finally appeased by his netbook assurances. Are you?