Discussion on:

Microsoft's new open source initiative

I think that they're hedging their bets, and that they'll play the same game that Zynga is doing. They'll watch developments, and anything that turns in to a home run, they'll shamelessly copy, and make it theirs.

Doesn't the GNU say that if you are to use open source code, that it has to remain free for others? Microsoft can't anymore than anyone else.

I see just about everything these days through the lens of platforms and ecosystems. Long story short: Microsoft is finally realizing that open APIs, SDKs, and development communities increase the rate of innovation while concurrently decreasing its cost. I agree with the other commenter about the Zynga/Facebook frenemy relationship.

Phil Simon
www.theageoftheplatform.com

I don't believe they have arrived at the land of milk and honey and they are converted munchkins searching for a beautiful flower.
They have a dark purpose. Maybe it's to infiltrate like communism in a democracy but I don't believe they have good intentions.
Otherwise, their fearless leaders of past and present wouldn't have ridiculed and dismissed open source. Those same leaders are still in charge.

Unless you can name the dark purpose you speak of I would suggest it remain in the eye of the beholder. this is a typical Jack article with no substance, designed to make the comments light up with another Open Source v Microsoft tiresome pissing contest.
at least Jack, you mention MS is a huge contributor to the Linux kernel (top 20? - try top 3) what about that IBM are a huge contributor to the other technologies you mention.
MS are simply moving towards IT as a service- anybody working in IT already knows this - don't they?

IIRC, didn't uncle Steve call the open source community "Communists"? From a Capitalistic perspective, one would have thought that that was the best insult that he could give. And that should be taken as a compliment.

Looks like the Capitalist has realised that he needs to work with the Communists to try and sell his products to them Who would have thought huh?

They are just changing with the times.

And as for open source, Microsoft has a much longer history than this of dumping tons of money into it.

This is not exactly a startling revelation.

The primary reason - Microsoft is out of ideas already. They try to cover everything, only to discover others are away ahead in most interesting and profitable areas.

Microsoft is also in dire need to clean up their image and regain some trust. They also try to implant their technology in the various open source projects, possibly owith far-reaching patent abuse plans... Open source does not mean patent free!

Microsoft is only there for the dollars. If they were to run their business like they tell us then there would never need to be updates or new OS as all previous OS would be compatible with each other and work well with each other.

You say that like it's a bad thing.

Nah, just plain good business. Remember the old adage. keep your friends close and your ememies closer.

Sure their friendly and nice now; that's how they do it. Here is the basic Microsoft Mantra: Dominate all markets and those who resist make friends with so you can undermine them later. Microsoft is an old dog and as the saying goes you can't teach old dogs new tricks. Here is a recent example. Windows Vista and Windows 7 changed the CIF or Samba protocol to be "less" compatible with the rest of the world. This results in a problem communicating in a fundamental network way with the rest of society: Older Windows, Mac, Linux, and Printers. Now why would they have done that? Microsoft has always tried to be "compatible" with others right?

MS finally realized they can get a lot of people handing them something for nothing.

But it is possible they're doing a rope-a-dope here, they have enough clout to alter the courses of development, and might be thinking of leading the marching band into the dead end alley like the parade in "Animal House."

Not born yesterday. Open source cannot exist in a large corporate atmosphere. It will kill creativity. Besides, MS is too big and fat to allow creativity. Creativity demands that you be lean and mean.

"The Snake" (1968) by Al Wilson tells of a tender-hearted woman who finds a dying, half-frozen snake on the side of the road. Taking the snake home, she revives it and hugs it. The snake later bites her, then says to her as she lies dying in disbelief, "Silly woman, you knew I was a snake before you brought me in!"

I think that this is an acceptance that Open Source is growing and is here to stay. Nobody, even giants like Microsoft and Oracle can now stand back, ignore and even rubbish it. OS is making inroads into almost every area of software. Even relational database technology is starting to see competition from the so-called no-SQL database players. OS is bringing disruptive technology into so many areas that even MS could not ignore it. If your next software technology choice runs on Linux, then Windows must be displaced!

The question that was raised was why Microsoft is contributing to Linux? The answer is "Self Preservation". What Self Preservation implies is that in recognizing the cloud and cloud software services, Microsoft is moving all versions of it's ERP software to the cloud. While MS herself provides servers in the cloud, the majority and the servers that are most capable are open source.

In a No-SQL or MS SQL world, the interface is via TCP/IP, ergo, it is important that servers that host VMware, or Microsoft's VM system, or whatever, can fully support MS ERP systems and MS Office software and MS Sharepoint. MS is thinking that the ERP software is generating revenue, not the operating system platform. Ergo, assure that some of that software runs on Linux.

Next they will be working with Open Source and trying to charge for it in Office and Windows. If they already haven't! I don't think they should have their hand in this unless they really are trying to help. Even then, they are getting torn down from Open Source and everyone is getting tired of their garbage products, BSOD and all the other cool things MS software does. Open Source shouldn't allow MS to do this, they are trying to backstab. MS needs to get their software straight before they start venturing into other ideas to steal.

Microsoft cannot be taken seriously as a contributor to open source while they continue to claim ownership of Linux. I'll take them seriously when they stop trying to extort money from Linux distributors.

I find it hard to trust them, considering
their past anti competitive practices.
And, theyre pushing UEFI
to the exclusion of being able to boot Linux?
I feel very uneasy about it.
We ll have to wait and see.
Hopefully, they wont cause too much damage.

....'open-friendly'.... does think mean maybe they'll rethink they're WOA (sorry, Windows RT laptop and tablet hardware partner 'shotgun-wedding' and instigate a change in their partnership/windows-logo T&C's ....what I mean is their coercive requirement that Windows 8 on Arm (Windows RT) be 'welded' to the new (laptop&tablet) ARM based hardware(s) via 'Secure'-Boot...I.E. by FORBIDDING secureboot's Custom Mode on these ARM systems.

I think they won't be changing that AT ALL.... and therefore this Open Technologies team probably counts for nothing! Forcibly keeping linux competition off these new hardware systems may not be illegal, because sure, Apple (among other hardware competitors) get to keep their hardware and ecosystems all to themselves too...........but it is Immoral.. think about it.. they will be FORCING the (Windows)ARM tablet and laptop manufacturers to be Windows only, with no room...or possibility for Linux (native Linux, not within a VM) on these hardware solutions.

If ARM as a hardware platform really takes off, well, it already has.. then these form factors..on ARM.. become 'The New PC' as it were - and as I've said, Microsoft it perfectly legally allowed to do this, which is such a shame. Ideally I would say they SHOULD NOT be allowed -purely for the sake of allowing Linux to compete(ON THE SAME HARDWARE) but the same would have to go for Apple and they're hardware (I know you can boot Linux on all the current Laptop models, I have no experience of their tablets).

Please Microsoft, 'for the sake of OPENness' and all this OPEN-loving you're obviously wishing to proclaim, rescind your NO SECUREBOOT CUSTOM MODE requirement of your new Windows RT(WOA) hardware partners!!

Oh go on! ..you love OPEN really...! (Do you??)

The momentum of Opensource is reaching critical mass level. It will get strong enough to sweep even massive obstacles out of it's way. Microsoft, whatever ulterior motives it may have, is not stupid. They realize they must, "play pretty", or get crushed, (even if it's down the road a ways.)

Can someone licence his/her code as GPL2 or 3? or is it more like resticted non-free 'freedom'

join ExtremelyFluffy (aka Microsoft) and then hope they don't pull out your legs.

Don't give your code to the devil... not even if they promise to be nice. Walk away from this and never look back.

First of all Microsoft's "contributions" to the kernel are purely self serving -- they have no interest in furthering Open Source technology. I see this as simply a ploy to garner favor with the media and clueless management types. As usual, they are only interested in padding the bottom line by pushing their own technology down our throats under the guise of interoperability.

...and they see the handwriting on the wall, their game will be up soon, and don't be the last to the party. Again.

Microsoft's past is full of acts of jumping copyright, patents, and contracts while assimilating every kind of technology from "partners" without the agreed upon terms of the contracts, and then stalling the resulting lawsuits until the other company went out of business. With OS who is able to endure the cost of suing Microsoft for Copyleft infringement? Yes this is a survival of Microsoft move, and for now they will look like they are playing fair, but Microsoft did not become the giant that they are by playing fair. Just look at their past. Microsoft is a software predator, and I see no reason why they would change now.

Microsoft is taking a beating from every corner. If they dont embrace their biggest rival and actually work together they will be another Novell. Still in business but not the powerhouse they were because of stubborn propritery attitude.

Open source has grown to the point of becoming a threat to Microsoft (how many of us have been waiting and hoping this would happen?). Microsoft is not going to open their greedy arms and welcome us all in. They are only about money and their past shows how they treat competition.
They know they can't compete with the best programmers in the world (not on their payroll) who are committed to open source.
Combine open source and the money-mad machine and you'll see a whole lot of slimy activities to steal, cry infringement rights (in our "new world" they'll sue successfully once they can zero in on a target who is now committed to a deal).
I don't know all they have up their sleeves, but their past hasn't just disappeared or magically changed so quickly.
I saw them rise and know their story and I simply don't trust them.
Of course, that's my opinion and I'm glad we can still all have one.

M$ lost the new technology wagon (cell phones / pads) to Linux (Android) and Apple, it is loosing steadily in the server and application platform (browsers) market and it MUST adapt, under the risk of becoming irrelevant. Their Embrace & Extend strategies does not work in the Open Source world ("In a world without walls, who needs windows?"), since non-interoperability leads to isolation - which is already hurting them, market-wise. They already have a big profit in their locked-in markets, but those are shrinking day by day.

I think this statement "One thing we all have to keep in mind is that Microsoft is in the top twenty contributors to the Linux kernel" is wrong and its the other way around it was the UNIX foundation that gave its Linux its kernel and MS took some of the feature and embedded it into the Windows Kernel. In fact the NT version was done by the former Unix system programmers that MS hired.

IMHO it's because of Redhat, they finally realise that OpenSource companies can make big $$

If Microsoft wants to insure interoperability of its products with the rest of the computing world, then why not start with supporting established open standards -- something they have yet to do fully.

This news makes me nervous. Obviously, Microsoft thinks that the open source community is something to fear. Otherwise, they wouldn't be trying to find or blaze inroads with it. Maybe it's that Microsoft is looking for the next victim to steal code from -- something that they've been caught doing in the past. The bad thing about it is that we may never know the extent that they have (or may) steal from the open source community, given the closed nature of their source code.

I simply don't trust letting the fox into the chicken coop.

What Open Source products does MS currently have on the table?

Microsoft is all about MAKE LOADS OF $MONEY$...
Thus going OPEN SOURCE for them simply means they get a FRESH new ideas from all the OPEN-SOURCE people & then change a few things here & there and they now have a new LOOK-a-LIKE product that they can sell for $97.95

HOW DO I KNOW SOMETHING LIKE THIS COULD BE TRUE??

Back in WINDOWS 3.1 days there was this program that I found that was FREEWARE and it was a SHELL that you could use instead of the WINDOWS 3.1 shell [system.sys file insert where you would have seen shell= [left blank loads default WINDOWS 3.1 shell]]
This freeware had a START BUTTON [on the top] and all the FAV DIRECTORIES [on the top] and PLACES [on the top] and you could have up to 8 windows open at any one time.
YOU could do FILE ASSOCIATIONS - example === file.zip when clicked would open the unarchiver UNZIP program. I would use that like it was the BIBLE...

Then comes WIN95..... DARN.... The shell was almost word & directory the same thing as the FREEWARE version BUT all the menus & START button were located at the bottom of the screen... [The bottom bar]. It was the exact thing but in REVERSE... AT THE BOTTOM instead of being at the top of the screen [the top bar]

THUS all MICROSOFT wants is to find the next greatest FREEWARE & edit it a little to make it into the MICROSOFT LINE OF WARES...

They probably think it is better to have a small room on the inside looking out than it is to have a football pitch on the outside trying to look in..... (always keep you enemies/competition close.....you need to be in arms reach if you want to use dagger.... plus it's also easier to insight disharmany and revolt once you are a trusted member of "the group" !!!.

Open source is not Microsoft partner. Microsoft will always do whatever it can to break, divide and rule, the Open Source Community. Just see the problem with software patents.
This will be good for a few projects and destructive for the vast majority of open source.
Do you remeber the FUD story?