Slashdot Mirror

'If they fix a significant technical problem, they should get a patent to preserve at least some competitive advantage'

I don't know if you read the same email but it seems patently clear that what was being proposed was breaking ACPI to make it Windows specific and use patents to prevent it being used on Linux. And since Linux is GPL it could not use patented ACPI extensions. Using broken extensions to preserve 'competitive advantage' is the act of a paranoid, greedy, untrustworthy and petty organization'

This is nothing new. MS has been shedding excutives like a dying tree sheds its leaves. Look them up, it makes a long list. Stutz probably wrote the most entertaining parting shots.

This article was originally posted on Stutz' website. Since OSDir seems to be slashdotted, you can read it here!

From David Stutz's website (http://www.synthesist.net/writing/commodity_softw are.html)

Everyone in the IT community already knows what a poor reputation that company has actively worked hard to earn. Articles like the above serve only to provide free marketing and distract from active development rather than pump-n-dump.

Rather than doing free security and sysadmin work for Chairman Bill this holiday season, and rather than providing free publicity for his portfolio, could we please give it a rest and have a MS free week, weekend or at least just a MS free friday? i.e. no articles or press releases about the lastest vaporware, thneed, fud or spin, inlcuding news relays via MS-owned sources like slate, msn, msnbc, msnpr, newseek, etc. It seems every day there is a shameless, uneccesary plug or two. Now that international investors have divested and even their own emloyees have offloaded it is as irrelevant to the stock market as it is for the IT sector. The pyramid scheme has maxed out, if you weren't already bailing, then it's too late.

As far as security goes, businesses and home users alike are finding Gnome and KDE easy to use and the plaforms (Darwin, OpenBSD, Linux, QNX, etc.) more secure, more stable, and easier to maintain. So looking back at MS-Window [lack of] security in 2003, we can say good bye to the terminally insecure and hello to modern technology.

Is The 'Soft Going Soft on Open Source?

By Mary Jo Foley
Microsoft's newest shared source license seems to be inching closer -- at least in spirit -- to the GNU GPL.

The open-source faithful have been harsh critics of Microsoft's shared source licensing plan and justifiably so. They have claimed that Microsoft has attempted to ride the coattails of the GNU General Public License (GPL), while simultaneously slamming the GPL as contaminating everything in its path.

Even some of Microsoft's own employees, such as David Stutz, the former Microsoft manager in charge of Microsoft's Common Language Infrastructure (CLI) Shared Source program, have expressed frustration with Microsoft's licensing rhetoric.

One More Time: Stutz's 'Sanitized' Goodbye Note

But is there a case to be made that Redmond is slowly but surely learning from its past mistakes?

Exhibit No. 1: Instead of trying to blur the lines between open source and shared source, this week, Microsoft is presenting (against a back drop of open-source protest) its shared source program as an "alternative" to the GPL at the Washington, D.C. e-Government pow-wow on open standards and open source.

Check Out the e-Government Agenda Here

Exhibit No. 2: With no fanfare, the company recently has added a new shared source licensing option to its stable that removes some (but definitely not all of the more onerous licensing clauses from Microsoft's contracts.

The new license -- called simply, the "ASP .Net Starter Kit License" -- is much streamlined and simplified, weighing in at a single page in length. Under the licensing terms, developers and users are permitted to download the ASP .Net Starter Kit source code for free, to develop on and around the code and redistribute it, commercially or internally, without paying Microsoft any royalties.

ASP .Net Starter Kit licensees do not need to return to Microsoft any changes they make to the code, Microsoft execs say. Under the GPL license, developers are obligated to submit back to the community any changes they make to the code base.

But don't start thinking that The 'Soft has gone soft on open source. There is wording in the ASP .Net Starter Kit license that prevents developers or customers from GPLing the Microsoft code, according to Microsoft execs.

"You are not allowed to combine or distribute the (ASP .Net Starter Kit) Software with other software that is licensed under terms that seek to require that the Software (or any intellectual property in it) be provided in source code form, licensed to others to allow the creation or distribution of derivative works, or distributed without charge," reads Microsoft's new license.

For the Whole Text of the New License, Click Here

What's your take? Do you think Microsoft is genuinely interested in adopting some of the positives from the open source model? Or is the company hiding behind seemingly more liberal terms and conditions? Write me at mswatch@ziffdavis.com and give me your two cents.