Microsoft/Mainsoft Porting to Linux - Follow-up

Lee Gomes and I had been writing about the Mainsoft/Microsoft porting to Linux rumours. Now Mainsoft has put out a Media advisory disavowing the Office rumour. Wininformat also has an article talking about Microsoft's denial of things, which adds another dimension to things. Paul Thurrott, the author of the Wininformant piece, askes a good question in as to why Mainsoft needs a copy of the WinNT source code if it's only porting IE.

Comments

Re:Still Stuck on Desktop Apps

[praedor]

I, for one, will NOT used web-based apps for my work. My work is MY WORK, it isn't top secret or illegal or anything else, but it is MINE. I will not do my wordprocessing, or any other work, on the web where it is (potentially) ANYONE'S work who can obtain access. It is simply about privacy and total control over my own work, and total control over what I release to other eyes or choose NOT to release.

As a matter of principal, my work is done, and ever shall be done, on MY personal computer without any potential prying eyes taking a gander before I decide (IF I decide) to publish/release the final product. I frickin' HATE web-based crap. I want MY work, MY software, MY time to be absolutely MINE. It is not a shared resource, it is not anyone else's business but my own, it belongs to me. Hence, I require a desktop-based, single client (though with web CAPABILITY) apps to do my graphics, writing, game-playing, whatever, work.

I do not want to HAVE to count on NEVER running into network outages, server crashes, etc, in order to get work done. The net is NOT so reliable that you (or anyone else) can count on it to always be able to get your work done when it relies upon the net.

There have been many times when the net has been unavailable to me at work, for a variety of reasons. Hence, that avenue of information collection is cutoff. There have been many times when the local network has gone down (maintenance, crashes) which prevents access to shared files, servers, etc. If I am relying on this crap to get my publishing work done... No. Thank. You. In EVERY case of the net being unavailable, my personal system has ALWAYS been available. I have ALWAYS been able to write up data, create graphs and graphics, read docs that I have LOCALLY downloaded. If I were relying on a web-based app to do all this, every time the net slowed down due to traffic or was otherwise unavialable, my perfectly serviceable PC/laptop would become merely a desktop heating system. I would get to twiddle my thumbs waiting for the system to come back so I could work on my documents.

There will always be a good use for client/desktop-based productivity apps (and games). The web is not reliable enough or private enough to count on it for everything; and why should one HAVE to cough up a lung to pay for access to the web, say, on an airliner or at an airport to do anything productive when you could do it perfectly fine if the app resides on your own disconnected system?

Web-based apps have a place but it isn't the end-all, be-all, universal fix.

Top 10 Reasons I don't want office for Linux

[Entropy_ah]

10. Clippy is pure evil
9. Much faster in linux, crashes in half the time
8. bassackwards() function in excell
7. Outlook 2000 is part of a communist plot against humanity
6. Why do you need a bloated Word 2000 when you already can use the very slim EMACS
5. Dont want blue screen of death ported to Linux
4. Forcing me to boot into Windows to use Office feels more opressing (I like to complain)
3. Powerpoint sounds like a gay porno
2. The voices comming from my windows key on my keyboard will only get louder
1. I WANT LINUX TO BE DIFFERENT FROM WINDOWS!!

Mainsoft/Windows Source

[oozer]

Mainsoft has had a windows source licence for years. For those who've never heard of them before they produce a kit and supply consultancy services for ISVs wanting to port windows apps to UNIX/X. Their kit (unlike the old Willows Twin) contains portions of the windows source in order to emulate stuff like common controls and at least the top layers of the gdi and user modules.

Because MS doesn't want people using its software to drive people onto unix it charges a high premium. If you use Mainsoft to port your app you will have to pay a per-copy royalty that pretty much equals the price of a windows licence! As such it is generally only used to port very expensive, low volume products normally.
--

Re: 1) not that expensive 2) how IE ported already

[peterw]

I've seen a presentation by some Mainsoft folks. The license fees aren't that bad. Basically you need a Mainsoft client runtime license for each desktop you want to run your "ported" applications on (I'm fairly sure that it's a per-seat, not per-app license), and, IIRC, the desktop license was in the range of $50 - $100 USD. Which is the same ballpark as a Windows 9x license, but Mainsoft's target is companies, where WinNT/2000 are the more likely desktop equivalents. So it's much cheaper than VMWare ($300 USD per commercial license + you still need an MS OS license). And, if you're having trouble with Windows, the increased overall stability and other benefits of Linux or Unix may easily justify the per seat fee.

MSFT used Mainsoft's tools to port IE to the flavors of Unix it already runs on, e.g. Solaris. So this isn't really big news. MS has already ported IE. They've talked about porting MediaPlayer. Both are yet more examples of anticompetitive "dumping" practices.

-Peter

US Voters: The GOP has criticized Clinton, Reno, and Klein for taking on Microsoft in court. The Democratic party had iMacs and PalmPilots at their convention. Who's more likely to support real competition in the software marketplace?