Slashdot Mirror


What if Microsoft went Open Source?

An anonymous reader writes "This article on newsforge takes a speculative look at what would have to happen if Microsoft decided to jump on the Open Source bandwagon (using Microsoft Project as the source of speculation). Amusing to think about, unlikely to happen."

31 of 370 comments (clear)

  1. Give it up by maukdaddy · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It's not happening, for obvious reasons. Companies exist to make money!
    MS is doing just fine without being OS!

    1. Re:Give it up by canajin56 · · Score: 5, Funny
      Slashdot would become redundant

      That's not true! There would still be Anime and cool gadgets! Not to mention Soviet Russia, "all your base", and Beowulf clusters

      Oh yes, and still all the OS news, scientific news, and so on....I guess :D

      MS...sorry, I mean...M$ bashing isn't what /. is all about, it's just the funnest part ;)

      --
      ASCII stupid question, get a stupid ANSI
    2. Re:Give it up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It's not happening, for obvious reasons. Companies exist to make money!

      So ... your point is?
      Why can't a company be open source and sell its product for profit? What's wrong with this?

    3. Re:Give it up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Only a person to whom you give your binaries to need get the source.

      So your customer could, in theory, resell yout product. However, they would probbly not be able to support it. I mean, that is the reason for picking MS in business, isn't it? You *know* MS will be around to support your product.

      Additionally, look at Trolltech (produce Qt). they have a GPL product (Qt), but it's GPL. If you include the code in your product (even just by dynamic linking), your product MUST be GPL'd too. Most businesses don't want to do that, but they have to option of buying a non-GPL version which they can use. They have to pay Trolltech for this, so they make money.

      Easy-peasy.

    4. Re:Give it up by Kierthos · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Maybe I want to buy the Open Source software so I can transfer it from old computer to new computer easily. Maybe I want the manual (which, even if available as a .pdf, seems to be so much more handy if I can leave through it). Maybe the download sites are constantly jammed, and it would take less time to drive to Best Buy, purchase a copy, drive back, and install it, then it would take to download the damn thing.

      Maybe it's an impulse buy. Maybe it's a present to another geek. Maybe you actually needed someone to tell you this....

      Kierthos

      --
      Mr. Hu is not a ninja.
  2. Netscape/Mozilla by HeelToe · · Score: 5, Interesting

    You never know, it might just eventually improve their products. Look at Netscape/Mozilla!

    1. Re:Netscape/Mozilla by deadsaijinx* · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Fact: Mozilla has lots of bugs
      Fact: The staff can't possibley address them all in real time
      Fact: They do manage to address a large number of them

      Fact: IE has lots of bugs
      Fact: THe staff can't possibley address them all in real time
      Fact: They usually just ignore bugs until b\they become a CRITICAL vulnerability. And even then it can take months to address.

      --
      YOU SUCK BALLS!
    2. Re:Netscape/Mozilla by DrXym · · Score: 5, Insightful
      At least you can see the Mozilla bug list. You can see how many are actual bugs, how many are meta bugs, how many are for minor quirks, how many cover future work or esoteric things, how many are duplicates, how many are platform specific, how many are mail / news / browser / embedding / editor / site specific, how many are for other projects sharing the bug database such as the webtools, who is working on what, what patches are available and so on. You can even raise new bugs and fix them if you like since the source and the bug system are open to all.


      Contrast that with IE where none of these things are possible. Got a bug? Good luck trying to raise and track the issue with Microsoft.

    3. Re:Netscape/Mozilla by alienw · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I'll bet that Microsoft has ten times as many developers working on IE as Netscape does. Also, they release for just ONE platform, while mozilla develops for at least 10. Small wonder that they can crank out new releases faster. Besides, MSIE 6 is, for the most part, a version of Spyglass mosaic with many new features bolted on. It still has many old quirks and bugs in its HTML interpreter, and has shitty support for stylesheets, XHTML, et cetera. Netscape/Mozilla is 100% new code.

      I'm sure it wouldn't take Mozilla developers so long if they started from an old, working codebase, made it for just one platform, and had thousands of bright and experienced developers working for them like Microsoft does. What's truly amazing is that the quality of MS products is so low, given their incredible resources.

    4. Re:Netscape/Mozilla by Per+Wigren · · Score: 5, Funny

      If MS Office was Open Source, you'd problably be able to compile it with:
      # ./configure --without-clippy

      I think that's the biggest reason we want Microsoft to make Office Open Source...

      --
      My other account has a 3-digit UID.
  3. Re: What if Microsoft went Open Source? by Ken@WearableTech · · Score: 5, Funny

    What if Microsoft went Open Source?... Pigs shall fly and people will ski in Hell

  4. What if? by rtnz · · Score: 5, Funny

    Slashdot comments would decrease by 50%?

    1. Re:What if? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Then they would increase 100% with cries of how they weren't following the letter of the L/GPL/BSD license/whatever.

  5. A reason by Apreche · · Score: 5, Interesting

    There is a reason why Microsoft doesn't go open source that a lot of people don't realize, or at least they don't think about it. Sure Microsoft made the code for the NT Kernel, Office, VS.NET, etc. So they can legally release all that code. But there are a lot of things within Windows and Office that Microsoft can't legally release the code for. Like the defragger that is made by some German company. A lot of device drivers written by hardware people also. Windows now technically also includes Sun Java, which they can't release the source for.

    So while MS could open lots of source, there would be quite a few holes in it, and all the geeks who bothered to look would be wondering what was up with the swiss cheese.

    --
    The GeekNights podcast is going strong. Listen!
    1. Re:A reason by Tekai · · Score: 5, Insightful

      of course they can't release the whole sourcecode for all of their applications, for the reasons you just mentioned. But even if only if they released the sourcecode to a tiny fraction of their it could benefit them. OpenOffice.org/StarOffice, Mozilla/Netscape, Mac OS X/Darwin are examples where the sourcecode has been released after code from other companies has been removed, and yet it was beneficial for all parties involved. And All of them are also sold with closed source extensions. So your reasoning is only partly valid.
      And nobody says that you can't fill the holes in swiss sourcecode.

  6. What if.... by simgod · · Score: 5, Insightful

    What if America was a real democracy and not run by oligarhic oportunists... ?

    Unlikely... Impossible ...

  7. If MS went OSS... by Rai · · Score: 5, Funny

    I expect clocks would began running backwards shortly before the fabric of universe unraveled and everyone simultaneously imploded.

    1. Re:If MS went OSS... by Karellen · · Score: 5, Funny

      Surely you mean:

      EGON : "Try to imagine all life as you know it stopping instantaneously and every molecule in your body exploding at the speed of light."

      RAY (awed): "Complete protonic reversal."

      VENKMAN: "OK, That's bad. Good safety tip; thanks Egon."

      --
      Why doesn't the gene pool have a life guard?
  8. No interest by embedded_C · · Score: 5, Insightful
    I don't believe Microsoft will go Open Source, successfully at least. They've resisted all this time, so if and when they did go Open Source, I just don't think the interest would be there to support the product the way that Linux has been supported.

    I picture in my mind, many gleeful hackers and an overwhelming wave of new exploits, that might in fact cause more people to switch to Linux, where the support community is much more on top of things, and a reliable infrastructure is in place.

  9. Re: What if Microsoft went Open Source? by user32.ExitWindowsEx · · Score: 5, Funny

    And Slashdot readers shall get laid.

    --
    "Evil will always triumph because good is dumb." -- Dark Helmet
  10. Can't and won't by travail_jgd · · Score: 5, Informative

    There are almost certainly pieces of (current) Windows code that can't be released under an open license. So the idea of the entire Windows code base being GPL'd will never happen. Even if earlier versions of Windows were "clean", they still wouldn't be released: older versions of MS software are the biggest threat to the newest versions. According to Google Zeitgeist, there are more people running "obsolete" Microsoft OSes (95, 98, NT) than "current" ones (2000, XP).

    OTOH, Windows could follow Apple's lead, and use Linux or BSD as a starting point for their next-generation OS. The problem with that idea is that it doesn't really match MS's current goals of DRM, software leases, and increasing MS's revenues.

    (I RTFA the day it was published.)

  11. Re:Microsoft Open Source by MegaFur · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You're right of course that it will never happen, but Open Source Windoze would be useful since it would make it easier to create Windoze emulation environments and would remove any need to purchase Windoze to run Windoze-only apps.

    --
    Furry cows moo and decompress.
  12. I think a better question is.... by smitty45 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    If Microsoft DID actually "get it" and go opensource, dropping their strategy and opening up code and changed their development ideas...

    would the OSS/FS community be able to handle that ?

    and would anyone help them out ?
    (assuming that, let's say it's released under GPL or BSD style licenses)

  13. Re: What if Microsoft went Open Source? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    How many people read that and wished for MS to go OS? ;oP

  14. Something like this is too hard to speculate. by PyrotekNX · · Score: 5, Insightful

    In the 70's and 80's we speculated that cars would use a clean energy source by the year 2000. But nobody realized that SUVs would become popular and get even worse gas milage.

    The same thing will probably happen with Microsoft. A huge business like that does not change overnight. It is doubtful that we see any changes until it is too late. Proprietary businesses no matter how good will eventually lose out to 3rd parties. There is a window in businesses like IBM and Microsoft. When that time is up, they will get hit hard.

    IBM at one time was completely proprietary. Piece by piece 3rd party manufacturers replaced IBM hardware. Eventually IBM clones were around and could compete with IBM directly. Over a span of less than 10 years IBM lost most if it's desktop market share. Now IBM doesn't even bother with consumer hardware. The last couple of things to go were videocards and hard drives. Companies like NVIDIA and ATI were innovators and blew by IBM in the videocard market. Then the IBM hard drives began to get chinsey and they discontinued that as well.

    I am speculating that the same thing with Microsoft is going to occur. Right now there are competing office suites, desktop os', web browsers etc. These products will eventually replace the need for Microsoft products one by one as more people use them. In a matter of years more people will be using open/free software and look back to the days of Microsoft and either laugh or feel dread and angst. The days of a software proprietary model are limited and if Microsoft and other companies don't change to accept opensource, then they will ultimately lose their market shares.

  15. No good, Project has a dependency on MSO.dll by Saint+Stephen · · Score: 5, Informative



    Project has huge dependencies on Office but not vice versa. Typically Project team picks up office bits around 90 days after Office stabilizes. .MSP files are Jet databases (Access). There is always a new version of Project released based on the current Office codebase.

    All of the common code is in MSO9.dll, or MSO10.dll, whatever, as well as "external" dependencies like MSXML.dll or MDAC from Web Data, or Trident (MSHTML). I'm not going to claim that you can't GPL Project without releasing the rest (don't know enough), but I can tell you the codebases are very intertwined. Does GPL still make sense given this info?

    Basically all Project is is a specialized Access database application. (BTW, did you know that Exchange storage engine and Microsoft Access are both based on Jet? Exchange == Jet Blue. Access == Jet Red. And DHCP and Crypto DBs are stored in .EDB files, which shares Jet ancestry.) Funny, huh?

  16. Defragger??? by da+cog · · Score: 5, Funny

    Microsoft Windows has a defragger? That's so cool! Now when I get blown up while playing Quake I can just alt-tab out, punch the defragger, and watch the shocked expression on my enemies' faces as my pieces fly back together! BWAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!

    --
    Snarkiness is inversely proportional to wisdom because it emphasizes feeling right rather than being right.
  17. Visual Studio by Smallest · · Score: 5, Informative

    With VS, you get the source for all of the MFC, ATL and C run-time libraries. The code is at least as good as any of the GPL'd code i've run across - and at least they know where to put their leading brackets (on the next line, not immediately after the "if")!!

    -c

    --
    I have discovered a truly remarkable proof which this margin is too small to contain.
    1. Re:Visual Studio by madmaxx · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Haha ah haha... Oh, wait ... that wasn't intentionally funny.

      Personal preference of coding style does not define good vs. bad code. Quality is defined by consistent attention to detail, where those details are related to correctness, robustness, efficiency, security, etc.

      In my years of coding, I've been mistaken in thinking there was ONE TRUE WAY in terms of coding style. I was wrong, and so are you. Style is only perpheral to other *important* qualities in software.

      --
      mx
  18. As much as I despise Microsoft by GauteL · · Score: 5, Informative

    If they ever made Windows Free Software (as defined by the FSF), then a huge part of Stallman's war will have been won, no matter if this was the way he visioned it or not.

    This would be a huge, monumental win for Free Software, because the most visual basis of almost all desktop computers in the world would be free software.

    Will it happen? No.

  19. Open Sores by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny


    Thought MS already had lots of open sores ?......