Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Microsoft Planning on Opening Up More Source

Posted by CowboyNeal on from the take-a-look-at-this dept.

mhh5 writes "It's a bit surprising, but it looks like Microsoft is considering making some of its code open source. Obviously, Microsoft's OS or Office are not going to be opened, and it seems like Microsoft is just trying to get more developers, but it's a interesting change of policy."

24 of 482 comments (clear)

  1. Finally! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    I can't wait to get my hands on that DOS 3.3 source. I shall build the mightiest DOS EVER!!!!

    1. Re:Finally! by elasticwings · · Score: 5, Funny

      Better yet, we can finally have the source to port Clippy to every application.

    2. Re:Finally! by shigelojoe · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Of course, not everyone is going to listen to Microsoft when Linux is being discussed. Slowly, more and more people are going to catch on that Linux is worth a second look, and Microsoft would look foolish (well, more foolish than usual) if they kept on insisting that there are no pros to using Linux.

      One example of how this PR strategy has failed recently is the current situation of the Seattle Mariners. I know, I know, a professional sports analogy; don't worry, this will be painless. Anyway, during the 2000 through 2003 seasons, the Mariners won 60.6% of their games (393 out of 648); by all accounts, this was a very good team. But there were issues mounting behind the scenes. Players were getting older, and money was being wasted on players that had already passed their peak. Regardless, the Mariners front office kept reassuring fans that the team could compete. Sabermetricians (people who study baseball statistics) predicted that old age would end up biting the Mariners in the ass, but fans didn't believe that a team that had done so well recently would do so poorly now. Well, the Mariners are almost halfway through their season, and they have won only 41.4% of their games (29 out of 70). They have the worst record in their division, the second worst record in their league, and the fifth worst record in all of Major League Baseball! Still, the front office denies that there is anything seriously wrong with how the team is being run and maintained. Now the fans *know* that the Mariners are too old to play well, pay too much to crappy players in an attempt to improve their team, and that the front office is going to bullshit their way out of doing anything meaningful. By staying the course and saying that nothing serious is wrong, the Mariners front office is going to lose a lot of business and a lot of respect.

      I'm not the kind of guy who would normally give free advice to Microsoft, but sometimes it's better for the emperor to admit that he's not wearing any clothes.

    3. Re:Finally! by maxbang · · Score: 5, Funny

      Ha! From the article: "There's more of that on the way," said Microsoft's Stephen Walli...

      That's like a fat chick showing you a boob and saying, "There's more where that came from."

      --
      I also reply below your current threshold.
    4. Re:Finally! by iabervon · · Score: 5, Insightful

      That worked until other computer giants started pushing Linux. When Microsoft says something's not serious, but IBM spends a billion dollars marketing it, Oracle says it's their preferred platform, and Dell sells it on their big machines, it's pretty clear that Microsoft is failing to understand customer requirements. "Everybody else is talking about Linux, but Microsoft doesn't seem to know anything about it" leads to "Microsoft is not keeping up to date on technology". Of course, if everybody else weren't talking about Linux, Microsoft would have just kept saying nothing about it.

    5. Re:Finally! by sumdumass · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I would agree that they are making more of an anti ibm-oracle-whatever campain as you stated. I do think that there is a side effect and that is giving linux more credit then it already had/has. Wether this is planned or not might be a question not worth asking but it is one of the results. They are bringing more attention to linux as a viable competitor and more shops are taking notice.

      I can attest to this myself. I have a client that was/is pro-micrisoft for everything. I wanted for a long time to use a linux on an old box for a internet router so I could have some more control using ssh and the likes. After being told no for several years, suddenly out of the blue I recieved a call saying it might be a good idea to go ahead and do it. Some of the key points of the conversations was, we won't have to worry about viruses on the linux server and it is definatly cheaper then the win2000 server and IIS. It serves the internet to about 40 workstations, hosts the email, scans all messages with a virrus scanner, and spam filter, gives me ftp and ssh access were I didn't really have it before, runs one of the worlds best firwalls (iptables/netfilter) and cost about $1800 less to start up. Also it allows the other win2000 server to be used to alieviate some stress from another server that runs a data store that I wouldn't allow on a box with a direct conection to the internet.

      There is now talk about placing another linux box in running a sql server and dumping a couple of data bases into it for a working backup that would survive the next big windows virus/hack attack. This wouldn't have ever been possable without Microsoft and others bringing attention to linux as a competitor (AT least in this shop). My client reviewed these decisions with some asociates in other buisinesses and they are considering doing the same. One of the plusses is there would be limited vendor lockin so other options would be viable when microsoft (or some other windows only app) riases licence fees'. Also the thought of having workable backup solutions that are immune to the same virus/update/whatever bugs is pricless. If somethign hits and takes down the servers, bam a few config changes and everythign is back to normal while the problem is being sorted out. I don't think we would switch entirely to linux there but I also didn't think linux would have been there in the first place.

  2. Just one thing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Any program MS could open the source to other than Office or Windows is almost completely useless. What would be much better is if they opened the file formats. Then maybe we could have proper .doc readers and writers.

    1. Re:Just one thing by Kobayashi+Maru · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I wouldn't say useless. Being able to see how the program reads and writes a file is much more useful than trying to guess what that program is doing. The open source community has done a good job guessing... imagine how much easier their jobs would be if they could observe the precise behaviour of the actual program.

    2. Re:Just one thing by tachin · · Score: 5, Interesting

      The code they open source *now* may be useless, but the trend is interesting, not long ago open source was "evil", "viral", "comunist", "unamerican"...and now they are doing open source?..maybe it's not that bad after all?

    3. Re:Just one thing by DougMelvin · · Score: 5, Interesting

      To name some programs other than windows and office that are not "almost completely useless":

      windows media player
      directx
      various drivers
      IIS
      windows scripting host
      internet explorer
      imagion.. IE with real DOM support
      or how about 100,000 volunteers hunting vulnerabilities?
      outlook express
      visual studio and all it's bits
      regclean
      microsoft management console
      source safe
      msn messenger
      remeber the desktop toys?
      countless more.. but i'm starting to get board with this.. must.. must.. eve..

      bye.



      --
      Reality is in the mind of the beholder - me 1996
    4. Re:Just one thing by kfg · · Score: 5, Insightful

      File formats, codecs and *APIs*.

      We don't need to see the code, we just need to know what goes in and what comes out documented. Then we can write our own damned code to do it which will be untainted by MS's code, of little return value to them, and allow us to compete directly.

      Which is why you won't see it happen other than under duress.

      After that seeing the actual code is just like seeing MS in its underwear, fun to point and giggle for a little while, but after that more and more disquieting and revolting.

      KFG

    5. Re:Just one thing by Entropius · · Score: 5, Insightful

      No, they're not right.

      The "Americanism" that you refer to (that the GPL supposedly violates) is the belief in individual liberty coupled with civic responsibility--the idea that, if it doesn't infringe on anyone else's personal rights, you have the freedom to do what the hell you want and the duty to use that freedom to benefit society as a whole.

      OSS is thus right in line with the original American values. As long as it doesn't mess up anyone else, the KDE developers can do whatever the hell they want with their computers: they choose to write code on them and give me a copy, so I can post this here.

      Now there is a trend toward the reliance on the law, on legally-binding agreements and codification, rather than on a shared duty to be benevolent, to make people play nice. Whether this is a good thing or not is a discussion for another time, but it is certain that large organizations--chiefly, corporations and IP-holders--can make greater use of this new reliance on contracts than individuals can.

      The GPL is simply a creative rechanneling of this current trend to protect individuals--who would like to protect the altruistic and hackable nature of their products--rather than those who wish to profit from them.

      I wish the GPL didn't need to exist--that developers could release software with a statement to the effect of "I'd like this code to remain open and distributed free of charge. Please do me the respect of acknowledging me as the original offer, and of honoring my wishes for this work." But since, in today's climate, people (read: corporations) are bound not by honor and ethics but only by law, the OSS community needs the GPL to *protect* the original American values inherent in open source software.

  3. Open Development Process by SlightOverdose · · Score: 5, Interesting

    While we know Microsoft are not going to open source anything critical, one of the things they do seem to be starting to do is make the development process more transparent to the public.

    Many Microsoft developers now discuss projects openly on Blogs and Forums, and some projects (i.e. Internet Explorer) now have community sites where the public can interact directly with the development team.

    Personally I like this transparent process, and hope it becomes popular within Microsoft. They have some of the best developers in the world and this sort of restructuring could lead to some excellent software being produced.

  4. Re:I have the source... by TheShadowHawk · · Score: 5, Funny

    What about GOTO's?

    Surely there must be at LEAST ONE GOTO!

    --
    Friends don't let Friends use Internet Explorer.
  5. Re:They just want free development by Reenigne · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Microsoft finally takes a step in the right direction, and you still critisize. Give them them the credit they deserve, it may not be much, but it is better than them raping the world.

    --
    Why can I not mod a message to crap?!?
  6. Obligatory Admiral Akbar by Weaselmancer · · Score: 5, Interesting

    It's a trap!

    ...ok, dumb jokes aside, this is probably not as good as it sounds. I'd advise the Wine guys to stay as far away from this code as possible!!

    Remember, these are the guys who "recommended" Baystar to SCO. They are NOT open source friendly.

    SCO caused Linux a lot of problems with their whole "code pollution" bit. I'll betcha they're planting seeds to do the same thing with their own code base later on down the road.

    Stay away from this, folks. FAR away.

    --
    Weaselmancer
    rediculous.
  7. If the Office source code was released by stox · · Score: 5, Funny

    Thousands of open source developers around the world would die as their head's exploded.

    We used to have a joke at Bell Labs regarding the source code for the 5ESS. If we ever wanted to eliminate any competition, we would send them a copy of the source, and they would go bankrupt trying to figure it out.

    --
    "To those who are overly cautious, everything is impossible. "
  8. Ahh, you beat me to it by TiggertheMad · · Score: 5, Funny

    ...Although, the possibilities of porting MS Bob to LINUX are intriguing...

    --

    HA! I just wasted some of your bandwidth with a frivolous sig!
  9. Tcp/Ip stack by obdulio · · Score: 5, Funny

    They are going to open the source of their network protocols. The first thing they are opening is the TCP/IP protocols. ;-)

    --
    PENAROL: Seras eterno como el tiempo y floreceras en cada primavera.
  10. What are the extra ground rules in the CPL? by ya_steve · · Score: 5, Interesting

    From the article:

    Microsoft's two existing open-source projects have used a type of open-source license from IBM called the CPL, or common public license, which some companies tend to favor because it clearly delineates some critical ground rules for an open-source technology's use. Analysts say that choice of license shows that Microsoft takes issue not as much with the broader open-source concept as with the GPL, a different type of open-source license used for Linux and other programs.

    I would argue that the GPL has "clearly delinated ground rules", and I'm not sure what extra value is added by the CPL. The FSF licence list gives some hints that the CPL imposes extra requirements:

    The Common Public License is incompatible with the GPL because it has various specific requirements that are not in the GPL. For example, it requires certain patent licenses be given that the GPL does not require. (We don't think those patent license requirements are inherently a bad idea, but nonetheless they are incompatible with the GNU GPL.)

    Does anybody have any examples of why a corporation would prefer the CPL to the GPL?

  11. Re:Microsoft's 2 open source projects...are CPL by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative
    As indicated in the article, these sourceforge projects uses the "Common Public License" (CPL).

    This led to the question of what is the CPL and how does this differ from other licenses. A little Googling on my part turned up this site that compares the open source licenses.

    The most significant difference between the CPL and the GPL involves the license of derivative works.

    -cmh

  12. Microsoft's new openness by rajmobile · · Score: 5, Interesting

    http://blogs.msdn.com is mesmerising. I can't believe they encourage their developers to post regularly, and that the feeds go out un-edited by management or marketing. Plus, they have anonymous comments enabled.

    http://channel9.msdn.com/ is an impressive effort, and shows how far MS is going with their community outreach.

    It's scary how much you can learn from blogs.msdn.com. There are a lot of smart people working at MS, but what are they all working on? The quality and thoughtfulness of the posters there indicates that they must have some killer internal projects.

  13. BSOD by accidental_1 · · Score: 5, Funny

    Even better, we can find out what all those BSOD messages are.

  14. OK, Here's the Latest (Today) IIS Exploit by MooseByte · · Score: 5, Informative

    "Name an instance of IIS being automatically exploited. I'll cite you two Apache holes in return."

    Here you go, freshly under investigation, spreading as I type.

    From the article: "Government and industry experts warned late Thursday of a mysterious, large-scale Internet attack against thousands of popular Web sites. The virus-like infection tries to implant hacker software onto the computers of all Web site visitors. [ ... ] The mysterious infection appeared to target at least one recent version of software by Microsoft Corp. to operate Web sites, called its Internet Information Server, popular among businesses and organizations."

    That was fun. Your turn.