Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Microsoft Releases FlexWiki as Open Source

Posted by michael on from the jumping-on-the-bandwagon dept.

davemabe writes "Microsoft is apparently releasing its FlexWiki wiki implementation as an open source project. FlexWiki is the software used to run the wikis over at Channel 9. My question is: Is this software as good as the ever-extensible Kwiki implementation?"

20 of 340 comments (clear)

  1. But I thought... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    What's with all the open-sourcing of Microsoft stuff lately?

    Aren't these the guys who said open source harms innovation and damages the economy? Can't have it both ways, guys.

    Here's proof. Free 27" flatscreen TVs, 17" monitors.

  2. I find it ironic by cyberlotnet · · Score: 2, Insightful

    "Microsofts third open source project"

    Does the right nut know what the left nut is doing over there?

    One nut is releasing open source projects, The other nut goes as far as to try to make legislation to slow down or stop adoptation of open source.

    Sorry Microsoft, you can't have your cake and eat it to.. MAKE UP YOUR MINDS.

    --
    Personal Website
    1. Re:I find it ironic by McDutchie · · Score: 4, Insightful
      Does the right nut know what the left nut is doing over there?

      As huge as they are, that would hardly be surprising. Governments are notorious for suffering from this problem, and Microsoft seems to be bigger than many governments.

    2. Re:I find it ironic by XeRXeS-TCN · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I think they're probably aware just fine. This is the third "open source" project that they have released, and you'll notice that again it's pretty much just crap that's either reinventing the wheel, or crap that is of no value to the community. Additionally in this case, the fact that it's implementing a Wiki system kind of feels like the old "Embrace, Extend & Extinguish" of which they are so often accused. One way or the other, it's opening the source to utterly insignificant projects (in terms of their business plan and profits, I don't mean that the Wiki principle is in any way worthless) presumably so that when the next anti-trust case comes up, they can confidentally claim that they're a 'community player' for open sourcing some of their projects.

      I also saw mention from another poster about the use of the IBM Public License, which is listed on the GNU website as being "not inherently a bad idea", but "incompatible with the GPL". In this way, Microsoft can continue it's FUD and public declarations that the GPL is like a "Pacman" that eats up intellectual property.

      They can quite happily keep releasing insignificant projects, slating the GPL and Linux at every opportunity, and claiming all the while that they're not as proprietary and hostile as everyone thinks.

  3. Conversely... by Sheetrock · · Score: 4, Insightful
    My question is: Is this software as good as the ever-extensible Kwiki implementation?

    My question is: is there anything Microsoft can do that we won't question?

    Applaud them for their newfound approach to open source. More alternatives are always better. I'll bet this software does something Kwiki can't do.

    --

    Try not. Do or do not, there is no try.
    -- Dr. Spock, stardate 2822-3.




  4. Credit where it's due? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Is this software as good as the ever-extensible Kwiki implementation?

    You know, Microsoft has done an incredible number of crappy things, and they deserve most of the flak they get, but I don't understand why we can't just once acknowledge them for taking a positive step without making some cheap jab like this.

    "Microsoft released something as open source -- but let's all assume that a non-MS alternative is better even though we haven't made an actual comparison!" How immature can you get?

    Yes, I know I could just stop reading /., but it's an unhealthy addiction... :)

    1. Re:Credit where it's due? by l3v1 · · Score: 1, Insightful

      How immature can you get?

      Well, given that microsoft's open source != our open source (i.e. ms shared source license vs gnu gpl or bsd), there's no surprise some people are not really overwhelmed by this step.

      A bit greater step would be required from MS to make some of us jumping around in ecstasy.

      s

      --
      I am putting myself to the fullest possible use, which is all I can think that any conscious entity can ever hope to do.
    2. Re:Credit where it's due? by Peter+La+Casse · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Is this software as good as the ever-extensible Kwiki implementation?

      You know, Microsoft has done an incredible number of crappy things, and they deserve most of the flak they get, but I don't understand why we can't just once acknowledge them for taking a positive step without making some cheap jab like this.

      How is that a cheap jab? It seems like a very reasonable question to me: how does this new project compare to this other existing project?

    3. Re:Credit where it's due? by AstroDrabb · · Score: 4, Insightful
      why we can't just once acknowledge them for taking a positive step without making some cheap jab like this.
      ...
      How immature can you get?
      If someone constantly took jabs at you and kicked you while you were down, would you trust them the next time they held out their hand? I wouldn't. It will take a while for MS to build _any_ trust in the OSS/FSS communities, especially the Free Software community.

      If you look at the few Open source apps MS has released, they have all been very insignificant. MS will impress me when they make one of their bigger apps Open Source and Free Source. I am not talking about one of their apps that they sell or generate direct revenue from. I am talking about the tons of other apps they include with their OS or other software that they do not sell. I know i would like to get my hands on explorer.exe the desktop shell and file manager. That code is crap and is always crashing on me even in WinXP SP2. It locks just about every file it touches when you use the explorer.exe file manager requiring using task manager to kill and restart it. It is the biggest headache for me using WinXP at work.

      To me this just seems like a PR effort from MS so they can say "me too" when asked about Open Source. Free Software is by far more important to me then Open Source. I don't care if I can look at the code, I want to be able to do something with the code. Free Software gives you the rights to be able to do something with the code while Open Source doesn't alwasy give you those rights. For example, can I take the FlexWiki code MS is releasing and fork it and do something with it MS does not like or agree with? Are there patents encombering FlexWiki? I cannot get to the site right now to check.

      Ok, I just got to the site and read this from the license (IANAL).

      As a condition to exercising the rights and licenses granted
      hereunder, each Recipient hereby assumes sole responsibility
      to secure any other intellectual property rights needed, if
      any. For example, if a third party patent license is required
      to allow Recipient to distribute the Program, it is Recipient's
      responsibility to acquire that license
      To me (IANAL), that doesn't sound too good. It looks like MS trying to keep a back-door in their "open" source code just in case they have something in there that they can require a license for. Exactly how is this Open Source if it can be encumbered by patents and other "IP"?
      --
      If Tyranny and Oppression come to this land,
      it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy. -James Madison
  5. Re:Why Not? by ironygranny · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I think the OP's problem was that Microsoft has been so vocally against open-source. IBM, at least, makes commercials with Muhammad Ali egging on the children of the corn in support of open-source. The issue is not that they should either open-source everything they do or nothing at all, rather that they should just stop talking shit about it if they're going to "participate."

  6. Re:Why Not? by GreyPoopon · · Score: 3, Insightful
    Does IBM Open Source everythig they do? How about Novell? Red Hat?

    Umm, I think you missed the point the parent was making. The issue isn't whether Microsoft submits all of the software as Open Source. It's the fact that they are trying to litigate against Open Source while at the same time releasing some of their own projects as Open Source. I don't think you can make the same argument about IBM, Novell or Red Hat.

    --

    GreyPoopon
    --
    Why is it I can write insightful comments but can't come up with a clever signature?

  7. Re:Information about the CPL by bob_jenkins · · Score: 2, Insightful

    That's makes the CPL better than the GPL, no? If a piece of GPL software is copyright free, but unusable because of patents, that's not very Free.

    Should there be clauses covering trademarks too?

  8. What's wrong with a gift horse? by St.+Arbirix · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Is this software as good as the ever-extensible Kwiki implementation?

    Talk about looking gift horses in the mouth. That's like seeing Houdini get out of a lock box hanging from a crane and asking "Yeah, but can he levitate?"

    The point is Microsoft put something out that's open source. If it were 30 shades of awesome they'd be selling it instead. For now it's just there for the community to improve upon and keep.

    --
    Direct away from face when opening.
  9. It's a marketing problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Microsoft's problem is essentially little more than a marketing/branding problem. The "problem" is that in many PHB's minds, OSS == Linux/Apache/whatever. Microsoft wants to catch the very tangible benefits of OSS without inadvertantly endorsing Linux/Apache/whatever. Thats why they are choosing the CPL; for the simple reason that it isn't the GPL.

    The bottom line is that, at some level, certain OSS is good for Microsoft. WiX being open is good for Microsoft. So are ASP.NET hosted Wikis. They need to find a way to capitalize on that.

    Microsoft's FUD against the GPL is an attempt to shift Linux's "category" from being "Open Source Software" to "GPLed software". The fact that many biz people are confused about the GPL makes it a more convenient target. Once that association is in people's heads, Microsoft can employ OSS to their benefit, with stuff like this, WiX, and so on.

    It is very unlikely that Microsoft will ever be an OSS company in the same way that Red Hat or even IBM is, but they might be one in the manner that, say Apple, is. Apple's involvement in OSS is little more than the Darwin kernel and a collection of associated goodies, really not that much if you think about it. While this is certainly more than Microsoft right now, it might not always be that way.

  10. Re:WiX and WTL are CPL by gbjbaanb · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Its not a conspiracy - read this /. article (the italics is what you want).

    Note how it is designed to stop unscrupulous people from charging you a royalty. Something that GPL doesn't do.

    Imagine I add code to Apache that contains a patent I hold. Now, I wait a few years for it to become popular, and then start suing left, right and centre).

    The CPL basically says that this bad behaviour is illegal, when you release, you don't just gove away the source, you allow people to use it freely. Under the GPL, you could legitimately charge for the 'free' software.

    Of course, this brings out the conspiracy comments mainly because of the religious zealotly over the GPL (oh, and against MS of course).
    The problem is only that the GPL requires you to release under the GPL, regardless of the original licence. That's why it is incompatible - not for any other reason, and certainly not because the CPL is 'less free' or 'patent encumbered' or 'theyre out to get you and your little FOSS doggie too'

  11. Re:ASP.NET by ajs · · Score: 2, Insightful
    Anyway, comparing it to Perl-written Kwiki is nonsense IMHO.

    Not at all. And to all of the people who have said something along the lines of, "why can't we praise them for this release," questioning the quality of one piece of softwre vs. another is a tradition on Slashdot and has nothing to do with Microsoft (other than that they happen to be the author of one of those pieces of software in this case).

    If this were a post about MySQL's latest release, you'd expect questions of how it stacks up to PostgreSQL. Same goes for Gnome/KDE or Evolution/Thunderbird, etc.

    It's not that we're slapping MS down for doing this, it's fine if they release open source software, but we're not going to take it easy on them either.

    Slashdot's approach to releases can be summed up thusly:
    Nice software ... good release ... *slap* what have you done for me lately?!
    Fair or unfair, it's not because it's MS.
  12. Re:What!! by chris_mahan · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Wait... Who else is on our To Hate list?
    Amazon -> One Click
    Adobe -> Skylarov
    Microsoft -> Developers Developers developers... Stomp stomp stomp (can somebody make a techno tune out of that NOT?)
    Apple -> DRM ridden iPod?
    Sony -> ???
    Sun -> let go of Java already...
    RedHat -> Licence fees for Enterprise Edition? WTF?
    George Lucas -> Boba fired first? (how do you "fire" a laser gun?)

    Oh, but before the bloomer and doomer come along, here's our "To Love" list:

    IBM -> In spite of the chalk-based street ads, linux support, ThinkPads.
    NOVELL -> SUSE and Ximian and Evolution. ...the list grows thin...

    --

    "Piter, too, is dead."

  13. The Immature Script Kiddies Show Up by elijahao · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The foolishness of people never ceases to amaze me.

    The news hits that Microsoft is involved with contributing a piece of software to the community at large, and immediately it's website is completely defaced and vulgarized. If I was Microsoft or Pro-Microsoft I'd be using that as major FUD against corporations thinking about using Open Source anything.

    So many losers in the world with nothing to do but smoke, drink, jerk off, and cuss at Microsoft.

    Idiots.

  14. Someone's been having fun by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    http://www.flexwiki.com/default.aspx/FlexWiki.Visi torWelcome

  15. Timeo Microsoftem et dona ferentem by L.+J.+Beauregard · · Score: 2, Insightful
    What's wrong with a gift horse?

    Go ask a Trojan, if you can find one.

    --
    Ooh, moderator points! Five more idjits go to Minus One Hell!
    Delendae sunt RIAA, MPAA et Windoze