Bill Gates Claims OSS Has Poor Interoperability

XeRXeS-TCN writes "In yet another example of Bill Gates seemingly 'not getting it' (or getting it just fine and spreading FUD), he has sent out an email to all MSFT's corporate customers, stating that if they are looking for interoperability, they should not look to Linux or OSS software. What he really means of course, is free alternatives trying to interoperate with Microsoft's non-documented proprietary standards."

Comments

Windows interoperability

[Beolach]

Yeah, if you want Windows interoperability, you should just go with Windows. Just make sure you have the exact same versions of everything you want to have interoperate.

A while ago I set up a home network. Linux gateway/fileserver running Samba, other boxes on the network running Linux, Win98, WinME, WinXP Pro & Home. Everything could see & use the Samba shares on the Linux fileserver. All the WinXP Pros could see & use shares on the other WinXP Pros. Trying to access shares between WinXP Pro & WinME - no can do.

Re:Yeah, right

[BoomerSooner]

PDFs are backward compatible. If you are using new features that weren't available you might need to upgrade your (free) reader. However you can print to PDF from any Mac application (I haven't tried the Linux alternatives) and the FDF Libraries are available for using for free from Adobe. Not too difficult if you ask me.

Adobe isn't the nicest company to deal with either but they are a hell of a lot better than MS.

Note: I'm an MSDN subscriber and I develop for Linux, Windows, Mac and *nix systems.

Bigger Irony: Letter But not Spirit of Law

[reporter]

Recently, Microsoft agreed to establish its Office formats as an open standard in order to comply with Massachusett's laws stipulating open standards (but not necessarily open source). Now, according to the article starting this thread of discussion, Microsoft opposes open-source solutions that use Microsoft formats.

Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, do we have a case of complying with the letter of the law but crapping on the spirit of the law?

Re:You want interoperability?

[Simon Lyngshede]

Very true. Pretty much any service I need on my network will authenticate via Kerberos, except my Windows workstations. I know it can be done, but not without buying a version of Windows 2000/2003 server and doing some trusted realm stuff with AD.

Microsoft should not speak to loudly about interoperability before starting to share more APIs and providing better support for other peoples formats in their own software. Billy Boy seems to forget that interoperability, like trust, is a two way street. Right now Microsoft expect all others to conform to their specification (without revaling the specification of cause) and to trust them, while providing nothing in return.

Re:Linux is pretty bad in this regard

[vsprintf]

I hate to defend this guy, but there's other things you should be attacking him over. From a user point of view. Different Open Source distros are really like different Operating Systems.

Well, they are. The only thing they share in common may be a version of the kernel and the user tools.

How do you install software in Red Hat? Debian? Windows 95? Windows XP?

If you want to make an apples-to-apples comparison, then compare Mandrake 7.2 to Mandrake 10.1 versus Win98 to WinXP. Software installation is essentially the same accross the board except that Mandrake won't install something just because you put a CD in the drive.

I must have missed it when the law of computer usability was written. Who said everything had to work according to the Microsoft way? I guess that OO should break the document format with every new release if that's the standard.