Hilf Speaks About Linux Through Microsoft Eyes

inkslinger77 writes "Microsoft's Linux-pro, Bill Hilf pulled out of the Linux World conference in Australia, but speaks with Computerworld anyway about what exactly his team gets up to. He talks about how Microsoft plans to make money from Linux and how they use Linux in their overall market strategy."

Comments

Translation.

[babbling]

How does Microsoft plan to make money from open source and Linux?

The majority of Microsoft doesn't understand the benefits of the OSS development model. We are pretending to incorporate its most positive elements into our development practices. We like to claim our top priority is to produce great software that meets the needs of our customers, partners, and other constituent communities. We recently struck deals that will see us screw over SugarCRM and Jboss, open source vendors we normally would leave alone. The reason we pursued these relationships is because in both cases nearly half of the infidel traitors are running Windows Server. By fucking over these companies, we can help raise the perceived TCO of open source software. The deals are also a prime example of the success partners are finding on the Windows platform regardless of the development model they employ (so we need to put an end to this).

Downside of opensource...

[s31523]

Microsoft will probably download a Linux distro. re-compile the kernel with intentional bugs, then show it off and say: "Look! Linux has worse security problems than Windows! Don't go free, go Microsoft..."

time to rant

[mary_will_grow]

They choose a technology - an operating system or an application - based on its ability to solve a particular problem and to serve a certain business need, not based on its development model.

Not me! I /could/ choose linux based on the fact that I can stuff my system so full of development tools, compilers, cross compilers, 3d libraries, windowing libraries, that I can't even think straight, all without spending a nickle.

Or, I /could/ choose linux based on the fact that I can simply walk away from the computer when I'm done using it. I dont need to shutdown, in fear of a slow experience when I come back, or in fear of extending my internet-exposure for longer than I have to, filling my computer with spyware.

But no, I choose linux because I look to the FUTURE, you know, BEYOND my next 5 clicks or so. You george bush american's are now very confused arent you? Future?

I dont care if Micro$oft may have a slightly better table-format layout in Office Gizmo 2007. I understand what their software development model gives to the world, and I understand what the open source software development model gives to the world. Academia, you know, the place where all those good ideas come from, has always worked with an open development model. I choose linux because I support their development model, I choose linux because support of that development model is support for a future full of innovation courtesy of our uninhibited access to the our society's collective knowledge.

But Ok, if you really want to, you can pick why I'll never use your crappy product.
1. Its crappy
2. You're development model and business precedent you have sent will stifle general innovation in the world if everyone starts acting like you. I hate you and think that you've done more harm then good!

God, it took until __XP__ for you to finally make it so Freecell couldn't crash my home computer's operating system kernel. Those facilities had been there since the 386. GO AWAY.